Cost-Effectiveness of Primary Prevention with Statin Treatment for Chinese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

The Cost-Effectiveness of Hyperlipidemia Medication in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Review

Hyperlipidemia is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease - the leading cause of death globally. Increased understanding of the cost-effectiveness of hyperlipidemia treatment in low- and middle-income countries can guide approaches to hyperlipidemia management in resource-limited environments. We conducted a systematic review of the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of hyperlipidemia medication treatment in low- and middle-income countries using studies published between January 2010 and April 2020. We abstracted study details, including study design, treatment setting, intervention type, health metrics, costs standardized to constant 2019 US dollars, and cost-effectiveness measures including average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Comparisons across studies suggested that treatment via polypill is generally more cost-effective than statin-only therapy, and that primary prevention is more cost-effective than secondary prevention. Treating hyperlipidemia at a threshold of 5.7 mmol/l comes at a higher cost per disability-adjusted life-years averted than at a threshold of 6.2 mmol/l. Most pharmacological treatment strategies for hyperlipidemia were found to be cost-effective in most of the examined low- and middle-income countries.

Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease in China

Background

In several cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs), empagliflozin (SGLT-2 inhibitor), sitagliptin (DPP-4 inhibitor) and liraglutide (GLP-1 receptor agonist) + standard of care (SoC) were compared to SoC in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study assessed the cost-effectiveness (CE) of empagliflozin + SoC in comparison to sitagliptin + SoC and liraglutide + SoC based on the respective CVOT.

Methods

The IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM) was calibrated to reproduce the CVOT outcomes. EMPA-REG OUTCOME baseline characteristics and CVOT specific treatment effects on risk factors for cardiovascular disease (HbA1c, BMI, blood pressure, lipids) were applied. Three-year observed cardiovascular events of empagliflozin + SoC versus sitagliptin + SoC and liraglutide + SoC were derived from EMPA-REG OUTCOME and an indirect treatment comparison. Relative risk adjustments to calibrate the CDM were obtained after a trial and error process to match as closely the observed and CDM-predicted outcomes. The drug-specific treatment effects were considered up until HbA1c reached 8.5% and treatment switch occurred. After this switch, the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study 82 risk equations predicted events based on co-existing risk factors and treatment intensification to basal bolus insulin were applied. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system applying 3% discounting. The time horizon was lifelong.

Results

Empagliflozin + SoC provides additional Quality Adjusted Life years (QALY + 0.564) for an incremental cost of 42,497RMB (US$6053) compared to sitagliptin + SoC, resulting in an Incremental Cost Utility Ratio of 75,349RMB (US$10,732), thus below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 212,676RMB, corresponding to three times the Gross Domestic Product in China (2019). Compared to liraglutide + SoC, empagliflozin + SoC use leads to 0.211QALY gained and cost savings of 71,427RMB (US$10,173) and is as such dominant. Scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the results.

Conclusion

Results suggest that empagliflozin + SoC is cost-effective compared to sitagliptin + SoC and liraglutide + SoC at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 212,676RMB ($30,292)/QALY.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00299-z.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin compared with glimepiride in patients with Type 2 diabetes in China

Aim: The study assesses the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin versus glimepiride in patients with Type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled by metformin alone in China, based on the EMPA-REG H2H-SU trial. Materials & methods: A calibrated version of the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was used. Cost of complications and utility were taken from literature. The Chinese healthcare system perspective and 5% discounting rates were applied. Results: Empagliflozin+metformin provides additional quality-adjusted life-years (0.317) driven by a reduction in the number of cardiovascular and renal events, for an additional cost of $1382 (CNY9703) compared with glimepiride+metformin. Conclusion: Empagliflozin is cost-effective treatment versus glimepiride applying a threshold of $30,290 (CNY212,676).

Cost-Effectiveness of Dipeptidylpeptidase-4 Inhibitors Added to Metformin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in China

PURPOSE

Dipeptidylpeptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, including linagliptin, alogliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and vildagliptin, are used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients in China. This study assessed the economic outcomes of different DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin in the Chinese context.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, the validated Chinese Outcomes Model for T2DM (COMT) was conducted to project economic outcomes from the perspective of Chinese healthcare service providers. Efficacy and safety, medical expenditure, and utility data were derived from the literature, which were assigned to model variables. The primary outputs of the model included the lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probability sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the potential uncertainties of parameters.

RESULTS

Of the five competing strategies, alogliptin 25 mg strategy yielded the most significant health outcome, which associated with improvements in discounted QALY of 0.007, 0.014, 0.011, and 0.022 versus linagliptin 5 mg, saxagliptin 5 mg, sitagliptin 100 mg and vildagliptin50 mg, respectively. The sitagliptin 100 mg strategy was the cheapest option. The ICER of alogliptin 25 mg against sitagliptin 100 mg strategy was $6,952 per additional QALY gained, and the rest of the strategies were dominated or extended dominated. The most influential parameters were the cost of DPP-4 inhibitors and their treatment efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggested that alogliptin was a preferred treatment option compared with other DPP-4 inhibitors for Chinese patients whose T2DM are inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy.

Economic evaluation of dapagliflozin versus metformin in Chinese patients whose diabetes is inadequately controlled with diet and exercise

Background

To investigate the long-term economic outcome of dapagliflozin versus metformin in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) whose diet and exercise have not provided sufficient glycemic control.

Methods

An economic analysis of dapagliflozin versus metformin was conducted by using the Chinese Outcomes Model for T2DM with a time horizon of lifetime, which was developed and validated based on the Chinese population. The efficacy data of lowering HbA1c of dapagliflozin and metformin was derived from a network meta-analysis. Other clinical, cost and utility inputs were obtained from published sources. Lifetime discounted quality-adjusted life-years, cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were measured. The uncertainty was facilitated by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

The comparison of metformin and dapagliflozin in Chinese patients with insufficient glycemic control by diet and exercise showed that dapagliflozin was more costly and produced fewer health benefits in our simulated cohort. The sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were robust.

Conclusions

Dapagliflozin is not likely to be cost-effective compared with metformin for Chinese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with diet and exercise.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Lifestyle Interventions for Preventing Diabetes in a Health Resource-Limited Setting

AIMS

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a health challenge in China, and the economic outcomes of lifestyle intervention are critically important for policymakers. This study estimates the lifetime economic outcomes of lifestyle intervention among the prediabetic population in the Chinese context.

METHODS

We developed a mathematical model to compare the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention and no prevention in the prediabetic population. Efficacy and safety, medical expenditure, and utility data were derived from the literature, which was assigned to model variables for estimating the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The analysis was conducted from the perspective of Chinese healthcare service providers. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Compared with no prevention, lifestyle intervention averted 9.53% of T2DM, which translated into an additional 0.52 QALYs at a saved cost of $700 by substantially reducing the probabilities of macro- and microvascular diseases. This finding indicated that lifestyle intervention was a dominant strategy. The sensitivity analyses showed the model outputs were robust.

CONCLUSIONS

Lifestyle intervention is a very cost-effective alternative for prediabetic subjects and worth implementing in the Chinese healthcare system to reduce the disease burden related to T2DM.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events among patients with type 2 diabetes in China

The use of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with lower rates of cardiovascular events but increased risks of bleeding complications. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of aspirin therapy for primary prevention of CVD in Chinese DM patients. A life-long Markov model was developed to compare aspirin therapy (100mg daily) versus no use of aspirin in DM patients with no history of CVD. Model validation was conducted by comparing the simulated event rates with data reported in a clinical trial. Direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYs) were the primary outcomes from the perspective of healthcare system in China. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the uncertainty of model inputs. Base-case analysis showed aspirin therapy was more costly (USD1,086 versus USD819) with higher QALYs gained (11.94 versus 11.86 QALYs) compared to no use of aspirin. The base-case results were sensitive to the odds ratio of all-cause death in aspirin therapy versus no use of aspirin. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that aspirin therapy gained an additional 0.066 QALYs (95% CI: -0.167 QALYs-0.286 QALYs) at higher cost by USD352 (95% CI: USD130-644)). Using 30,000 USD/QALY as willingness-to-pay threshold, aspirin therapy and no use of aspirin were the preferred option in 68.71% and 31.29% of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, respectively. In conclusion, aspirin therapy appears to be cost-effective compared with no use of aspirin in primary prevention of CVD in Chinese DM patients.

Cost-Effectiveness of Canagliflozin Versus Dapagliflozin Added to Metformin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in China

PURPOSE

Agents that inhibit sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2), including canagliflozin and dapagliflozin, become available for the treatment of Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study assessed the economic outcomes of canagliflozin 100 mg versus dapagliflozin 10 mg in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin in the Chinese context.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Economic outcomes were projected by using the validated Chinese Outcomes Model for T2DM (COMT). Efficacy and safety, medical expenditure, and utility data were derived from the literature, which were assigned to model variables for estimating the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The analysis was conducted from the perspective of Chinese healthcare service providers. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Health outcomes and costs were discounted at 5%.

RESULTS

Relative to dapagliflozin 10 mg, treatment with canagliflozin 100 mg was associated with additional 0.015 expected life years per patients treated and 0.013 QALYs gained, which was driven by the reduced risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications over lifetime horizon. The incremental cost of canagliflozin 100 mg versus dapagliflozin 10 mg was US $-129, which indicated the canagliflozin 100 mg strategy was a dominant option. The univariate sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were sensitive to several model inputs.

CONCLUSION

These results suggested that canagliflozin was a cost-saving treatment option compared with dapagliflozin from the perspective of Chinese health care services providers for Chinese patients with T2DM who are inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy.