1
|
Hu S, Wang S, Gu S, Qi C, Shi C, Fan G. Cost-utility analysis and drug pricing of once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec for type 2 diabetes patients treated with basal insulin in China. Diabetes Obes Metab 2024; 26:5995-6006. [PMID: 39344844 DOI: 10.1111/dom.15973] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2024] [Revised: 08/29/2024] [Accepted: 09/02/2024] [Indexed: 10/01/2024]
Abstract
AIM Insulin icodec is a first once-weekly administration basal insulin analogue for type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to investigate the price range of icodec for type 2 diabetes in the Chinese market, taking insulin degludec as reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS Long-term health outcomes and costs for icodec and degludec were simulated using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model (version 2.1) over 40 years from the Chinese healthcare provider's perspective. The efficacy and safety data were obtained from the ONWARDS 2 trial (Switching to once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec in individuals with basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (ONWARDS 2): a phase 3a, randomised, open label, multicentre, treat-to-target trial). Cost-utility analysis and a binary search were used to investigate the price range of icodec. Sensitivity analyses were performed to verify the robustness of the base-case analysis results. RESULTS After a 40-year simulation, the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) of icodec and degludec were 10.32 and 10.28 years, respectively. At the initial assumption of the same annual costs of icodec and degludec of $455.40, icodec was the dominant therapy compared with degludec, with higher QALYs and lower total cost. After the binary search, we observed that the annual cost range of icodec was $625.17-$855.25. This cost range was finally adjusted to be $597.66-$736.34 using one-way sensitivity analysis and confirmed using probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis. The scenario analysis revealed that the annual cost range of icodec could be $506.70-$736.34 if the price of degludec decreased by 20% in the future. CONCLUSION Insulin icodec appears to be more cost effective than degludec if the annual cost of icodec ranges from $597.66 to $736.34 for patients with type 2 diabetes in China.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shanshan Hu
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Shuowen Wang
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Shengying Gu
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Chendong Qi
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Chenyang Shi
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Guorong Fan
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Goldman J, Triplitt C, Isaacs D. Icodec: A Novel Once-Weekly Basal Insulin for Diabetes Management. Ann Pharmacother 2024:10600280241287790. [PMID: 39425483 DOI: 10.1177/10600280241287790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and clinical implications of insulin icodec, a novel once-weekly basal insulin for the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D), with an emphasis on its advantages and challenges in comparison with existing daily basal insulins. DATA SOURCES A literature search was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to August 26, 2024, using the search terms icodec and ONWARDS trial. Studies involving patients living with T1D or T2D on once-weekly insulin icodec compared with once-daily insulins glargine U100, glargine U300, and degludec were considered for this review. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION Relevant English-language studies and those conducted in humans were considered. DATA SYNTHESIS Insulin icodec offers reduced dosing frequency and potentially superior glycemic management with a safety profile comparable to existing basal insulins. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE Insulin icodec once-weekly dosing could significantly improve convenience and efficacy over daily basal insulins, representing a significant innovation in insulin therapy. CONCLUSIONS Insulin icodec emerges as a promising option for diabetes management, potentially improving treatment adherence and quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Goldman
- Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Curtis Triplitt
- Texas Diabetes Institute, University Health System; University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Diana Isaacs
- Endocrinology & Metabolism Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rosenstock J, Bajaj HS, Lingvay I, Heller SR. Clinical perspectives on the frequency of hypoglycemia in treat-to-target randomized controlled trials comparing basal insulin analogs in type 2 diabetes: a narrative review. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2024; 12:e003930. [PMID: 38749508 PMCID: PMC11097869 DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2023-003930] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/18/2024] Open
Abstract
The objective of this review was to comprehensively present and summarize trends in reported rates of hypoglycemia with one or two times per day basal insulin analogs in individuals with type 2 diabetes to help address and contextualize the emerging theoretical concern of increased hypoglycemic risk with once-weekly basal insulins.Hypoglycemia data were extracted from treat-to-target randomized clinical trials conducted during 2000-2022. Published articles were identified on PubMed or within the US Food and Drug Administration submission documents. Overall, 57 articles were identified: 44 assessed hypoglycemic outcomes in participants receiving basal-only therapy (33 in insulin-naive participants; 11 in insulin-experienced participants), 4 in a mixed population (insulin-naive and insulin-experienced participants) and 9 in participants receiving basal-bolus therapy. For the analysis, emphasis was placed on level 2 (blood glucose <3.0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL)) and level 3 (or severe) hypoglycemia.Overall, event rates for level 2 or level 3 hypoglycemia across most studies ranged from 0.06 to 7.10 events/person-year of exposure (PYE) for participants receiving a basal-only insulin regimen; the rate for basal-bolus regimens ranged from 2.4 to 13.6 events/PYE. Rates were generally lower with second-generation basal insulins (insulin degludec or insulin glargine U300) than with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or first-generation basal insulins (insulin detemir or insulin glargine U100). Subgroup categorization by sulfonylurea usage, end-of-treatment insulin dose or glycated hemoglobin reduction did not show consistent trends on overall hypoglycemia rates. Hypoglycemia rates reported so far for once-weekly basal insulins are consistent with or lower than those reported for daily-administered basal insulin analogs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ildiko Lingvay
- Endocrinology Division, Department of Internal Medicine and Peter O'Donnell School of Public Health, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
| | - Simon R Heller
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Saleem SZ, Fareed A, Akhtar SMM, Farhat S, Taha AM, Akilimali A. Efficacy and safety of once-weekly insulin icodec compared to once-daily insulin g U-100 in patients with type II diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetol Metab Syndr 2024; 16:80. [PMID: 38566252 PMCID: PMC10988795 DOI: 10.1186/s13098-024-01305-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2024] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND//OBJECTIVE Diabetes affects millions of people globally, despite treatment options, adherence and other factors pose obstacles. Once-weekly Insulin Icodec, a novel basal Insulin analog with a week-long half-life, offers potential benefits, enhancing convenience, adherence, and quality of life for improved glycemic control. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly Insulin Icodec compared to once-daily Insulin Glargine U-100 in individuals with type II diabetes (T2D). METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases before September 2023 to identify relevant Randomized control trials (RCTs) with no language restrictions following PRISMA guidelines. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for quality assessment. All statistical analyses were conducted using RevMan (version 5.4; Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014). RESULT Four RCTs published from 2020 to 2023 with a cumulative sample size of 1035 were included. The pooled mean difference (MD) revealed a 4.68% longer TIR (%) with Insulin Icodec compared to Insulin Glargine U-100 [{95% CI (0.69, 8.68), p = 0.02}], the estimated mean changes in HbA1c (%) and FPG (mg%) were found to be insignificant between the two groups [MD = - 0.12 {95% CI (- 0.26, 0.01), p = 0.07}] and [MD = - 2.59 {95% CI (- 6.95, 1.78), p = 0.25}], respectively. The overall OR for hypoglycemia was also nonsignificant between the two regimens 1.04 [{95% CI (0.71, 1.52), p = 0.84}]. Other safety parameters were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Switching from daily Insulin Glargine U-100 to weekly Insulin Icodec showed longer TIR (%) as well as similar blood glycemic control and safety profile. Hence, it may be a good alternate option for management of longstanding T2D.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Syed Zia Saleem
- Department of Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan
| | - Areeba Fareed
- Department of Medicine, Karachi Medical and Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan
| | | | - Solay Farhat
- Faculty of Science, Lebanese University, Beirut, Lebanon
| | | | - Aymar Akilimali
- Department of Research, Medical Research Circle, Bukavu, DR, Congo.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abuelazm M, Ibrahim AA, Khlidj Y, Badr A, Amin AM, Elzeftawy MA, Gowaily I, Elsaeidy AS, Abdelazeem B. Once-weekly Insulin Icodec Versus Once-daily Long-acting Insulin for Type II Diabetes: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Endocr Soc 2024; 8:bvad177. [PMID: 38213906 PMCID: PMC10783254 DOI: 10.1210/jendso/bvad177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2023] [Indexed: 01/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Insulin icodec is a novel basal insulin analog with once-weekly subcutaneous administration. We aim to estimate the efficacy and safety of insulin icodec vs long-acting insulin (insulin glargine and degludec) in type II diabetic patients. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through May 29, 2023. We used RevMan V. 5.4 to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Our primary outcome was glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) change. Results We included 7 RCTs with a total of 3183 patients. Insulin icodec was associated with significantly decreased HbA1C (MD: -0.15 with 95% CI [-0.24, -0.06], P = .002) and increased percentage of time with glucose in range (TIR) (MD: 4.06 with 95% CI [2.06, 6.06], P = .0001). However, insulin icodec was associated with increased body weight (MD: 0.57 with 95% CI [0.45, 0.70], P = .00001). Also, there was no difference regarding any serious adverse events (AEs) (RR: 0.96 with 95% CI [0.76, 1.20], P = .7) or AEs leading to withdrawal (RR: 1.54 with 95% CI [0.84, 2.82], P = .16). However, insulin icodec was associated with increased any AEs incidence (RR: 1.06 with 95% CI [1.01, 1.12], P = .02). Conclusion Insulin icodec was associated with decreased HbA1C, increased TIR, with similar hypoglycemic and serious AEs. However, it was also associated with increased body weight and the incidence of any AEs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ahmed A Ibrahim
- Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia 32511, Egypt
| | - Yehya Khlidj
- Faculty of Medicine, Algiers University, Algiers 44002, Algeria
| | - Amr Badr
- Department of Cardiology, Banha Teaching Hospital, Banha 13511, Egypt
| | | | | | | | | | - Basel Abdelazeem
- Department of Cardiology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Nkonge KM, Nkonge DK, Nkonge TN. Insulin Therapy for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus: A Narrative Review of Innovative Treatment Strategies. Diabetes Ther 2023; 14:1801-1831. [PMID: 37736787 PMCID: PMC10570256 DOI: 10.1007/s13300-023-01468-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Accepted: 08/29/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023] Open
Abstract
The discovery of insulin was presented to the international medical community on May 3, 1922. Since then, insulin has become one of the most effective pharmacological agents used to treat type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the initiation and intensification of insulin therapy is often delayed in people living with type 2 diabetes due to numerous challenges associated with daily subcutaneous administration. Reducing the frequency of injections, using insulin pens instead of syringes and vials, simplifying treatment regimens, or administering insulin through alternative routes may help improve adherence to and persistence with insulin therapy among people living with diabetes. As the world commemorates the centennial of the commercialization of insulin, the aims of this article are to provide an overview of insulin therapy and to summarize clinically significant findings from phase 3 clinical trials evaluating less frequent dosing of insulin and the non-injectable administration of insulin.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ken M. Nkonge
- University of Nairobi, P.O. Box 30197, Nairobi, Kenya
| | | | - Teresa N. Nkonge
- University of Nairobi, P.O. Box 30197, Nairobi, Kenya
- McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8 Canada
| |
Collapse
|