This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
AIMS: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of once-daily insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus basal-bolus therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes not meeting glycemic targets on basal insulin from a healthcare payer perspective in Slovakia. METHODS: Long-term clinical and economic outcomes for patients receiving IDegLira and basal-bolus therapy were estimated using the IMS CORE Diabetes Model based on a published pooled analysis of patient-level data. RESULTS: IDegLira was associated with an improvement in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.29 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with basal-bolus therapy. The average lifetime cost per patient in the IDegLira arm was EUR 2,449 higher than in the basal-bolus therapy arm. Increased treatment costs with IDegLira were partially offset by cost savings from avoided diabetes-related complications. IDegLira was highly cost-effective versus basal-bolus therapy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR 8,590 per QALY gained, which is well below the cost-effectiveness threshold set by the law in Slovakia. CONCLUSION: IDegLira is cost-effective in Slovakia, providing a simple option for intensification of basal insulin therapy without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia or weight gain and with fewer daily injections than a basal-bolus regimen.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Psota et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: