Patterns of use and expenses associated with mail-service pharmacy in adults with diabetes

OBJECTIVES

To identify socioeconomic factors associated with mail-service pharmacy use and compare the differences in disease-specific prescription medication and medical utilization expenses in a nationally representative sample of adults with diabetes.

DESIGN

A retrospective, longitudinal, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

United States in 2006-11.

PARTICIPANTS

Medical Expenditure Panel Survey household component (MEPS-HC) participants aged 18 years or older diagnosed with diabetes and prescribed antidiabetic medications.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Likelihood of mail-service pharmacy use, diabetes-related medical utilization, and medication expenses.

RESULTS

Among 4,430 eligible participants identified in the 2006-11 surveys, representing more than 83 million U.S. individuals, nearly 13% of the participants obtained two-thirds or more of their antidiabetic medications via mail service predominantly. Mail-service pharmacy users were older, had high school or college degrees, had higher incomes, and were more likely to be covered by private insurance. There were no significant differences in diabetes-related medical utilization and drug expenses between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Besides pharmacy benefit design, sociodemographic and economic factors influenced drug dispensing channel use (mail service versus community pharmacy). No significant differences in diabetes-related drug and medical expenses between mail-service and community pharmacy users were observed.

Basal insulin persistence, associated factors, and outcomes after treatment initiation among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the US

OBJECTIVE

To assess basal insulin persistence, associated factors, and economic outcomes for insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the US.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

People aged ≥18 years diagnosed with T2DM initiating basal insulin between April 2006 and March 2012 (index date), no prior insulin use, and continuous insurance coverage for 6 months before (baseline) and 24 months after index date (follow-up period) were selected using de-identified administrative claims data in the US. Based on whether there were ≥30 day gaps in basal insulin use in the first year post-index, patients were classified as continuers (no gap), interrupters (≥1 prescription after gap), and discontinuers (no prescription after gap).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Factors associated with persistence - assessed using multinomial logistic regression model; annual healthcare resource use and costs during follow-up period - compared separately between continuers and interrupters, and continuers and discontinuers.

RESULTS

Of the 19,110 people included in the sample (mean age: 59 years, ∼60% male), 20% continued to use basal insulin, 62% had ≥1 interruption, and 18% discontinued therapy in the year after initiation. Older age, multiple antihyperglycemic drug use, and injectable antihyperglycemic use during baseline were associated with significantly higher likelihoods of continuing basal insulin. Relative to interrupters and discontinuers, continuers had fewer emergency department visits, shorter hospital stays, and lower medical costs (continuers: $10,890, interrupters: $13,674, discontinuers: $13,021), but higher pharmacy costs (continuers: $7449, interrupters: $5239, discontinuers: $4857) in the first year post-index (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Total healthcare costs were similar across the three cohorts. Findings for the second year post-index were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of people in this study interrupted or discontinued basal insulin treatment in the year after initiation; and incurred higher medical resource use and costs than continuers. The findings are limited to the commercially insured population in the US. In addition, persistence patterns were assessed using administrative claims as opposed to actual medication-taking behavior and did not account for measures of glycemic control. Further research is needed to understand the reasons behind basal insulin persistence and the implications thereof, to help clinicians manage care for T2DM more effectively.

Long-term health economic benefits of sensor-augmented pump therapy vs continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion alone in type 1 diabetes: a U.K. perspective

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is an important treatment option for type 1 diabetes patients unable to achieve adequate glycemic control with multiple daily injections (MDI). Combining CSII with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAP) with a low glucose-suspend (LGS) feature may further improve glycemic control and reduce the frequency of hypoglycemia. A cost-effectiveness analysis of SAP + LGS vs. CSII plus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) was performed to determine the health economic benefits of SAP + LGS in type 1 diabetes patients using CSII in the U.K.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using the CORE diabetes model. Treatment effects were sourced from the literature, where SAP + LGS was associated with a projected HbA1c reduction of -1.49% vs. -0.62% for CSII, and a reduced frequency of severe hypoglycemia. The time horizon was that of patient lifetimes; future costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 3.5% and 1.5% per annum, respectively.

RESULTS

Projected outcomes showed that SAP + LGS was associated with higher mean quality-adjusted life expectancy (17.9 vs. 14.9 quality-adjusted life years [QALYs], SAP + LGS vs. CSII), and higher life expectancy (23.8 vs. 21.9 years), but higher mean lifetime direct costs (GBP 125,559 vs. GBP 88,991), leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of GBP 12,233 per QALY gained for SAP + LGS vs. CSII. Findings of the base-case analysis remained robust in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

For UK-based type 1 diabetes patients with poor glycemic control, the use of SAP + LGS is likely to be cost-effective compared with CSII plus SMBG.

Cost-effectiveness of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections of insulin in Type 1 diabetes: a systematic review

AIM

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is increasingly used in clinical practice for the management of selected patients with Type 1 diabetes. Several cost-effectiveness studies comparing CSII vs. multiple insulin injections (MDI) have been reported. The aim was systematically to review these analyses and test the hypothesis that CSII is a cost-effective use of healthcare resources across settings.

METHODS

A literature review was performed using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and other databases. No time limit or language restrictions were applied. After two rounds of screening, 11 cost-effectiveness analyses were included in the final review, of which nine used the CORE Diabetes Model. A narrative synthesis was conducted and mean cost effectiveness calculated.

RESULTS

CSII was considered cost-effective vs. MDI in Type 1 diabetes in all 11 studies in 8 countries, with a mean (95% CI) incremental cost effectiveness ratio of €30 862 (17 997-43 727), US$40 143 (23 409-56 876) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. CSII was associated with improved life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy (0.4-1.1 QALYs in adults), driven by lower HbA(1c) and lower frequency of hypoglycaemic events vs. MDI. CSII was associated with higher lifetime direct costs due to higher treatment costs but this was partially offset by cost-savings from reduced diabetes-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Published cost-effectiveness analyses show that in Type 1 diabetes CSII is cost-effective vs. MDI across a number of settings for patients who have poor glycaemic control and/or problematic hypoglycaemia on MDI, with cost-effectiveness highly sensitive to the reduction in HbA1c and hypoglycaemia frequency associated with CSII.

Approach to assessing the economic impact of insulin-related hypoglycaemia using the novel Local Impact of Hypoglycaemia Tool

AIM

To provide estimates of the costs of severe and non-severe insulin-related hypoglycaemia in the UK using the Local Impact of Hypoglycaemia Tool.

METHODS

Rates of hypoglycaemia were extracted from the UK Hypoglycaemia Study Group observational study. The costs of severe and non-severe hypoglycaemic episodes in insulin-treated adults with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes were estimated from UK data sources. The rates and costs were then applied to specific populations to give an estimate of the cost of insulin-related hypoglycaemia for the UK, a specific locality, or a user-defined population. User-specific rates and costs could also be applied.

RESULTS

The estimated cost of a hypoglycaemic episode can range from as much as £2,152 for severe episodes (for which the patient is admitted to hospital) to as little as £1.67 for non-severe episodes. With a UK population of 64.1 million, the total estimated cost of managing insulin-related hypoglycaemia is £468.0 m per year (£295.9 m for severe episodes, £172.1 m for non-severe episodes). On a local health economy level, using a hypothetical general population of 100 000, the total cost of managing insulin-related hypoglycaemia is estimated to be £730,052 per year (£461,658 for severe and £268,394 for non-severe episodes).

CONCLUSIONS

The Local Impact of Hypoglycaemia Tool highlights the economic burden of insulin-related hypoglycaemia. Non-severe episodes are often overlooked because of their low individual cost, but their high frequency makes the cumulative cost substantial. The Local Impact of Hypoglycaemia Tool also shows clinicians and budget-holders the economic impact of lower rates of hypoglycaemia.

Health Economic Evaluation of a Strict Glucose Control Guideline Implemented Using Point-of-Care Testing in Three Intensive Care Units in The Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care testing of blood glucose (BG-POCT) is essential for safe and effective insulin titrations in critically ill patients under glucose control with insulin. The costs associated with this practice are considered substantial, especially when more frequent blood glucose (BG) testing is needed, as with more strict glucose control (SGC) aiming for lower BG levels.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate, from a hospital perspective, the incremental cost effectiveness of an SGC guideline, aiming for BG levels of 4.4-6.1 mmol/L, compared to the situation before implementation of that guideline (aiming for BG levels <8.3 mmol/L), both using BG-POCT.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a guideline implementation project aiming for implementation of a guideline of SGC in three intensive care units in The Netherlands. A Markov model including the four health states 'target glucose', 'hyperglycaemia' (defined as BG levels >6.1 mmol/L), 'hypoglycaemia' (defined as BG levels <4.4 mmol/L) and 'in-hospital death' was developed to compare expected costs, number of patients within target and number of life-years saved before and after implementation of the SGC guideline. The effectiveness estimates are based on empirical data from 3195 patients 12 and 24 months before and after implementation of the guideline, respectively. All costs have been converted to price year 2013, and are estimated based on hospital data, the literature and available price lists.

RESULTS

The number of BG-POCT increased from 4.8 [interquartile range (IQR) 2.6-6.7] to 8.0 [IQR 4.1-11.2] per patient per day, accruing 58% higher costs for BG-POCT (€13.56 vs. €8.57 per patient) in the SGC protocol versus the situation before implementation. When taking total hospital costs and clinical effects into account, implementation of the SGC guideline increased total hospital costs per patient by 1.8%, i.e., €355 (from €20,617 to €20,972) during the inpatient stay, while the number of patients in target glucose levels increased by 1.4% (i.e., from 881 to 895 per 1000 patients). This translates to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €25 per additional patient within the target glucose level. The model outcomes are most sensitive to changes in ICU length of stay.

CONCLUSION

The increase in the number of patients and time within target glucose levels is achieved with a small increase in total direct hospital costs.

The direct cost of intravenous insulin infusions to the NHS in England and Wales

The cost of intravenous insulin infusion to the NHS is unknown. The aim of this study was to estimate the direct cost of insulin infusions to the NHS in England and Wales in the first 24-hour period of infusion. Data from the National Inpatient Diabetes Audit 2013 in the UK were used to estimate the number of insulin infusions in use across England and Wales. Costs were calculated for six models for setting up and maintenance of insulin infusions, depending on the extent of involvement of different healthcare professionals in the UK. In this study, the direct costs of intravenous insulin infusions to the NHS in England and Wales have been estimated to vary from £6.4-8.5 million in the first 24-hour period on infusion. More appropriate use of these infusions could result in substantial cost savings.

Is the current standard of care leading to cost-effective outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes requiring insulin? A long-term health economic analysis for the UK

AIMS

The aim of the analysis was to investigate whether insulin intensification, based on the use of intensive insulin regimens as recommended by the current standard of care in routine clinical practice, would be cost-effective for patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK.

METHODS

Clinical data were derived from a retrospective analysis of 3185 patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) general practice database. In total, 48% (614 patients) intensified insulin therapy, defined by adding bolus or premix insulin to a basal regimen, which was associated with a reduction in HbA1c and an increase in body mass index. Projections of clinical outcomes and costs (2011 GBP) over patients' lifetimes were made using a recently validated type 2 diabetes model.

RESULTS

Immediate insulin intensification was associated with improvements in life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy and time to onset of complications versus no intensification or delaying intensification by 2, 4, 6, or 8 years. Direct costs were higher with the insulin intensification strategy (due to the acquisition costs of insulin). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for insulin intensification were GBP 32,560, GBP 35,187, GBP 40,006, GBP 48,187 and GBP 55,431 per QALY gained versus delaying intensification 2, 4, 6 and 8 years, and no intensification, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although associated with improved clinical outcomes, insulin intensification as practiced in the UK has a relatively high cost per QALY and may not lead to cost-effective outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes as currently defined by UK cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Early discontinuation and related treatment costs after initiation of Basal insulin in type 2 diabetes patients: a German primary care database analysis

AIMS

The aim was to compare early discontinuation and related treatment costs in type 2 diabetes in primary care after initiation of insulin glargine or human basal insulin (NPH).

METHODS

Overall, 2765 glargine and 1554 NPH patients from 1072 general practices were analyzed (Disease Analyser). Early discontinuation was defined as switching to a different basal insulin or another insulin treatment regimen within 90 days after first basal insulin prescription (index date, ID). Treatment costs were assessed 365 days prior and post ID in both groups. Propensity score matching and linear regression was used to adjust cost differences (post vs prior ID: discontinued vs continued patients) for age, sex, diabetes duration, antidiabetic comedication, diabetologist care, disease management program participation, costs before ID, and Charlson Comorbidity Index.

RESULTS

Within 3 months after ID, 13% of glargine patients switched to other insulin treatment regimens (NPH: 18%; P < .05). After propensity score matching, adjusted cost differences in 146 discontinued versus 1342 continued glargine patients were calculated (NPH: 146 vs 1342). Diabetes-related prescription costs were lower among persistent glargine patients compared to persistent NPH patients (EUR-49 [19]; P = .0109). Mean cost difference for diabetes-related prescriptions was lower among those who persisted on glargine compared to those who switched to other treatment regimens (EUR-74 [42], P = .0780).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment persistence within 3 months after basal insulin initiation was significantly higher under insulin glargine compared to NPH. Diabetes-related prescription costs were significantly lower among patients who adhered to insulin glargine compared to persistent NPH patients.

Prevalence and treatment costs of type 2 diabetes in Germany and the effects of social and demographical differences

Treatment costs for type 2 diabetes account for a substantial amount of the expenses for statutory health care funds. Within a study sample of the year 2005, 6.8% of the insured were being treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Compared to the non-diabetic insured in the sample, patients included more males and older persons. Employed diabetics also showed lower mean gross salary when compared to the non-diabetic employed of the sample. In 2007, their mean costs for in- and outpatient care and drug prescriptions amounted to 2,622 Euros per patient. The impacts of social and demographical patient characteristics on total treatment costs were measured with a multiple linear regression model, controlling for the hypoglycemic therapy of the patient. Here, the impact of age, gender and intensive insulin therapy became evident. A higher annual salary had a negative, yet non-significant, effect.

Direct medical cost of type 2 diabetes in singapore

Due to the chronic nature of diabetes along with their complications, they have been recognised as a major health issue, which results in significant economic burden. This study aims to estimate the direct medical cost associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Singapore in 2010 and to examine both the relationship between demographic and clinical state variables with the total estimated expenditure. The National Healthcare Group (NHG) Chronic Disease Management System (CDMS) database was used to identify patients with T2DM in the year 2010. DM-attributable costs estimated included hospitalisations, accident and emergency (A&E) room visits, outpatient physician visits, medications, laboratory tests and allied health services. All charges and unit costs were provided by the NHG. A total of 500 patients with DM were identified for the analyses. The mean annual direct medical cost was found to be $2,034, of which 61% was accounted for by inpatient services, 35% by outpatient services, and 4% by A&E services. Independent determinants of total costs were DM treatments such as the use of insulin only (p<0.001) and the combination of both oral medications and insulin (p=0.047) as well as having complications such as cerebrovascular disease (p<0.001), cardiovascular disease (p=0.002), peripheral vascular disease (p=0.001), and nephropathy (p=0.041). In this study, the cost of DM treatments and DM-related complications were found to be strong determinants of costs. This finding suggests an imperative need to address the economic burden associated with diabetes with urgency and to reorganise resources required to improve healthcare costs.

Effect of adherence and insulin delivery system on clinical and economic outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin treatment

BACKGROUND

Adherence to insulin affects real-world health outcomes and may itself be affected by the choice of insulin delivery device (pen or vial/syringe). The choice of insulin delivery device may also have direct effects on effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to estimate the effects of insulin adherence and delivery device on real-world health outcomes.

METHODS

This study included adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiating insulin, with continuous health plan insurance for 6 or more months before initiation (baseline) and 1 or more year after. Measured outcomes included glycosylated hemoglobin (Hb A1c) reduction, hospitalization rate, total health care costs, and pharmacy costs over 1 year of follow-up. Adherence (defined as having insulin fills sufficient for the entire quarter), pen or vial/syringe use, and disease-related patient characteristics were assessed in each quarter. To account for the time-varying relationship between adherence, patient characteristics, and outcomes, marginal structural generalized linear models were used to estimate the effect of adherence and device use. Mean outcomes were predicted for different combinations of adherence and device choice.

RESULTS

Among the 13,428 patients (mean age 54 years; 46% women; baseline Hb A1c 9.3%), adherent pen users had greater reductions in Hb A1c (-0.35%; P = 0.045), lower hospitalization rates (-0.36; P < 0.01), and higher pharmacy costs ($2923; P < 0.01) than did nonadherent vial users, and similar total health care costs ($3906 lower; P = 0.1). Pen use and adherent vial use decreased hospitalization rate and increased pharmacy but not total costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence and pen use have beneficial effects on patients' real-world outcomes, with the most favorable effects attributable to adherent pen use.

Resource utilization and costs associated with using insulin therapy within a newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus population

BACKGROUND

Although oral antidiabetic medications are the mainstay for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), patients often require insulin therapy to achieve optimal glycemic control. Given the prevalence of insulin use among patients with T2DM, this study evaluated the economic impact of this treatment modality in patients treated in a managed care setting.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate costs and resource utilization associated with using insulin therapy among patients with newly diagnosed T2DM who were initially treated with other noninsulin antidiabetic (NIAD) medications.

METHODS

An observational, retrospective study design was implemented using integrated medical and pharmacy claims data. Adults with a diagnosis of T2DM from July 1, 2003, through March 31, 2008, were identified. The date of first diagnosis was deemed the index date. The 24-month period after the index date was used to assess treatment patterns. Based on the treatment patterns, the following 2 cohorts were selected: NIAD-only cohort, users who received greater than 1 NIAD class medication but never received insulin, and insulin-use cohort, NIAD users who switched to/added on insulin therapy (duration ≥ 60 days). Patients were matched in a 1:3 (insulin-use:NIAD-only) ratio based on propensity scores and other key covariates of interest. Hypoglycemia rates, monthly costs, and resource use during the outcome assessment period were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

After matching, 1,400 patients (350 insulin users and 1,050 NIAD-only users) were included in the analysis (42% women; mean age, 56 years). After controlling for covariates, the insulin-use cohort incurred $71 per patient per month higher total T2DM-specific costs than the NIAD-only cohort ($241/month vs. $170/month, P = 0.0003). Pharmacy costs and utilization of physician visits were drivers of cost differences between cohorts. The rate of hypoglycemic events was 10.2 per 100 person-years for the insulin-use cohort versus 2.9 per 100 person-years in the NIAD-only cohort (P  less than  0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of insulin therapy is associated with increased hypoglycemic events, increased pharmacy and medical costs, and greater utilization of T2DM-specific health care services.

Cost-effectiveness of once daily GLP-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide compared to bolus insulin both in combination with basal insulin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes in Norway

BACKGROUND

Lixisenatide is a potent, selective and short-acting once daily prandial glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist which lowers glycohemoglobin and body weight by clinically significant amounts in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin, with limited risk of hypoglycemia.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of lixisenatide versus bolus insulin, both in combination with basal insulin, in patients with type 2 diabetes in Norway.

METHODS

The IMS CORE Diabetes Model, a non-product-specific and validated simulation model, was used to make clinical and cost projections. Transition probabilities, risk adjustments and the progression of complication risk factors were derived from the UK Prospective Diabetes Study, supplemented with Norwegian data. Patients were assumed to receive combination treatment with basal insulin, lixisenatide or bolus insulin therapy for 3 years, followed by intensification of a basal-bolus insulin regimen for their remaining lifetime. Simulated healthcare costs, taken from the public payer perspective, were derived from microcosting and diagnosis related groups, discounted at 4% per annum and reported in Norwegian krone (NOK). Productivity costs were also captured based on extractions from the Norwegian Labor and Welfare Administration. Health state utilities were derived from a systematic literature review. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Lixisenatide in combination with basal insulin was associated with increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and reduced lifetime healthcare costs compared to bolus insulin in combination with basal insulin in patients with Type 2 diabetes, and can be considered dominant. The net monetary benefit of lixisenatide versus bolus insulin was NOK 39,369 per patient. Results were sensitive to discounting, the application of excess body weight associated disutility and uncertainty surrounding the changes in HbA1c.

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide may be considered an economically efficient therapy in combination with basal insulin in the Norwegian setting, due to cost savings, weight loss and associated gains in health-related quality of life.

The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of stepwise addition of bolus insulin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: evaluation of the FullSTEP trial

Abstract Background and aims: Intensification of basal insulin-only therapy in type 2 diabetes is often achieved through addition of bolus insulin 3-times daily. The FullSTEP trial demonstrated that stepwise addition (SWA) of bolus insulin aspart was non-inferior to full basal-bolus (FBB) therapy and reduced the rate of hypoglycemia. Here the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of SWA is evaluated.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact models were developed to assess the cost and quality-of-life (QoL) implications of intensification using SWA compared with FBB in the US setting. At assessment, SWA patients added one bolus dose to their current regimen if the HbA1c target was not met. SWA patients reaching three bolus doses used FBB event rates. Outcomes were evaluated at trial end and projected annually up to 5 years. Models captured hypoglycemic events, the proportion meeting HbA1c target, and self-measured blood glucose. Event rates and QoL utilities were taken from trial data and published literature. Costs were evaluated from a healthcare-payer perspective, reported in 2013 USD, and discounted (like clinical outcomes) at 3.5% annually. This analysis applies to patients with HbA1c 7.0-9.0% and body mass index <40 kg/m(2).

RESULTS

SWA was associated with improved QoL and reduced costs compared with FBB. Improvement in QoL and cost reduction were driven by lower rates of hypoglycemia. Sensitivity analyses showed that outcomes were most influenced by the cost of bolus insulin and QoL impact of symptomatic hypoglycemia. Budget impact analysis estimated that, by moving from FBB to SWA, a health plan with 77,000 patients with type 2 diabetes, of whom 7.8% annually intensified to basal-bolus therapy, would save USD 1304 per intensifying patient over the trial period.

CONCLUSIONS

SWA of bolus insulin should be considered a beneficial and cost-saving alternative to FBB therapy for the intensification of treatment in type 2 diabetes.

Switching from multiple daily injections to CSII pump therapy: insulin expenditures in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVES

To identify variations in expenditures and utilization of insulin and other antidiabetes medications by comparing patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) pump therapy versus multiple daily injection (MDI) therapy.

STUDY DESIGN

Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database and Medicare Supplemental Database for 2006 to 2010 were used in a difference-in-differences approach that took advantage of variation in the timing of the switch from MDI therapy to CSII pump therapy.

METHODS

Continuous users of MDI therapy throughout the study period were compared with those who switched to the CSII pump therapy during this period. Specifications included: coefficient estimates from cross-sectional ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions with: 1) no additional controls, 2) controls for patient demographics and comorbidities, and 3) patient fixed effects. Propensity score matching at baseline mitigated concerns regarding patient selection bias.

RESULTS

While insulin expenditures rose during the study period, switching to CSII pump therapy led to sizable reductions in insulin expenditures. This reduction in insulin expenditures due to switching varied between $657 (standard error [SE] $126; P<.01) and $1011 (SE $250.60; P<.01) per year.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a significant reduction in insulin expenditures among MDI patients who switched to CSII pump therapy at various times throughout the study period.

The evaluation of clinical and cost outcomes associated with earlier initiation of insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) follows a stepwise progression. As a treatment loses its effectiveness, it is typically replaced with a more complex and frequently more costly treatment. Eventually this progression leads to the use of basal insulin typically with concomitant treatments (e.g., metformin, a GLP-1 RA [glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist], a TZD [thiazolidinedione] or a DPP-4i [dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor]) and, ultimately, to basal-bolus insulin in some forms. As the cost of oral antidiabetics (OADs) and noninsulin injectables have approached, and in some cases exceeded, the cost of insulin, we reexamined the placement of insulin in T2DM treatment progression. Our hypothesis was that earlier use of insulin produces clinical and cost benefits due to its superior efficacy and treatment scalability at an acceptable cost when considered over a 5-year period.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) estimate clinical and payer cost outcomes of initiating insulin treatment for patients with T2DM earlier in their treatment progression and (b) estimate clinical and payer cost outcomes resulting from delays in escalating treatment for T2DM when indicated by patient hemoglobin A1c levels.

METHODS

We developed a Monte Carlo microsimulation model to estimate patients reaching target A1c, diabetes-related complications, mortality, and associated costs under various treatment strategies for newly diagnosed patients with T2DM. Treatment efficacies were modeled from results of randomized clinical trials, including the time and rate of A1c drift. A typical treatment progression was selected based on the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes guidelines as the standard of care (SOC). Two treatment approaches were evaluated: two-stage insulin (basal plus antidiabetics followed by biphasic plus metformin) and single-stage insulin (biphasic plus metformin). For each approach, we analyzed multiple strategies. For each analysis, treatment steps were sequentially and cumulatively removed from the SOC until only the insulin steps remained. Delays in escalating treatment were evaluated by increasing the minimum time on a treatment within each strategy. The analysis time frame was 5 years.

RESULTS

Relative to SOC, the two-stage insulin approach resulted in 0.10% to 1.79% more patients achieving target A1c (<7.0%), at incremental costs of $95 to $3,267. (The ranges are due to the different strategies within the approach.) With the single-stage approach, 0.50% to 2.63% more patients achieved the target A1c compared with SOC at an incremental cost of -$1,642 to $1,177. Major diabetes-related complications were reduced by 0.38% to 17.46% using the two-stage approach and 0.72% to 25.92% using the single-stage approach. Severe hypoglycemia increased by 17.97% to 60.43% using the two-stage approach and 6.44% to 68.87% using the single-stage approach. In the base case scenario, the minimum time on a specific treatment was 3 months. When the minimum time on each treatment was increased to 12 months (i.e., delayed), patients reaching A1c targets were reduced by 57%, complications increased by 13% to 76%, and mortality increased by 8% over 5 years when compared with the base case for the SOC. However, severe hypoglycemic events were reduced by 83%.

CONCLUSIONS

As insulin was advanced earlier in therapy in the two-stage and single-stage approaches, patients reaching their A1c targets increased, severe hypoglycemic events increased, and diabetes-related complications and mortality decreased. Cost savings were estimated for 3 (of 4) strategies in the single-stage approach. Delays in treatment escalation substantially reduced patients reaching target A1c levels and increased the occurrence of major nonhypoglycemic diabetic complications. With the exception of substantial increases in severe hypoglycemic events, earlier use of insulin mitigates the clinical consequences of these delays.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy and automated insulin suspension versus standard pump therapy for hypoglycemic unaware patients with type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with "Low Glucose Suspend" (LGS) functionality versus standard pump therapy with self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with type 1 diabetes who have impaired awareness of hypoglycemia.

METHODS

A clinical trial-based economic evaluation was performed in which the net costs and effectiveness of the two treatment modalities were calculated and expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The clinical outcome of interest for the evaluation was the rate of severe hypoglycemia in each arm of the LGS study. Quality-of-life utility scores were calculated using the three-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire. Resource use costs were estimated using public sources.

RESULTS

After 6 months, the use of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with LGS significantly reduced the incidence of severe hypoglycemia compared with standard pump therapy (incident rate difference 1.85 [0.17-3.53]; P = 0.037). Based on a primary randomized study, the ICER per severe hypoglycemic event avoided was $18,257 for all patients and $14,944 for those aged 12 years and older. Including all major medical resource costs (e.g., hospital admissions), the ICERs were $17,602 and $14,289, respectively. Over the 6-month period, the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was $40,803 for patients aged 12 years and older.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the Australian experience evaluating new interventions across a broad range of therapeutic areas, sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with LGS may be considered a cost-effective alternative to standard pump therapy with self-monitoring of blood glucose in hypoglycemia unaware patients with type 1 diabetes.