The long-term cost-effectiveness of oral semaglutide versus empagliflozin and dulaglutide in Portugal

Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome

Davide Carvalho¹  Catarina Costa²  Vasco Conde²  Samuel J. P. Malkin³  Barnaby Hunt³ 

[1] Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de S João, Faculty of Medicine and Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal;Novo Nordisk Portugal, Lda, Paço de Arcos, Portugal;Ossian Health Economics and Communications GmbH, Bäumleingasse 20, 4051, Basel, Switzerland;

关键词: Costs and cost analysis;    Cost-effectiveness;    Diabetes mellitus;    Dulaglutide;    Empagliflozin;    GLP-1 receptor agonist;    Oral semaglutide;    Portugal;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13098-022-00801-4

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundOral semaglutide is a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analog that has been associated with improvements in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight versus sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor empagliflozin and injectable GLP-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide in the PIONEER 2 clinical trial and in a recent network meta-analysis (NMA), respectively. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of oral semaglutide 14 mg versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg for the treatment of type 2 diabetes from a healthcare payer perspective in Portugal.MethodsIn two separate analyses, outcomes were projected over patients’ lifetimes using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (v9.0), discounted at 4% per annum. Clinical data were sourced from the PIONEER 2 trial and the NMA for the comparisons versus empagliflozin and dulaglutide, respectively. Patients were assumed to receive initial therapies until HbA1c exceeded 7.5%, then treatment-intensified to solely basal insulin therapy. Costs were accounted from a National Healthcare Service perspective in Portugal and expressed in 2021 euros (EUR). Utilities were taken from published sources.ResultsOral semaglutide 14 mg was associated with improvements in life expectancy of 0.10 and 0.03 years, and quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.11 and 0.03 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg, respectively. Improved clinical outcomes were due to a reduced cumulative incidence and increased time to onset of diabetes-related complications with oral semaglutide. Total costs were projected to be EUR 2548 and EUR 814 higher with oral semaglutide versus empagliflozin and dulaglutide, with higher acquisition costs partially offset by cost savings from avoidance of diabetes-related complications. Oral semaglutide 14 mg was therefore associated with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of EUR 23,571 and EUR 23,927 per QALY gained versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg, respectively.ConclusionsBased on a willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 30,000 per QALY gained, oral semaglutide 14 mg was considered cost-effective versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in Portugal.

【 授权许可】

CC BY