Cost-effectiveness of intensified versus conventional multifactorial intervention in type 2 diabetes: results and projections from the Steno-2 study

The Impact of Unrelated Future Medical Costs on Economic Evaluation Outcomes for Different Models of Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

This study leveraged data from 11 independent international diabetes models to evaluate the impact of unrelated future medical costs on the outcomes of health economic evaluations in diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Eleven models simulated the progression of diabetes and occurrence of its complications in hypothetical cohorts of individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 (T2D) diabetes over the remaining lifetime of the patients to evaluate the cost effectiveness of three hypothetical glucose improvement interventions versus a hypothetical control intervention. All models used the same set of costs associated with diabetes complications and interventions, using a United Kingdom healthcare system perspective. Standard utility/disutility values associated with diabetes-related complications were used. Unrelated future medical costs were assumed equal for all interventions and control arms. The statistical significance of changes on the total lifetime costs, incremental costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) before and after adding the unrelated future medical costs were analysed using t-test and summarized in incremental cost-effectiveness diagrams by type of diabetes.

RESULTS

The inclusion of unrelated costs increased mean total lifetime costs substantially. However, there were no significant differences between the mean incremental costs and ICERs before and after adding unrelated future medical costs. Unrelated future medical cost inclusion did not alter the original conclusions of the diabetes modelling evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

For diabetes, with many costly noncommunicable diseases already explicitly modelled as complications, and with many interventions having predominantly an effect on the improvement of quality of life, unrelated future medical costs have a small impact on the outcomes of health economic evaluations.

Education programmes for people with chronic kidney disease and diabetes

BACKGROUND

Adherence to complex regimens for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and diabetes is often poor. Interventions to enhance adherence require intensive education and behavioural counselling. However, whether the existing evidence is scientifically rigorous and can support recommendations for routine use of educational programmes in people with CKD and diabetes is still unknown. This is an update of a review first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of education programmes for people with CKD and diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 19 July 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs investigating the benefits and harms of educational programmes (information and behavioural instructions and advice given by a healthcare provider, who could be a nurse, pharmacist, educator, health professional, medical practitioner, or healthcare provider, through verbal, written, audio-recording, or computer-aided modalities) for people 18 years and older with CKD and diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the literature, determined study eligibility, assessed quality, and extracted and entered data. We expressed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and continuous data as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies (13 reports, 840 randomised participants) were included. The overall risk of bias was low for objective outcomes and attrition bias, unclear for selection bias, reporting bias and other biases, and high for subjective outcomes. Education programmes compared to routine care alone probably decrease glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) (4 studies, 467 participants: MD -0.42%, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.31; moderate certainty evidence; 13.5 months follow-up) and may decrease total cholesterol (179 participants: MD -0.35 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.63 to -00.07; low certainty evidence) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (179 participants: MD -0.40 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.14; low certainty evidence) at 18 months of follow-up. One study (83 participants) reported education programmes for people receiving dialysis who have diabetes may improve the diabetes knowledge of diagnosis, monitoring, hypoglycaemia, hyperglycaemia, medication with insulin, oral medication, personal health habits, diet, exercise, chronic complications, and living with diabetes and coping with stress (all low certainty evidence). There may be an improvement in the general knowledge of diabetes at the end of the intervention and at the end of the three-month follow-up (one study, 97 participants; low certainty evidence) in people with diabetes and moderately increased albuminuria (A2). In participants with diabetes and moderately increased albuminuria (A2) (one study, 97 participants), education programmes may improve a participant's beliefs in treatment effectiveness and total self-efficacy at the end of five weeks compared to routine care (low certainty evidence). Self-efficacy for in-home blood glucose monitoring and beliefs in personal control may increase at the end of the three-month follow-up (low certainty evidence). There were no differences in other self-efficacy measures. One study (100 participants) reported an education programme may increase change in behaviour for general diet, specific diet and home blood glucose monitoring at the end of treatment (low certainty evidence); however, at the end of three months of follow-up, there may be no difference in any behaviour change outcomes (all low certainty evidence). There were uncertain effects on death, serious hypoglycaemia, and kidney failure due to very low certainty evidence. No data was available for changes in kidney function (creatinine clearance, serum creatinine, doubling of serum creatinine or proteinuria). For an education programme plus multidisciplinary, co-ordinated care compared to routine care, there may be little or no difference in HbA1c, kidney failure, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), systolic or diastolic blood pressure, hypoglycaemia, hyperglycaemia, and LDL and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (all low certainty evidence in participants with type-2 diabetes mellitus and documented advanced diabetic nephropathy). There were no data for death, patient-orientated measures, change in kidney function (other than eGFR and albuminuria), cardiovascular disease morbidity, quality of life, or adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Education programmes may improve knowledge of some areas related to diabetes care and some self-management practices. Education programmes probably decrease HbA1c in people with CKD and diabetes, but the effect on other clinical outcomes is unclear. This review only included eight studies with small sample sizes. Therefore, more randomised studies are needed to examine the efficacy of education programmes on important clinical outcomes in people with CKD and diabetes.

Cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent quality improvement care model for diabetes in South Asia: The CARRS randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent strategy versus usual care in people with type 2 diabetes in South Asia.

DESIGN

Economic evaluation from healthcare system and societal perspectives.

SETTING

Ten diverse urban clinics in India and Pakistan.

PARTICIPANTS

1146 people with type 2 diabetes (575 in the intervention group and 571 in the usual care group) with mean age of 54.2 years, median diabetes duration: 7 years and mean HbA1c: 9.9% (85 mmol/mol) at baseline.

INTERVENTION

Multicomponent strategy comprising decision-supported electronic health records and non-physician care coordinator. Control group received usual care.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per unit achievement in multiple risk factor control (HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) and SBP <130/80 mmHg or LDLc <2.58 mmol/L (100 mg/dL)), ICERs per unit reduction in HbA1c, 5-mmHg unit reductions in systolic BP, 10-unit reductions in LDLc (mg/dl) (considered as clinically relevant) and ICER per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. ICERs were reported in 2020 purchasing power parity-adjusted international dollars (INT$). The probability of ICERs being cost-effective was considered depending on the willingness to pay (WTP) values as a share of GDP per capita for India (Int$ 7041.4) and Pakistan (Int$ 4847.6).

RESULTS

Compared to usual care, the annual incremental costs per person for intervention group were Int$ 1061.9 from a health system perspective and Int$ 1093.6 from a societal perspective. The ICER was Int$ 10,874.6 per increase in multiple risk factor control, $2588.1 per one percentage point reduction in the HbA1c, and $1744.6 per 5 unit reduction in SBP (mmHg), and $1271 per 10 unit reduction in LDLc (mg/dl). The ICER per QALY gained was $33,399.6 from a societal perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

In a trial setting in South Asia, a multicomponent strategy for diabetes care resulted in better multiple risk factor control at higher costs and may be cost-effective depending on the willingness to pay threshold with substantial uncertainty around cost-effectiveness for QALYs gained in the short term (2.5 years). Future research needs to confirm the long-term cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial intervention for diabetes care in diverse healthcare settings in LMICs.

Blood pressure control for diabetic retinopathy

BACKGROUND

Diabetic retinopathy is a common complication of diabetes and a leading cause of visual impairment and blindness. Research has established the importance of blood glucose control to prevent development and progression of the ocular complications of diabetes. Concurrent blood pressure control has been advocated for this purpose, but individual studies have reported varying conclusions regarding the effects of this intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the existing evidence regarding the effect of interventions to control blood pressure levels among diabetics on incidence and progression of diabetic retinopathy, preservation of visual acuity, adverse events, quality of life, and costs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched several electronic databases, including CENTRAL, and trial registries. We last searched the electronic databases on 3 September 2021. We also reviewed the reference lists of review articles and trial reports selected for inclusion.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which either type 1 or type 2 diabetic participants, with or without hypertension, were assigned randomly to more intense versus less intense blood pressure control; to blood pressure control versus usual care or no intervention on blood pressure (placebo); or to one class of antihypertensive medication versus another or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of records identified by the electronic and manual searches and the full-text reports of any records identified as potentially relevant. The included trials were independently assessed for risk of bias with respect to outcomes reported in this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 RCTs conducted in North America, Europe, Australia, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East that had enrolled a total of 4620 type 1 and 22,565 type 2 diabetic participants (sample sizes from 16 to 4477 participants). In all 7 RCTs for normotensive type 1 diabetic participants, 8 of 12 RCTs with normotensive type 2 diabetic participants, and 5 of 10 RCTs with hypertensive type 2 diabetic participants, one group was assigned to one or more antihypertensive agents and the control group to placebo. In the remaining 4 RCTs for normotensive participants with type 2 diabetes and 5 RCTs for hypertensive type 2 diabetic participants, methods of intense blood pressure control were compared to usual care. Eight trials were sponsored entirely and 10 trials partially by pharmaceutical companies; nine studies received support from other sources; and two studies did not report funding source. Study designs, populations, interventions, lengths of follow-up (range less than one year to nine years), and blood pressure targets varied among the included trials. For primary review outcomes after five years of treatment and follow-up, one of the seven trials for type 1 diabetics reported incidence of retinopathy and one trial reported progression of retinopathy; one trial reported a combined outcome of incidence and progression (as defined by study authors). Among normotensive type 2 diabetics, four of 12 trials reported incidence of diabetic retinopathy and two trials reported progression of retinopathy; two trials reported combined incidence and progression. Among hypertensive type 2 diabetics, six of the 10 trials reported incidence of diabetic retinopathy and two trials reported progression of retinopathy; five of the 10 trials reported combined incidence and progression. The evidence supports an overall benefit of more intensive blood pressure intervention for five-year incidence of diabetic retinopathy (11 studies; 4940 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 0.92; I2 = 15%; moderate certainty evidence) and the combined outcome of incidence and progression (8 studies; 6212 participants; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89; I2 = 42%; low certainty evidence). The available evidence did not support a benefit regarding five-year progression of diabetic retinopathy (5 studies; 5144 participants; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12; I2 = 57%; moderate certainty evidence), incidence of proliferative diabetic retinopathy, clinically significant macular edema, or vitreous hemorrhage (9 studies; 8237 participants; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.04; I2 = 31%; low certainty evidence), or loss of 3 or more lines on a visual acuity chart with a logMAR scale (2 studies; 2326 participants; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.08; I2 = 90%; very low certainty evidence). Hypertensive type 2 diabetic participants realized more benefit from intense blood pressure control for three of the four outcomes concerning incidence and progression of diabetic retinopathy. The adverse event reported most often (13 of 29 trials) was death, yielding an estimated RR 0.87 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.00; 13 studies; 13,979 participants; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Hypotension was reported in two trials, with an RR of 2.04 (95% CI 1.63 to 2.55; 2 studies; 3323 participants; I2 = 37%; low certainty evidence), indicating an excess of hypotensive events among participants assigned to more intervention on blood pressure.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hypertension is a well-known risk factor for several chronic conditions for which lowering blood pressure has proven to be beneficial. The available evidence supports a modest beneficial effect of intervention to reduce blood pressure with respect to preventing diabetic retinopathy for up to five years, particularly for hypertensive type 2 diabetics. However, there was a paucity of evidence to support such intervention to slow progression of diabetic retinopathy or to affect other outcomes considered in this review among normotensive diabetics. This weakens any conclusion regarding an overall benefit of intervening on blood pressure in diabetic patients without hypertension for the sole purpose of preventing diabetic retinopathy or avoiding the need for treatment for advanced stages of diabetic retinopathy.

Antiplatelet agents for chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet agents are widely used to prevent cardiovascular events. The risks and benefits of antiplatelet agents may be different in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) for whom occlusive atherosclerotic events are less prevalent, and bleeding hazards might be increased. This is an update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antiplatelet agents in people with any form of CKD, including those with CKD not receiving renal replacement therapy, patients receiving any form of dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 July 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials of any antiplatelet agents versus placebo or no treatment, or direct head-to-head antiplatelet agent studies in people with CKD. Studies were included if they enrolled participants with CKD, or included people in broader at-risk populations in which data for subgroups with CKD could be disaggregated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently extracted data from primary study reports and any available supplementary information for study population, interventions, outcomes, and risks of bias. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from numbers of events and numbers of participants at risk which were extracted from each included study. The reported RRs were extracted where crude event rates were not provided. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 113 studies, enrolling 51,959 participants; 90 studies (40,597 CKD participants) compared an antiplatelet agent with placebo or no treatment, and 29 studies (11,805 CKD participants) directly compared one antiplatelet agent with another. Fifty-six new studies were added to this 2021 update. Seven studies originally excluded from the 2013 review were included, although they had a follow-up lower than two months. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in 16 and 22 studies, respectively. Sixty-four studies reported low-risk methods for blinding of participants and investigators; outcome assessment was blinded in 41 studies. Forty-one studies were at low risk of attrition bias, 50 studies were at low risk of selective reporting bias, and 57 studies were at low risk of other potential sources of bias. Compared to placebo or no treatment, antiplatelet agents probably reduces myocardial infarction (18 studies, 15,289 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, I² = 0%; moderate certainty). Antiplatelet agents has uncertain effects on fatal or nonfatal stroke (12 studies, 10.382 participants: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.59, I² = 37%; very low certainty) and may have little or no effect on death from any cause (35 studies, 18,241 participants: RR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.84 to 1.06, I² = 14%; low certainty). Antiplatelet therapy probably increases major bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with haemodialysis (HD) (29 studies, 16,194 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.65, I² = 12%; moderate certainty). In addition, antiplatelet therapy may increase minor bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with HD (21 studies, 13,218 participants: RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.90, I² = 58%; low certainty). Antiplatelet treatment may reduce early dialysis vascular access thrombosis (8 studies, 1525 participants) RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.70; low certainty). Antiplatelet agents may reduce doubling of serum creatinine in CKD (3 studies, 217 participants: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.86, I² = 8%; low certainty). The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents on stroke, cardiovascular death, kidney failure, kidney transplant graft loss, transplant rejection, creatinine clearance, proteinuria, dialysis access failure, loss of primary unassisted patency, failure to attain suitability for dialysis, need of intervention and cardiovascular hospitalisation were uncertain. Limited data were available for direct head-to-head comparisons of antiplatelet drugs, including prasugrel, ticagrelor, different doses of clopidogrel, abciximab, defibrotide, sarpogrelate and beraprost.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antiplatelet agents probably reduced myocardial infarction and increased major bleeding, but do not appear to reduce all-cause and cardiovascular death among people with CKD and those treated with dialysis. The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents compared with each other are uncertain.

Comparison of efficacy between dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor on metabolic risk factors in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Results from the CANTABILE study

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of teneligliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, and canagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, at reducing a composite outcome of three metabolic risk factors (obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and metabolic risks.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group comparison study, 162 patients with T2DM and one or more metabolic risk factors were randomized into a teneligliptin or canagliflozin group and treated for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the composite percentage of subjects who experienced an improvement in at least one metabolic risk after 24 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint was achieved significantly by more patients in the canagliflozin group than in the teneligliptin group (62.2% vs. 31.3%, p = 0.0004). A ≥ 3% body weight loss was also achieved by significantly more participants in the canagliflozin group than in the teneligliptin group (55.9% vs. 10.5%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed canagliflozin to be more effective at reducing metabolic risks than teneligliptin. In Japanese patients with T2DM and metabolic risk factors, SGLT2 inhibitors may be superior to DPP-4 inhibitors at controlling multiple metabolic risk.

Integrated Measurement for Early Detection (MIDO) as a digital strategy for timely assessment of non-communicable disease profiles and factors associated with unawareness and control: a retrospective observational study in primary healthcare facilities in Mexico

OBJECTIVES

The Carlos Slim Foundation implemented the Integrated Measurement for Early Detection (MIDO), a screening strategy for non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in Mexico as part of CASALUD, a portfolio of digital health services focusing on healthcare delivery and prevention/management of NCDs. We investigated the disease profile of the screened population and evaluated MIDO's contribution to the continuum of care of the main NCDs.

DESIGN

Using data from MIDO and the chronic diseases information system, we quantified the proportion of the population screened and diagnosed with NCDs, and measured care linkage/retention and level of control achieved. We analysed comorbidity patterns and estimated prevalence of predisease stages. Finally, we estimated characteristics associated with unawareness and control of NCDs, and examined efficacy of the CASALUD model in improving NCD control.

SETTING

Public primary health centres in 27/32 Mexican states.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged ≥20 years lacking healthcare access.

RESULTS

From 2014 to 2018, 743 000 individuals were screened using MIDO. A predisease or disease condition was detected in ≥70% of the population who were unaware of their NCD status. The screening identified 38 417 new cases of type 2 diabetes, 53 133 new cases of hypertension and 208 627 individuals with obesity. Dyslipidaemia was found in 77.3% of individuals with available blood samples. Comorbidities were highly prevalent, especially in people with obesity. Only 5.47% (n=17 774) of individuals were linked with their corresponding primary health centre. Factors associated with unawareness of and uncontrolled NCDs were sex, age, and social determinants, for example, rural/urban environment, access to healthcare service, and education level. Patients with type 2 diabetes treated at clinics under the CASALUD model were more likely to achieve disease control (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.61).

CONCLUSION

Patient-centred screening strategies such as MIDO are urgently needed to improve screening, access, retention and control for patients with NCDs.

Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease: Synopsis of the 2020 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline

DESCRIPTION

The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) organization developed a clinical practice guideline in 2020 for the management of patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

The KDIGO Work Group (WG) was tasked with developing the guideline for diabetes management in CKD. It defined the scope of the guideline, gathered evidence, determined systematic review topics, and graded evidence that had been summarized by an evidence review team. The English-language literature searches, which were initially done through October 2018, were updated in February 2020. The WG used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to appraise evidence and rate the strength of the recommendations. Expert judgment was used to develop consensus practice points supplementary to the evidence-based graded recommendations. The guideline document underwent open public review. Comments from various stakeholders, subject matter experts, and industry and national organizations were considered before the document was finalized.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The guideline includes 12 recommendations and 48 practice points for clinicians caring for patients with diabetes and CKD. This synopsis focuses on the key recommendations pertinent to the following issues: comprehensive care needs, glycemic monitoring and targets, lifestyle interventions, antihyperglycemic therapies, and educational and integrated care approaches.

Managing the multifaceted nature of type 2 diabetes using once-weekly injectable GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

As a highly prevalent chronic condition associated with complications and high mortality rates, it is important for pharmacists to have a comprehensive understanding of the impact of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and available treatment options. The use of injectable glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) is recommended as an effective and convenient treatment regimen for improving glycaemic control in individuals with T2D, with a good safety profile; however, the wider extent of its potential benefits often are unknown to clinical pharmacists. The objective of this article is to provide an overview of the impact of T2D on individuals and to discuss the multifaceted role of once-weekly (QW) GLP-1 RAs in addressing these challenges.

METHODS

This is a narrative review of the published literature regarding the use of injectable GLP-1 RAs in managing health complications in people with T2D.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Recent findings reveal additional benefits of GLP-1 RAs in managing T2D complications, including atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease, retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy. Dulaglutide and semaglutide have been shown to provide additional CV benefit in patients at high risk of CV events compared with standard of care/placebo and may offer renal protection in patients with chronic kidney disease. Cost-effectiveness studies, taking into consideration these different complications, have shown that QW GLP-1 RAs were cost-effective compared with other therapies. GLP-1 RAs may also help to improve overall health-related quality of life, reducing the risk of depression and 'diabetes distress', and limiting the risk of hypoglycaemia.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

From the literature, this appears to be the first review of the evidence supporting the multifaceted role of QW GLP-1 RAs in T2D, with particular emphasis on their use in comorbid conditions, as well as associated potential financial and well-being benefits. The results suggest that QW GLP-1 RAs may be an attractive treatment option for improving glycaemic control in T2D, especially in individuals with (or at risk of) additional comorbidities or health complications.

Cost-effectiveness of Interventions to Manage Diabetes: Has the Evidence Changed Since 2008?

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize updated evidence on the cost-effectiveness (CE) of interventions to manage diabetes, its complications, and comorbidities.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review of studies from high-income countries evaluating the CE of diabetes management interventions recommended by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and published in English between June 2008 and July 2017. We also incorporated studies from a previous CE review from the period 1985-2008. We classified the interventions based on their strength of evidence (strong, supportive, or uncertain) and levels of CE: cost-saving (more health benefit at a lower cost), very cost-effective (≤$25,000 per life year gained [LYG] or quality-adjusted life year [QALY]), cost-effective ($25,001-$50,000 per LYG or QALY), marginally cost-effective ($50,001-$100,000 per LYG or QALY), or not cost-effective (>$100,000 per LYG or QALY). Costs were measured in 2017 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

Seventy-three new studies met our inclusion criteria. These were combined with 49 studies from the previous review to yield 122 studies over the period 1985-2017. A large majority of the ADA-recommended interventions remain cost-effective. Specifically, we found strong evidence that the following ADA-recommended interventions are cost-saving or very cost-effective: In the cost-saving category are 1) ACE inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) therapy for intensive hypertension management compared with standard hypertension management, 2) ACEI/ARB therapy to prevent chronic kidney disease and/or end-stage renal disease in people with albuminuria compared with no ACEI/ARB therapy, 3) comprehensive foot care and patient education to prevent and treat foot ulcers among those at moderate/high risk of developing foot ulcers, 4) telemedicine for diabetic retinopathy screening compared with office screening, and 5) bariatric surgery compared with no surgery for individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m²). In the very cost-effective category are 1) intensive glycemic management (targeting A1C <7%) compared with conventional glycemic management (targeting an A1C level of 8-10%) for individuals with newly diagnosed T2D, 2) multicomponent interventions (involving behavior change/education and pharmacological therapy targeting hyperglycemia, hypertension, dyslipidemia, microalbuminuria, nephropathy/retinopathy, secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease with aspirin) compared with usual care, 3) statin therapy compared with no statin therapy for individuals with T2D and history of cardiovascular disease, 4) diabetes self-management education and support compared with usual care, 5) T2D screening every 3 years starting at age 45 years compared with no screening, 6) integrated, patient-centered care compared with usual care, 7) smoking cessation compared with no smoking cessation, 8) daily aspirin use as primary prevention for cardiovascular complications compared with usual care, 9) self-monitoring of blood glucose three times per day compared with once per day among those using insulin, 10) intensive glycemic management compared with conventional insulin therapy for T2D among adults aged ≥50 years, and 11) collaborative care for depression compared with usual care.

CONCLUSIONS

Complementing professional treatment recommendations, our systematic review provides an updated understanding of the potential value of interventions to manage diabetes and its complications and can assist clinicians and payers in prioritizing interventions and health care resources.

Prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes: current challenges and opportunities

More than 100 million people in the USA have diabetes or prediabetes and are at high risk for developing cardiovascular disease. Current evidence-based guidelines support a multifactorial approach in patients with diabetes, including lifestyle intervention and pharmacological treatment of hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. In addition, recent cardiovascular outcome trials demonstrated that sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes. Albeit this evidence, over 80% of patients with diabetes do not achieve the recommended treatment goals. Considering the rising burden of cardiovascular complications, there is need to improve the quality of care in patients with diabetes. In this review, we discuss the current quality of health care in patients with diabetes in the USA, identify barriers to achieve guideline-recommended treatment goals and outline opportunities for the improvement in caring for patients with diabetes.

Cost-effectiveness of intensive interventions compared to standard care in individuals with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and critical appraisal of decision-analytic models

AIMS

The objective of this systematic review is to identify and assess the quality of published decision-analytic models evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of target-driven intensive interventions for single and multifactorial risk factor control compared to standard care in people with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases MEDLINE, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to October 31, 2019. Articles were eligible for inclusion if the studies had used a decision-analytic model evaluating both the long-term costs and benefits associated with intensive interventions for risk factor control compared to standard care in people with type 2 diabetes. Data were extracted using a standardised form, while quality was assessed using the decision-analytic model-specific Philips-criteria.

RESULTS

Overall, nine articles (11 models) were identified, four models evaluated intensive glycaemic control, three evaluated intensive blood pressure control, two evaluated intensive lipid control, and two evaluated intensive multifactorial interventions. Six reported using discrete-time simulations modelling approach, whereas five reported using a Markov modelling framework. The majority, seven studies, reported that the intensive interventions were dominant or cost-effective, given the assumptions and analytical perspective taken. The methodological and reporting quality of the studies was generally weak, with only four studies fulfilling more than 50% of their applicable Philips-criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review of decision-analytic models of target-driven intensive interventions for single and multifactorial risk factor control in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Identified shortcomings are lack of transparency in data identification and evidence synthesis as well as for the selection of the modelling approaches. Future models should aim to include greater evaluation of the quality of the data sources used and the assessment of uncertainty in the model.

Rationale, Design, and Methods of the Study of Comparison of Canagliflozin vs. Teneligliptin Against Basic Metabolic Risks in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (CANTABILE study): Protocol for a Randomized, Parallel-Group Comparison Trial

BACKGROUND

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are widely used antidiabetic drugs. However, to date, no studies have directly compared the effects of these two drugs on the components of the metabolic syndrome in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

OBJECTIVES

The Comparison of Canagliflozin vs. Teneligliptin against Basic Metabolic Risks in Patients with T2DM (CANTABILE) study aims to examine whether the DPP-4 inhibitor (teneligliptin) or the SGLT2 inhibitor (canagliflozin) is the more effective drug for reducing metabolic risk factors as a composite in Japanese patients with T2DM.

METHODS

The CANTABILE study is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group comparison study. A total of 200 patients with T2DM treated with metformin alone or without glucose-lowering agents will be enrolled if they have one or more of the metabolic risk factors, such as obesity, borderline high blood pressure, and dyslipidemia. They will then will be randomized into the Teneligliptin group or the Canagliflozin group and treated for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint is the composite ratio of subjects with one or more improved metabolic risk factors. The secondary endpoints are the changes in each component of the primary endpoint.

PLANNED OUTCOMES

The CANTABILE study provides valuable evidence to indicate the suitability of SGLT2 inhibitors or DPP-4 inhibitors for Japanese patients with T2DM and metabolic risks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry number: UMIN000030343.

FUNDING

Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation.

Treat-to-target HbA1c and lipid profile to prolong β-cell mass/function and optimize treatment goal attainment

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the relation between different serum lipid fractions and other known barriers to attain the HbA_1c  ≤ 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) target.

METHODS

Data on 2719 patients with type 2 diabetes were collected from the five waves of the International Diabetes Mellitus Practice Study implemented in Argentina (2006 to 2012) including demographic/socioeconomic profile, clinical, metabolic (HbA_1c and serum lipids) data, and treatment type and also, percentage of treatment goal attainment. Descriptive statistical analyses included ANOVA, χ² test, and Fisher exact test and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, which identified predictive factors for HbA_1c  ≤ 7% (53 mmol/mol).

RESULTS

The average age was 63 years, primary/secondary education, health insurance, 10-year type 2 diabetes duration, most associated with cardiovascular risk factors and some microvascular/macrovascular complications; 94.5% received antihyperglycaemic drugs. Percentage of people on target: HbA_1c 51.2%, blood pressure 23.5%, total cholesterol 62.6%, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol 38.9%, and triglycerides 61.1%. HbA_1c on target depended markedly on treatment type: more of those treated with lifestyle changes and significantly fewer of those receiving insulin. Only 4.1% had all parameters simultaneously on target. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that achieving HbA_1c  ≤ 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) was associated with higher educational level, shorter diabetes duration, and having reached goals for LDL cholesterol and triglycerides, whereas opposite results were obtained with insulin treatment and longer diabetes duration.

CONCLUSIONS

High LDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels simultaneously potentiate development/progression of chronic complications, exerting this effect in the long term by decreasing β-cell mass/function, thereby making it more difficult to reach HbA_1c values able to prevent complications.

Management of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes with Once-Weekly Semaglutide Versus Dulaglutide, Exenatide ER, Liraglutide and Lixisenatide: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in the Danish Setting

INTRODUCTION

Once-weekly semaglutide is a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analog for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) that has been associated with greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight versus GLP-1 receptor agonists dulaglutide, exenatide extended-release (ER), liraglutide and lixisenatide in the SUSTAIN trial program and a network meta-analysis (NMA). The aim of the present study was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of semaglutide versus all available GLP-1 receptor agonists in Denmark, using a clinically orientated treatment approach.

METHODS

Outcomes were projected over patient lifetimes using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model. Baseline characteristics and treatment effects were sourced from the corresponding SUSTAIN trials and the NMA. Patients were assumed to initiate GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy and subsequently treatment-intensify according to clinical treatment guidelines, with addition of basal insulin and switching to basal-bolus insulin occurring when HbA1c exceeded recommended targets. Patients were assumed to receive a GLP-1 receptor agonist plus basal insulin therapy once HbA1c levels reached 7.5% and a basal-bolus insulin regimen once HbA1c exceeded 8.0%. Costs were captured in 2017 Danish kroner (DKK), with future costs and outcomes discounted at 3% per annum.

RESULTS

Primary analyses indicated that semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1 mg were associated with improvements in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.11 and 0.34 quality-adjusted life years, respectively, versus dulaglutide, achieved at cost savings of DKK 289 and DKK 13,416, respectively. Supporting analyses indicated that both doses of semaglutide were either cost-effective or dominant versus exenatide ER, liraglutide 1.2 mg and 1.8 mg and lixisenatide.

CONCLUSION

Semaglutide represents a cost-effective alternative to other GLP-1 receptor agonist therapies available in Denmark, demonstrating clinical benefits versus dulaglutide, exenatide ER, liraglutide and lixisenatide for the treatment of patients with T2D.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S. Plain language summary available for this article.

Type 2 diabetes: Prescription patterns and treatment outcomes of IDMPS survey in Argentina

AIM

To assess prescription patterns for treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and their outcomes in the IDMPS survey in Argentina.

METHODS

Data from 2551 people with T2D recruited from 210 physicians participating in IDMPS surveys in Argentina (2006 to 2012 waves) were recorded, including medical history, medications, glycemic control, blood pressure, and lipid status.

RESULTS

Most people were treated with oral glucose-lowering drugs (OGLDs) (65%), followed by combinations of these drugs plus insulin (22%) and only insulin (13%). These percentages varied according to T2D duration, the frequency of OGLDs decreasing while contrastingly and only insulin increasing (under 5 years versus over 10 years of disease duration, respectively). Average systolic blood pressure (SBP), HbA1c and LDL-c were significantly higher in patients treated with insulin either alone or associated with OGLDs. The percentage of people at target values for these parameters was also lower in these two groups. The percentage of people that reached simultaneous goal treatment values for BP, HbA1c and LDL-c levels was markedly low.

CONCLUSION

Prescription patterns for treatment of T2D follows a chronological trend and the percentage of people at goal values (HbA1c, BP and LDL-c values) was significantly lower in people receiving insulin. These data must be carefully considered by health and academic authorities in order to implement effective strategies to modify this situation.

Rationale and protocol for estimating the economic value of a multicomponent quality improvement strategy for diabetes care in South Asia

BACKGROUND

Economic dimensions of implementing quality improvement for diabetes care are understudied worldwide. We describe the economic evaluation protocol within a randomised controlled trial that tested a multi-component quality improvement (QI) strategy for individuals with poorly-controlled type 2 diabetes in South Asia.

METHODS/DESIGN

This economic evaluation of the Centre for Cardiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (CARRS) randomised trial involved 1146 people with poorly-controlled type 2 diabetes receiving care at 10 diverse diabetes clinics across India and Pakistan. The economic evaluation comprises both a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (mean 2.5 years follow up) and a microsimulation model-based cost-utility analysis (life-time horizon). Effectiveness measures include multiple risk factor control (achieving HbA1c < 7% and blood pressure < 130/80 mmHg and/or LDL-cholesterol< 100 mg/dl), and patient reported outcomes including quality adjusted life years (QALYs) measured by EQ-5D-3 L, hospitalizations, and diabetes related complications at the trial end. Cost measures include direct medical and non-medical costs relevant to outpatient care (consultation fee, medicines, laboratory tests, supplies, food, and escort/accompanying person costs, transport) and inpatient care (hospitalization, transport, and accompanying person costs) of the intervention compared to usual diabetes care. Patient, healthcare system, and societal perspectives will be applied for costing. Both cost and health effects will be discounted at 3% per year for within trial cost-effectiveness analysis over 2.5 years and decision modelling analysis over a lifetime horizon. Outcomes will be reported as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) to achieve multiple risk factor control, avoid diabetes-related complications, or QALYs gained against varying levels of willingness to pay threshold values. Sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess uncertainties around ICER estimates by varying costs (95% CIs) across public vs. private settings and using conservative estimates of effect size (95% CIs) for multiple risk factor control. Costs will be reported in US$ 2018.

DISCUSSION

We hypothesize that the additional upfront costs of delivering the intervention will be counterbalanced by improvements in clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes, thereby rendering this multi-component QI intervention cost-effective in resource constrained South Asian settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01212328.

Cost-effectiveness of a primary care multidisciplinary Risk Assessment and Management Program for patients with diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM) over lifetime

PURPOSE

The multidisciplinary Risk Assessment and Management Program for patients with diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM) was found to be cost-saving in comparison with usual primary care over 5 years' follow-up. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of RAMP-DM over lifetime.

METHODS

We built a Discrete Event Simulation model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RAMP-DM over lifespan from public health service provider's perspective. Transition probabilities among disease states were extrapolated from a cohort of 17,140 propensity score matched participants in RAMP-DM and those under usual primary care over 5-year's follow-up. The mortality of patients with specific DM-related complications was estimated from a cohort of 206,238 patients with diabetes. Health preference and direct medical costs of DM patients referred to our previous studies among Chinese DM patients.

RESULTS

RAMP-DM individuals gained 0.745 QALYs and cost US$1404 less than those under usual care. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that RAMP-DM had 86.0% chance of being cost-saving compared to usual care under the assumptions and estimates used in the model. The probability of RAMP-DM being cost-effective compared to usual care would be over 99%, when the willingness to pay threshold is HK$20,000 (US$ 2564) or higher.

CONCLUSION

RAMP-DM added to usual primary care was cost-saving in managing people with diabetes over lifetime. These findings support the integration of RAMP-DM as part of routine primary care for all patients with diabetes.

A cost analysis of intensified vs conventional multifactorial therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a post hoc analysis of the Steno-2 study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Long-term follow-up of the Steno-2 study demonstrated that intensified multifactorial intervention increased median lifespan by 7.9 years and delayed incident cardiovascular disease by a median of 8.1 years compared with conventional multifactorial intervention during 21.2 years of follow-up. In this post hoc analysis of data from the Steno-2 study, we aimed to study the difference in direct medical costs associated with conventional vs intensified treatment.

METHODS

In 1993, 160 Danish individuals with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria were randomised to conventional or intensified multifactorial target-driven intervention for 7.8 years. Information on direct healthcare costs was retrieved from health registries, and the costs in the two groups of participants were compared by bootstrap t test analysis.

RESULTS

Over 21.2 years of follow-up, there was no difference in total direct medical costs between the intensified treatment group, €12,126,900, and the conventional treatment group, €11,181,700 (p = 0.48). The mean cost per person-year during 1996-2014 was significantly lower in the intensified treatment group (€8725 in the intensive group and €10,091 in the conventional group, p = 0.045). The main driver of this difference was reduced costs associated with inpatient admissions related to cardiovascular disease (p = 0.0024).

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Over a follow-up period of 21.2 years, we found no difference in total costs and reduced cost per person-year associated with intensified multifactorial treatment for 7.8 years compared with conventional multifactorial treatment. Considering the substantial gain in life-years and health benefits achieved with intensified treatment, we conclude that intensified multifaceted intervention in high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes seems to be highly feasible when balancing healthcare costs and treatment benefits in a Danish healthcare setting.

Frequency of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Reappearance or Absence during the Second Pregnancy of Women Treated at Mayo Clinic between 2013 and 2018

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention ranks diabetes mellitus (DM) as the seventh leading cause of death in the USA. The most prevalent forms of DM include Type 2 DM, Type 1 DM, and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). While the acute problem of diabetic hyperglycemia can be clinically managed through dietary control and lifestyle changes or pharmacological intervention with oral medications or insulin, long-term complications of the disease are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. These long-term complications involve nearly all organ systems of the body and share common pathologies associated with endothelial cell abnormalities. To better understand the molecular mechanisms underlying DM as related to future long-term complications following hyperglycemia, we have undertaken a study to determine the frequency that GDM did or did not occur in the second pregnancy of women who experienced GDM in their first pregnancy between 2013 and 2018 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Within the five-year period of the study, the results indicate that 7,330 women received obstetrical care for pregnancy during the study period. Of these, 150 developed GDM in their first pregnancy and of these, 42 (28%) had a second pregnancy. Of these 42 women, 20 again developed GDM and 22 did not develop GDM in their second pregnancy within the study period. Following the occurrence of GDM in the first pregnancy, the study (1) established the number of women with and without GDM in the second pregnancy and (2) confirmed the feasibility to study diabetic metabolic memory using maternal placental tissue from GDM women. These studies represent Phase I of a larger research project whose goal is to analyze epigenetic mechanisms underlying true diabetic metabolic memory using endothelial cells isolated from the maternal placenta of women with and without GDM as described in this article.

Once-weekly semaglutide for patients with type 2 diabetes: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

Choosing therapies for type 2 diabetes that are both effective and cost-effective is vital as healthcare systems worldwide aim to maximize health of the population. The present analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist) versus insulin glargine U100 (the most commonly used basal insulin) and versus dulaglutide (an alternative once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist), from a societal perspective in the Netherlands.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to project outcomes for once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1 mg versus insulin glargine U100, once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg, and once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg. Clinical data were taken from the SUSTAIN 4 and SUSTAIN 7 clinical trials. The analysis captured direct and indirect costs, mortality, and the impact of diabetes-related complications on quality of life.

RESULTS

Projections of outcomes suggested that once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg was associated with improved quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.19 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus insulin glargine U100 and 0.07 QALYs versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg. Once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg was associated with mean increases in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.27 QALYs versus insulin glargine U100 and 0.13 QALYs versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg. Improvements came at an increased cost versus insulin glargine U100, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from a societal perspective of €4988 and €495 per QALY gained for once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1 mg, respectively, falling below Netherlands-specific willingness-to-pay thresholds. Improvements versus dulaglutide came at a reduced cost from a societal perspective for both doses of once-weekly semaglutide.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-weekly semaglutide is cost-effective versus insulin glargine U100, and dominant versus dulaglutide 0.75 and 1.5 mg for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, and represents a good use of healthcare resources in the Netherlands.

Quality of health economic evaluations for the ACC/AHA stable ischemic heart disease practice guideline: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recently published a rigorous framework to guide integration of economic data into clinical guidelines. We assessed the quality of economic evaluations in a major ACC/AHA clinical guidance report.

METHODS

We systematically identified cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of RCTs cited in the ACC/AHA 2012 Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Stable Ischemic Heart Disease. We extracted: (1) study identifiers; (2) parent RCT information; (3) economic analysis characteristics; and (4) study quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument (QHES).

RESULTS

Quality scores were categorized as high (≥75 points) or low (<75 points). Of 1,266 citations in the guideline, 219 were RCTs associated with 77 CEAs. Mean quality score was 81 (out of 100) and improved over time, though 29.9% of studies were low-quality. Cost-per-QALY was the most commonly reported primary outcome (39.0%). Low-quality studies were less likely to report study perspective, use appropriate time horizons, or address statistical and clinical uncertainty. Funding was overwhelmingly private (83%). A detailed methodological assessment of high-quality studies revealed domains of additional methodological issues not identified by the QHES.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations of RCTs in the 2012 ACC/AHA ischemic heart disease guideline largely had high QHES scores but methodological issues existed among "high-quality" studies. Because the ACC/AHA has generally been more systematic in its integration of scientific evidence compared to other professional societies, it is likely that most societies will need to proceed more cautiously in their integration of economic evidence.

Clinical inertia in insulin prescription for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus at a primary health care institution of Cartagena, Colombia

Introduction: Evidence has demonstrated clinical or prescriptive inertia along with an increased prescription of insulin, causing a delay in the change of prescription.Objective: To determine the prescription pattern and clinical inertia of insulin use in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) enrolled in a diabetes program at a primary health care institution of Cartagena, Colombia.Materials and methods: Pharmacoepidemiology study that addresses drug utilization based on data collected through a review of medical records of 331 patients with DM2, aged 18 and older, who had at least 6 months of control.Results: 64.4% of patients were treated with long-acting insulin analogues and 18.4% used insulin; 52.7% of the patients in which insuline use was required did not have a prescription of this drug.Conclusions: There is clinical inertia related to insulin prescription. Strategies should be implemented to overcome prescriptive inertia for people with DM2 in order to achieve therapeutic goals earlier and effectively prevent the development and progression of chronic complications.

Insulin and glucose-lowering agents for treating people with diabetes and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is the commonest cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Both conditions commonly co-exist. Glucometabolic changes and concurrent dialysis in diabetes and CKD make glucose-lowering challenging, increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Glucose-lowering agents have been mainly studied in people with near-normal kidney function. It is important to characterise existing knowledge of glucose-lowering agents in CKD to guide treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of insulin and other pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in people with diabetes and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 February 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in people with diabetes and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and quality of data and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies (128 records, 13,036 participants) were included. Nine studies compared sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; 13 studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; 2 studies compared glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists to placebo; 8 studies compared glitazones to no glitazone treatment; 1 study compared glinide to no glinide treatment; and 4 studies compared different types, doses or modes of administration of insulin. In addition, 2 studies compared sitagliptin to glipizide; and 1 study compared each of sitagliptin to insulin, glitazars to pioglitazone, vildagliptin to sitagliptin, linagliptin to voglibose, and albiglutide to sitagliptin. Most studies had a high risk of bias due to funding and attrition bias, and an unclear risk of detection bias.Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 1092 participants: MD -0.29%, -0.38 to -0.19 (-3.2 mmol/mol, -4.2 to -2.2); I2 = 0%), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (5 studies, 855 participants: MD -0.48 mmol/L, -0.78 to -0.19; I2 = 0%), systolic blood pressure (BP) (7 studies, 1198 participants: MD -4.68 mmHg, -6.69 to -2.68; I2 = 40%), diastolic BP (6 studies, 1142 participants: MD -1.72 mmHg, -2.77 to -0.66; I2 = 0%), heart failure (3 studies, 2519 participants: RR 0.59, 0.41 to 0.87; I2 = 0%), and hyperkalaemia (4 studies, 2788 participants: RR 0.58, 0.42 to 0.81; I2 = 0%); but probably increase genital infections (7 studies, 3086 participants: RR 2.50, 1.52 to 4.11; I2 = 0%), and creatinine (4 studies, 848 participants: MD 3.82 μmol/L, 1.45 to 6.19; I2 = 16%) (all effects of moderate certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may reduce weight (5 studies, 1029 participants: MD -1.41 kg, -1.8 to -1.02; I2 = 28%) and albuminuria (MD -8.14 mg/mmol creatinine, -14.51 to -1.77; I2 = 11%; low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may have little or no effect on the risk of cardiovascular death, hypoglycaemia, acute kidney injury (AKI), and urinary tract infection (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether SGLT2 inhibitors have any effect on death, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), hypovolaemia, fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.62%, -0.85 to -0.39 (-6.8 mmol/mol, -9.3 to -4.3); I2 = 59%) but may have little or no effect on FBG (low certainty evidence). DPP-4 inhibitors probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular death (2 studies, 5897 participants: RR 0.93, 0.77 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) and weight (2 studies, 210 participants: MD 0.16 kg, -0.58 to 0.90; I2 = 29%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may have little or no effect on heart failure, upper respiratory tract infections, and liver impairment (low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether DPP-4 inhibitors have any effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, GLP-1 agonists probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.53%, -1.01 to -0.06 (-5.8 mmol/mol, -11.0 to -0.7); I2 = 41%; moderate certainty evidence) and may reduce weight (low certainty evidence). GLP-1 agonists may have little or no effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether GLP-1 agonists reduce FBG, increase gastrointestinal symptoms, or affect the risk of pancreatitis (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether glitazones have any effect on HbA1c, FBG, death, weight, and risk of hypoglycaemia (very low certainty evidence).Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin probably reduces hypoglycaemia (2 studies, 551 participants: RR 0.40, 0.23 to 0.69; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin may have had little or no effect on HbA1c, FBG, weight, and eGFR (low certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, it is uncertain if sitagliptin has any effect on death or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty).For types, dosages or modes of administration of insulin and other head-to-head comparisons only individual studies were available so no conclusions could be made.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in diabetes and CKD is limited. SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists are probably efficacious for glucose-lowering and DPP-4 inhibitors may be efficacious for glucose-lowering. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce BP, heart failure, and hyperkalaemia but increase genital infections, and slightly increase creatinine. The safety profile for GLP-1 agonists is uncertain. No further conclusions could be made for the other classes of glucose-lowering agents including insulin. More high quality studies are required to help guide therapeutic choice for glucose-lowering in diabetes and CKD.

The General Practitioner Prompt Study to Reduce Cardiovascular and Renal Complications in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Renal Complications: Protocol and Baseline Characteristics for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Adherence to evidence-based cardiovascular risk factor targets in patients with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria has shown long-term reduction in mortality and morbidity. Strategies to achieve such adherence have been delivered at individual patient level and are not cost-effective. Health care professional-level intervention has the potential to promote better adherence at lower cost.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a multifactorial technology-driven intervention comprising health care professional training, a software prompt installed on practice systems, clinician email support, and enhanced performance and feedback reporting.

METHODS

A cluster randomized trial will be performed where the primary outcome is the proportion of eligible patients meeting tight cardiovascular risk factor targets, including systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP; BP<130/80 mm Hg) and total cholesterol (TC; TC<3.5 mmol/L) at 24 months. Secondary outcomes include proportion of patients with glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) <58 mmol/mol (7.5%), change in medication prescribing, changes in microalbuminuria and renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate, eGFR), incidence of major adverse CV events and mortality, and coding accuracy. Cost-effectiveness of the intervention will also be assessed.

RESULTS

Among 2721 eligible patients, mean age was 62.9 (SD 10.0) years, and duration of diabetes was 10.46 (SD 7.22) years. Mean HbA_1c was 59.3 (SD 17.4) mmol/mol; mean systolic and diastolic BP (mm Hg) were 134.3 (SD 14.6) and 76.1 (SD 9.5) mm Hg, respectively; and mean TC was 4.1 (SD 0.98) mmol/L. Overall, 131 out of 2721 (4.81%) patients achieved all 3 "tight" cardiovascular risk factor targets. Cardiovascular risk factor burden increased two-fold in those with eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m² compared with those with eGFR≥60 mL/min/1.73 m². Prevalence of microalbuminuria was 22.76%. In total, 1076 out of 2721 (39.54%) patients were coded for microalbuminuria or proteinuria on their primary care medical record.

CONCLUSIONS

The general practitioner prompt study is the largest UK primary care-based, technology-driven, randomized controlled trial to support intensive intervention in high-risk group of multiethnic individuals with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria. This paper provides contemporary estimates for prevalent cardiovascular disease and adherence to evidence-based cardiovascular risk factor targets at baseline in a population with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria. The main trial results, including cost-effectiveness data, will be submitted for publication in 2018.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN14918517; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14918517 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6zqm53wNA).

REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER

RR1-10.2196/9588.

Cardiovascular, respiratory, and related disorders: key messages from Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition

Cardiovascular, respiratory, and related disorders (CVRDs) are the leading causes of adult death worldwide, and substantial inequalities in care of patients with CVRDs exist between countries of high income and countries of low and middle income. Based on current trends, the UN Sustainable Development Goal to reduce premature mortality due to CVRDs by a third by 2030 will be challenging for many countries of low and middle income. We did systematic literature reviews of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to identify priority interventions. We summarise the key findings and present a costed essential package of interventions to reduce risk of and manage CVRDs. On a population level, we recommend tobacco taxation, bans on trans fats, and compulsory reduction of salt in manufactured food products. We suggest primary health services be strengthened through the establishment of locally endorsed guidelines and ensured availability of essential medications. The policy interventions and health service delivery package we suggest could serve as the cornerstone for the management of CVRDs, and afford substantial financial risk protection for vulnerable households. We estimate that full implementation of the essential package would cost an additional US$21 per person in the average low-income country and $24 in the average lower-middle-income country. The essential package we describe could be a starting place for low-income and middle-income countries developing universal health coverage packages. Interventions could be rolled out as disease burden demands and budgets allow. Our outlined interventions provide a pathway for countries attempting to convert the UN Sustainable Development Goal commitments into tangible action.

Impact of intervention on metabolic outcomes among dropouts with type 2 diabetes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of an individual intervention given by health care professionals to dropouts with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on their metabolic profile.

MATERIALS/METHODS

In 2010, we identified 356 T2D dropouts in Vantaa Health Centre, Finland. At the baseline visit the participants' status was assessed including laboratory tests. Diabetes counseling was given, and drug treatment was enhanced when needed. The follow-up visit was performed 13 to 30 months later including the same assessments as performed at the baseline visit. The dropouts who attended the follow-up visit formed the study group. One third (n=115) of the dropouts participated in the follow-up visit.

RESULTS

The study participants (mean age 61.4 years) were older than the non-participants (mean age 58.5 years) (p=0.009). After the intervention the proportion of participants with hemoglobin A1c≥9% (75mmol/mol) decreased from 15.5% to 5.2% (p=0.004). Improvements were also observed in general in hemoglobin A1c, from 6.6% (49mmol/mol) to 6.3% (45mmol/mol) (p=0.001), in total cholesterol, from 4.9mmol/l to 4.5mmol/l (p=0.011), in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, from 2.9mmol/l to 2.6mmol/l (p=0.015) and in diastolic blood pressure, from 90mmHg to 84mmHg (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Dropouts with T2D were difficult to bring back to the public health care system, especially men under the age of 60 years. Dropouts who participated in the intervention showed improvements in several metabolic outcomes.

Incremental Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Intensive Treatment in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Detected by Screening in the ADDITION-UK Trial: An Update with Empirical Trial-Based Cost Data

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty about the cost effectiveness of early intensive treatment versus routine care in individuals with type 2 diabetes detected by screening.

OBJECTIVES

To derive a trial-informed estimate of the incremental costs of intensive treatment as delivered in the Anglo-Danish-Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People with Screen-Detected Diabetes in Primary Care-Europe (ADDITION) trial and to revisit the long-term cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the UK National Health Service.

METHODS

We analyzed the electronic primary care records of a subsample of the ADDITION-Cambridge trial cohort (n = 173). Unit costs of used primary care services were taken from the published literature. Incremental annual costs of intensive treatment versus routine care in years 1 to 5 after diagnosis were calculated using multilevel generalized linear models. We revisited the long-term cost-utility analyses for the ADDITION-UK trial cohort and reported results for ADDITION-Cambridge using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model and the trial-informed cost estimates according to a previously developed evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Incremental annual costs of intensive treatment over years 1 to 5 averaged £29.10 (standard error = £33.00) for consultations with general practitioners and nurses and £54.60 (standard error = £28.50) for metabolic and cardioprotective medication. For ADDITION-UK, over the 10-, 20-, and 30-year time horizon, adjusted incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 0.014, 0.043, and 0.048, and adjusted incremental costs were £1,021, £1,217, and £1,311, resulting in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £71,232/QALY, £28,444/QALY, and £27,549/QALY, respectively. Respective incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for ADDITION-Cambridge were slightly higher.

CONCLUSIONS

The incremental costs of intensive treatment as delivered in the ADDITION-Cambridge trial were lower than expected. Given UK willingness-to-pay thresholds in patients with screen-detected diabetes, intensive treatment is of borderline cost effectiveness over a time horizon of 20 years and more.

EMPA-REG OUTCOME: The Endocrinologist's Point of View

For many years, it was widely accepted that control of plasma lipids and blood pressure could lower macrovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), whereas the benefits of lowering plasma glucose were largely limited to improvements in microvascular complications. The Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients-Removing Excess Glucose (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) study demonstrated for the first time that a glucose-lowering agent, the sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor empagliflozin, could reduce major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, and overall mortality when given in addition to standard care in patients with T2DM at high cardiovascular risk. These results were entirely unexpected and have led to much speculation regarding the potential mechanisms underlying cardiovascular benefits. In this review, the results of EMPA-REG OUTCOME are summarized and put into perspective for the endocrinologist who is treating patients with T2DM and cardiovascular disease.

Glucose targets for preventing diabetic kidney disease and its progression

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is the leading cause of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) around the world. Blood pressure lowering and glucose control are used to reduce diabetes-associated disability including kidney failure. However there is a lack of an overall evidence summary of the optimal target range for blood glucose control to prevent kidney failure.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of intensive (HbA1c < 7% or fasting glucose levels < 120 mg/dL versus standard glycaemic control (HbA1c ≥ 7% or fasting glucose levels ≥ 120 mg/dL for preventing the onset and progression of kidney disease among adults with diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register up to 31 March 2017 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating glucose-lowering interventions in which people (aged 14 year or older) with type 1 or 2 diabetes with and without kidney disease were randomly allocated to tight glucose control or less stringent blood glucose targets.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and risks of bias, extracted data and checked the processes for accuracy. Outcomes were mortality, cardiovascular complications, doubling of serum creatinine (SCr), ESKD and proteinuria. Confidence in the evidence was assessing using GRADE. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies involving 29,319 people with diabetes were included and 11 studies involving 29,141 people were included in our meta-analyses. Treatment duration was 56.7 months on average (range 6 months to 10 years). Studies included people with a range of kidney function. Incomplete reporting of key methodological details resulted in uncertain risks of bias in many studies. Using GRADE assessment, we had moderate confidence in the effects of glucose lowering strategies on ESKD, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and progressive protein leakage by kidney disease and low or very low confidence in effects of treatment on death related to cardiovascular complications and doubling of serum creatinine (SCr).For the primary outcomes, tight glycaemic control may make little or no difference to doubling of SCr compared with standard control (4 studies, 26,874 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.11; I2= 73%, low certainty evidence), development of ESKD (4 studies, 23,332 participants: RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.12; I2= 52%; low certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (9 studies, 29,094 participants: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.13; I2= 50%; moderate certainty evidence), cardiovascular mortality (6 studies, 23,673 participants: RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.92; I2= 85%; low certainty evidence), or sudden death (4 studies, 5913 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.57; I2= 85%; very low certainty evidence). People who received treatment to achieve tighter glycaemic control probably experienced lower risks of non-fatal myocardial infarction (5 studies, 25,596 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.99; I2= 46%, moderate certainty evidence), onset of microalbuminuria (4 studies, 19,846 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.93; I2= 61%, moderate certainty evidence), and progression of microalbuminuria (5 studies, 13,266 participants: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.93; I2= 75%, moderate certainty evidence). In absolute terms, tight versus standard glucose control treatment in 1,000 adults would lead to between zero and two people avoiding non-fatal myocardial infarction, while seven adults would avoid experiencing new-onset albuminuria and two would avoid worsening albuminuria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that people who receive intensive glycaemic control for treatment of diabetes had comparable risks of kidney failure, death and major cardiovascular events as people who received less stringent blood glucose control, while experiencing small clinical benefits on the onset and progression of microalbuminuria and myocardial infarction. The adverse effects of glycaemic management are uncertain. Based on absolute treatment effects, the clinical impact of targeting an HbA1c < 7% or blood glucose < 6.6 mmol/L is unclear and the potential harms of this treatment approach are largely unmeasured.

EMPA-REG OUTCOME: The Endocrinologist's Point of View

For many years, it was widely accepted that control of plasma lipids and blood pressure could lower macrovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), whereas the benefits of lowering plasma glucose were largely limited to improvements in microvascular complications. The Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients-Removing Excess Glucose (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) study demonstrated for the first time that a glucose-lowering agent, the sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor empagliflozin, could reduce major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, and overall mortality when given in addition to standard care in patients with T2DM at high cardiovascular risk. These results were entirely unexpected and have led to much speculation regarding the potential mechanisms underlying cardiovascular benefits. In this review, the results of EMPA-REG OUTCOME are summarized and put into perspective for the endocrinologist who is treating patients with T2DM and cardiovascular disease.

A multicentre demonstration project to evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of the web-based Joint Asia Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) programme with or without nurse support in Chinese patients with Type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To test the hypothesis that delivery of integrated care augmented by a web-based disease management programme and nurse coordinator would improve treatment target attainment and health-related behaviour.

METHODS

The web-based Joint Asia Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) and Diabetes Monitoring Database (DIAMOND) portals contain identical built-in protocols to integrate structured assessment, risk stratification, personalized reporting and decision support. The JADE portal contains an additional module to facilitate structured follow-up visits. Between January 2009 and September 2010, 3586 Chinese patients with Type 2 diabetes from six sites in China were randomized to DIAMOND (n = 1728) or JADE, plus nurse-coordinated follow-up visits (n = 1858) with comprehensive assessments at baseline and 12 months. The primary outcome was proportion of patients achieving ≥ 2 treatment targets (HbA1c < 53 mmol/mol (7%), blood pressure < 130/80 mmHg and LDL cholesterol < 2.6 mmol/l).

RESULTS

Of 3586 participants enrolled (mean age 57 years, 54% men, median disease duration 5 years), 2559 returned for repeat assessment after a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 12.5 (4.6) months. The proportion of participants attaining ≥ 2 treatment targets increased in both groups (JADE 40.6 to 50.0%; DIAMOND 38.2 to 50.8%) and there were similar absolute reductions in HbA1c [DIAMOND -8 mmol/mol vs JADE -7 mmol/mol (-0.69 vs -0.62%)] and LDL cholesterol (DIAMOND -0.32 mmol/l vs JADE -0.28 mmol/l), with no between-group difference. The JADE group was more likely to self-monitor blood glucose (50.5 vs 44.2%; P = 0.005) and had fewer defaulters (25.6 vs 32.0%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated care augmented by information technology improved cardiometabolic control, with additional nurse contacts reducing the default rate and enhancing self-care. (Clinical trials registry no.: NCT01274364).

Methods applied in cost-effectiveness models for treatment strategies in type 2 diabetes mellitus and their use in Health Technology Assessments: a systematic review of the literature from 2008 to 2013

OBJECTIVE

To identify and compare health-economic models that were developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and their use within Health Technology Assessments (HTAs).

METHODS

In total, six commonly used databases were searched for articles published between October 2008 and January 2013, using a protocolized search strategy and inclusion criteria. The websites of HTA organizations in nine countries, and proceedings from five relevant conferences, were also reviewed. The identified new health-economic models were qualitatively assessed using six criteria that were developed based on technical components, and characteristics related to the disease or the treatments being assessed. Finally, the number of times the models were applied within HTA reports, published literature, and/or major conferences was determined.

RESULTS

Thirteen new models were identified and reviewed in depth. Most of these were based on identical key data sources, and applied a similar model structure, either using Markov modeling or microsimulation techniques. The UKPDS equations and panel regressions were frequently used to estimate the occurrence of diabetes-related complications and the probability of developing risk factors in the long term. The qualitative assessment demonstrated that the CARDIFF, Sheffield T2DM and ECHO T2DM models seem technically equipped to appropriately assess the long-term health-economic consequences of chronic treatments for patients with T2DM. It was observed that the CORE model is the most widely described in literature and conferences, and the most often applied model within HTA submissions, followed by the CARDIFF and UKPDS models.

CONCLUSION

This research provides an overview of T2DM models that were developed between 2008 and January 2013. The outcomes of the qualitative assessments, combined with frequent use in local reimbursement decisions, prove the applicability of the CORE, CARDIFF and UKPDS models to address decision problems related to the long-term clinical and economic consequences of new and existing T2DM treatments.

Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes in France

OBJECTIVES

The present study aimed to compare the projected long-term clinical and cost implications associated with liraglutide, sitagliptin and glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus failing to achieve glycemic control on metformin monotherapy in France.

METHODS

Clinical input data for the modeling analysis were taken from two randomized, controlled trials (LIRA-DPP4 and LEAD-2). Long-term (patient lifetime) projections of clinical outcomes and direct costs (2013 Euros; €) were made using a validated computer simulation model of type 2 diabetes. Costs were taken from published France-specific sources. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at 3% annually. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Liraglutide was associated with an increase in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.25 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and an increase in mean direct healthcare costs of €2558 per patient compared with sitagliptin. In the comparison with glimepiride, liraglutide was associated with an increase in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.23 QALYs and an increase in direct costs of €4695. Based on these estimates, liraglutide was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €10,275 per QALY gained vs sitagliptin and €20,709 per QALY gained vs glimepiride in France.

CONCLUSION

Calculated ICERs for both comparisons fell below the commonly quoted willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained. Therefore, liraglutide is likely to be cost-effective vs sitagliptin and glimepiride from a healthcare payer perspective in France.

Intensive multifactorial treatment modifies the effect of family history of diabetes on glycaemic control in people with Type 2 diabetes: a post hoc analysis of the ADDITION-Denmark randomized controlled trial

AIM

To investigate whether intensive multifactorial treatment can reverse the predisposed adverse phenotype of people with Type 2 diabetes who have a family history of diabetes.

METHODS

Data from the randomized controlled trial ADDITION-Denmark were used. A total of 1441 newly diagnosed patients with diabetes (598 with family history of diabetes) were randomized to intensive treatment or routine care. Family history of diabetes was defined as having one parent and/or sibling with diabetes. Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the changes in risk factors (BMI, waist circumference, blood pressure, lipids and HbA1c ) after 5 years of follow-up in participants with and without a family history of diabetes. An interaction term between family history of diabetes and treatment group was included in the models to test for a modifying effect of the intervention. All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, baseline value of the risk factor and general practice (random effect).

RESULTS

At baseline, participants with a family history of diabetes were younger and had a 1.1 mmol/mol (0.1%) higher HbA1c concentration at the time of diagnosis than those without a family history of diabetes. Family history of diabetes modified the effect of the intervention on changes in HbA1c levels. In the group receiving routine care, participants with a family history of diabetes experienced an improvement in HbA1c concentration that was 3.3 mmol/mol (0.3%) lower than the improvement found in those without a family history of diabetes after 5 years of follow-up. In the intensive treatment group, however, there was no difference in HbA1c concentrations between participants with and without a family history of diabetes after 5 years of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive treatment of diabetes may partly remove the adverse effects of family history of diabetes on glycaemic control. The effect of this improvement on long-term diabetic complications warrants further investigation.

WITHDRAWN: Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus

The Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group withdrew this review as of Issue 7, 2015 because the involvement of two authors (C Hemmingsen and SS Lund) being employed in pharmaceutical companies. The authors of the review and the Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group did not find that this was a breach of the rules of the Cochrane Collaboration at the time when it was published. However, after the publication of the review, the Cochrane Collaboration requested withdrawal of the review due to the employment of the two authors. A new protocol for a review to cover this topic will be published. This will have a new title and a markedly improved protocol fulfilling new and important developments and standards within the Cochrane Collaboration as well as an improved inclusion and search strategy making it necessary to embark on a completely new review project.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Evaluating the Cost of Bringing People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus to Multiple Targets of Treatment in Canada

PURPOSE

Evidence suggests that clinical outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus can be improved through multifactorial treatment. The key challenges in the successful treatment of type 2 diabetes include maintaining tight glycemic control, minimizing the risk of hypoglycemia, controlling cardiovascular risk factors, and reducing or controlling weight. The aim of the present analysis was to evaluate the cost per patient achieving a composite clinical end point (glycosylated hemoglobin <7%, with no weight gain and no hypoglycemic events) in patients with type 2 diabetes in Quebec, Quebec, Canada, receiving liraglutide 1.2 mg, liraglutide 1.8 mg, thiazolidinedione, sulfonylurea, insulin glargine, sitagliptin, or exenatide.

METHODS

The proportion of patients achieving control was taken from a meta-analysis that was based on the Phase III trial program of liraglutide. Treatment costs, estimated from a health care payer perspective, were calculated on the basis of the trials included in the meta-analysis and captured the study drug, needles, self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) test strips, SMBG lancets, and other antidiabetes medications received. Cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per patient achieving the composite end point (cost of control) was evaluated with an economic model developed in Microsoft Excel. No discounting was applied to cost or clinical outcomes because these were not projected beyond a 1-year time horizon. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

FINDINGS

Liraglutide 1.8 mg was associated with the lowest number needed to treat, with 3 patients needing to be treated to bring 1 patient to the composite end point. Pioglitazone was associated with the highest number needed to treat, with 17 patients requiring treatment to bring 1 patient to the composite end point. Evaluation of only annual pharmacy costs indicated that liraglutide 1.8 mg was the most costly treatment at Can$2780 per patient per year. Pioglitazone and glimepiride were associated with the lowest direct annual costs. Combining the clinical efficacy data with the annual cost of medications produced cost of control values of Can$6070 (liraglutide 1.2 mg), Can$6949 (liraglutide 1.8 mg), Can$7237 (glimepiride), Can$7704 (exenatide), Can$8297 (insulin glargine), Can$8741 (pioglitazone), and Can$9270 (sitagliptin) per patient achieving the composite end point.

IMPLICATIONS

Liraglutide 1.2 mg and 1.8 mg were associated with the lowest cost of control values, driven by the high proportion of patients achieving the composite end point, which offset the higher medication costs. A relatively low cost of control value was achieved for glimepiride, driven by low acquisition costs, despite relatively few patients achieving the composite end point.

Cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial treatment compared with routine care for individuals with screen-detected Type 2 diabetes: analysis of the ADDITION-UK cluster-randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To examine the short- and long-term cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial treatment compared with routine care among people with screen-detected Type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Cost-utility analysis in ADDITION-UK, a cluster-randomized controlled trial of early intensive treatment in people with screen-detected diabetes in 69 UK general practices. Unit treatment costs and utility decrement data were taken from published literature. Accumulated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using ADDITION-UK data from 1 to 5 years (short-term analysis, n = 1024); trial data were extrapolated to 30 years using the UKPDS outcomes model (version 1.3) (long-term analysis; n = 999). All costs were transformed to the UK 2009/10 price level.

RESULTS

Adjusted incremental costs to the NHS were £285, £935, £1190 and £1745 over a 1-, 5-, 10- and 30-year time horizon, respectively (discounted at 3.5%). Adjusted incremental QALYs were 0.0000, - 0.0040, 0.0140 and 0.0465 over the same time horizons. Point estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) suggested that the intervention was not cost-effective although the ratio improved over time: the ICER over 10 years was £82,250, falling to £37,500 over 30 years. The ICER fell below £30 000 only when the intervention cost was below £631 per patient: we estimated the cost at £981.

CONCLUSION

Given conventional thresholds of cost-effectiveness, the intensive treatment delivered in ADDITION was not cost-effective compared with routine care for individuals with screen-detected diabetes in the UK. The intervention may be cost-effective if it can be delivered at reduced cost.

Effectiveness of multifactorial interventions in primary health care settings for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: A systematic review of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of multifactorial interventions carried out in the community setting to decrease cardiovascular risk in healthy patients.

METHODS

Systematic review of the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases from January 1980 to January 2014. Identified for inclusion were systematic reviews of clinical trials that included multifactorial interventions carried out in primary care or community settings, targeting more than one cardiovascular risk factor, and implementing more than one type of intervention. The methodological quality of the included articles was evaluated using the AMSTAR tool.

RESULTS

Eight systematic reviews were selected, including 219 studies. All of these reviews provided information about the effectiveness of multifactorial interventions in reducing mortality and morbidity due to cardiovascular diseases. Four reviews reported moderate effectiveness and four showed limited effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Multifactorial community interventions improve cardiovascular risk factors and have a small but potentially important effect on mortality. These interventions seem to be more effective in the at-risk population and when they are carried out at a high level of intensity.

Cost-effectiveness of Adolescent Bariatric Surgery

Background: The current estimates of the prevalence of adolescent morbid obesity and severe morbid obesity are about 21% and 6.6%, respectively. Obesity, if left untreated, may result in a variety of comorbid conditions and earlier mortality. Adolescent bariatric surgery is an effective, but expensive means to ameliorate these conditions and the risk of earlier mortality. We aimed to develop a model to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery.

Methods: All adolescents who participated in our bariatric surgery multidisciplinary program from January 2010 to December 2013 were included if they had at least 12 months follow-up after their surgery. Intervention costs included all operative as well as preoperative and 12-month postoperative care. We used the US Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS) to estimate the association between reductions in BMI after surgery with future savings from reduced medical care use and with increased health-related quality of life (HRQL). We linked BMI with life expectancy using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A Markov cohort model was then used to project health care-related costs (2013 US$), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over time starting at age 18. Incremental costs per QALY of surgery vs. no surgery from a health care system perspective were then estimated.

Results: At one year follow-up, mean weight loss was 37.5 (std. = 13.5) kg and the corresponding BMI was 35.4 (reduction of 13.2, p<0.01). Mean total intervention costs/person were $25,854 (std. = 2,044). A unit change in BMI was associated with future medical care savings of $157/year (p<0.01) and with an increase in HRQL of 0.004 (p<0.01) and life expectancy. At a threshold of a 100,000/QALY, bariatric surgery was not cost-effective in the first three years, but became cost-effective after that ($80,065/QALY in year four and $36,570/QALY in year seven). 

Conclusion: Our results suggest that bariatric surgery among adolescents may be cost-effective when evaluated over a long period of time. Future studies on a large scale are needed to show a continued improvement in QALYs and to evaluate earlier cost-effectiveness of the procedure.

The burden of diabetes in Argentina

OBJECTIVE

To measure the economic burden of diabetes in Argentina by age, gender and region for the year 2005, in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).

METHODS

DALYs were estimated by the sum of years of life lost due to premature death (YLL) and years of life lived with disability (YLD).

RESULTS

In the population studied (20 to 85 years), the burden of diabetes without complications was 1.3 million DALYs, 85% of which were caused by disabilities. Whereas mortality rates (YLL) increased as a function of age, YLD showed the opposite relationship. Women had higher burden of disease values, represented by 51 and 61% of YLL and YLD, respectively, independently of age.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that disabilities are a key component of diabetes burden; its regular and systematic estimation would allow to design effective prevention strategies, to assess the impact of their implementation and to optimize resource allocation based on objective evidence.

Diabetes guidelines may delay timely adjustments during treatment and might contribute to clinical inertia

Clinical inertia and poor knowledge by many physicians play an important role in delaying diabetes control. Among other guidelines, the Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes on Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes is a respected guideline with high impact on this subject in terms of influencing physicians in the definition of strategic approach to overcome poor glycemic control. But, on the other hand, it carries a recommendation that might contribute to clinical inertia because it can delay the needed implementation of more vigorous, intensive, and effective strategies to overcome poor glycemic control within a reasonable time frame during the evolution of the disease. The same is true with other respected algorithms from different diabetes associations. Together with pharmacological interventions, diabetes education and more intensive blood glucose monitoring in the initial phases after the diagnosis are key strategies for the effective control of diabetes. The main reason why a faster glycemic control should be implemented in an effective and safe way is to boost the confidence and the compliance of the patient to the recommendations of the diabetes care team. Better and faster results in glycemic control can only be safely achieved with educational strategies, structured self-monitoring of blood glucose, and adequate pharmacological therapy in the majority of cases.

Definition of intervention points in prediabetes

With respect to clinical phenotype and pathophysiology, prediabetes is akin to diabetes. Prediabetes is prevalent in the global population, and those affected are at high risk of progression to overt diabetes, and also at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Progression to diabetes can occur because of worsening insulin resistance, β-cell dysfunction, or both, but the timecourse can be non-linear and, therefore, unpredictable. Intervention-by lifestyle modification, glucose-lowering drugs, or a combination-can postpone deterioration of glucose control, but effects of intervention are variable and can be transient. Furthermore, to what extent interventions can reduce cardiovascular risk is uncertain. Lifestyle intervention mainly hinges on weight loss; as such, risk of failure in the long-term is high, and implementation at the community level is difficult. The ideal candidate for intervention is an individual with prediabetes-identified by targeted screening-with many well documented cardiovascular risk factors, and who is highly motivated to initiate and maintain multifactorial risk-control using a personalised mix of lifestyle-adaptation and pharmacological treatment.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: differences and similarities

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is a gastrointestinal hormone, secreted in response to ingestion of nutrients, and has important effects on several of the pathophysiological features of type 2 diabetes (T2D). The effects include potentiation of insulin secretion, suppression of glucagon secretion, slowing of gastric emptying and suppression of appetite. In circulation, GLP-1 has a half-life of approximately 2min due to rapid degradation by the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4). Because of this short half-life GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, resistant to degradation by DPP-4 have been developed. At the moment four different compounds are available for the treatment of T2D and many more are in clinical development. These compounds, although all based on the effects of native GLP-1, differ with regards to structure, pharmacokinetics and size, which ultimately leads to different clinical effects. This review gives an overview of the clinical data on GLP-1R agonists that have been compared in head-to-head studies and focuses on relevant differences between the compounds. Highlighting these similarities and differences could be beneficial for physicians in choosing the best treatment strategy for their patients.