Cost-effectiveness of aspirin use among persons with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes

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.

Net Clinical Benefit of Oral Anticoagulation Among Older Adults With Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

While guidelines recommend anticoagulation for all atrial fibrillation (AF) patients ≥75 years, evidence for the net clinical benefit (NCB) of anticoagulant in older adults is sparse. We sought to determine the association between age and NCB of anticoagulation in older adults with AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined adults ≥75 years with incident AF in the Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation-Cardiovascular Research Network cohort. Using a Markov state transition model, we estimated the lifetime NCB of warfarin and apixaban relative to no treatment in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). In the decision model, each month patients face a chance of stroke, hemorrhage, or death from a competing cause; the likelihood of each is a function of individual patients' stroke risk, hemorrhage risk, and life expectancy. We defined minimal clinically relevant lifetime benefit as 0.10 QALYs. In a sensitivity analysis, we examined the effect of competing risks of death on NCB using 2 models, one including competing risks and the second without competing risks. We included 14 946 patients, with a median age of 81 years and median CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4. In the main analysis, after age 87, NCB associated with warfarin decreased below 0.10 lifetime QALYs while NCB associated with apixaban did not decrease below 0.10 lifetime QALYs until after age 92. In sensitivity analyses, over a 3-year horizon, removing competing risks of death resulted in higher NCB (at 90 years, median difference using warfarin 0.010 QALYs [95% CI, 0.009-0.013], median difference using apixaban 0.025 QALYs [95% CI, 0.024-0.026]).

CONCLUSIONS

The NCB of anticoagulation decreases with advancing age. The competing risk of death diminishes the NCB of anticoagulation for older patients with AF. Physicians should consider competing mortality risks when recommending anticoagulants to older adults with AF.

Quality of Diabetes Care in Germany Improved from 2000 to 2007 to 2014, but Improvements Diminished since 2007. Evidence from the Population-Based KORA Studies

Objective

Little is known about the development of the quality of diabetes care in Germany. The aim of this study is to analyze time trends in patient self-management, physician-delivered care, medication, risk factor control, complications and quality of life from 2000 to 2014.

Methods

Analyses are based on data from individuals with type 2 diabetes of the population-based KORA S4 (1999–2001, n = 150), F4 (2006–2008, n = 203), FF4 (2013/14, n = 212) cohort study. Information on patient self-management, physician-delivered care, medication, risk factor control and quality of life were assessed in standardized questionnaires and examinations. The 10-year coronary heart disease (CHD) risk was calculated using the UKPDS risk engine. Time trends were analyzed using multivariable linear and logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, education, diabetes duration, and history of cardiovascular disease.

Results

From 2000 to 2014 the proportion of participants with type 2 diabetes receiving oral antidiabetic/cardio-protective medication and of those reaching treatment goals for glycemic control (HbA1c<7%, 60% to 71%, p = 0.09), blood pressure (<140/80 mmHg, 25% to 69%, p<0.001) and LDL cholesterol (<2.6 mmol/l, 13% to 27%, p<0.001) increased significantly. However, improvements were generally smaller from 2007 to 2014 than from 2000 to 2007. Modeled 10-year CHD risk decreased from 30% in 2000 to 24% in 2007 to 19% in 2014 (p<0.01). From 2007 to 2014, the prevalence of microvascular complications decreased and quality of life increased, but no improvements were observed for the majority of indicators of self-management.

Conclusion

Despite improvements, medication and risk factor control has remained suboptimal. The flattening of improvements and deteriorations in quality of (self-) care since 2007 indicate that more effort is needed to improve quality of care and patient self-management. Due to selection or lead time bias an overestimation of quality of care improvements cannot be ruled out.

Risk threshold for starting low dose aspirin in pregnancy to prevent preeclampsia: an opportunity at a low cost

Background

Preeclampsia (PE) increases maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Based on a multitude of data from randomized clinical trials, clinical practice guidelines endorse using ASA to prevent PE in women who are “at risk.” However, data are lacking about the level of absolute risk to warrant starting ASA prophylaxis.

Methods and Findings

We present two approaches for objectively determining the minimum absolute risk for PE at which ASA prophylaxis is justified. The first is a new approach—the minimum control event rate (CER_min). The second approach uses a pre-existing concept—the minimum event rate for treatment (MERT). Here we show how the CER_min is derived, and then use the CER_min and the MERT to guide us to a reasonable risk threshold for starting a woman on ASA prophylaxis against PE based on clinical risk assessment. We suggest that eligible women need not be at “high risk” for preeclampsia to warrant ASA, but rather at some modestly elevated absolute risk of 6–10%.

Conclusions

Given its very low cost, its widespread availability, ease of administration and its safety profile, ASA is a highly attractive agent for the prevention of maternal and perinatal morbidity worldwide.

Utility estimates for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus after experiencing a myocardial infarction or stroke: a systematic review

A systematic review identified studies eliciting utility decrements from myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and examined their use in economic models of new diabetes treatments. In 16 utility studies in patients with T2DM, utility decrements in the first year ranged from 0.017 to 0.226 for MI and from 0.034 to 0.590 for stroke. Sixteen of 19 economic evaluations of new treatments for T2DM included utility decrements for an MI and/or stroke from one of the 16 utility studies. Decrements for MI ranged from 0.012 to 0.180 in the first year. Decrements for stroke ranged from 0.044 to 0.690 in the first year. Utility studies in patients with T2DM provide little information about changes in utility decrements by time since the event and by disease severity. Cost-effectiveness studies do not always indicate how these values were used in the analysis.

Evaluation of Aspirin Use in Patients With Diabetes Receiving Care in Community Health

Background: The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends low-dose aspirin therapy as a primary prevention strategy in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) at increased cardiovascular risk. However, not all patients who are indicated are taking aspirin therapy, and it is not routinely documented in the electronic health record (EHR). Objective: To determine frequencies of appropriate aspirin use and documentation in the EHR in adult patients with DM. Methods: Adult patients with DM were randomized and contacted for participation in a telephonic survey between January and October 2013. Patients who consented were administered a standardized oral telephone survey regarding aspirin use. Patient demographics, current medications, allergies, past medical history, and pertinent laboratory values were collected. Patients were then stratified by the ADA-defined indication for aspirin. The primary outcomes were rates of appropriate aspirin use and documentation of aspirin therapy in the EHR. Results: Investigators contacted 276 patients for inclusion. Of the 81 patients surveyed, 74% were indicated for aspirin therapy. Nearly all (92.3%) patients reporting aspirin use were indicated for aspirin therapy compared with only 57.1% of patients who did not report aspirin but were indicated ( P = 0.0003). Alternatively, 96.7% of patients with aspirin use documented in their EHR were indicated for aspirin therapy compared with only 60.8% of patients who did not have aspirin use documented in the EHR but had an indication ( P = 0.0002). Approximately 20% of the patients indicated for and reporting aspirin use did not have aspirin documented in their EHR. Conclusions: Aspirin use in patients with DM who are indicated for therapy is significantly underutilized and underdocumented.

Incremental costs associated with myocardial infarction and stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: an overview for economic modeling

OBJECTIVE

To identify cost estimates related to myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) for use in economic models.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted. Electronic databases and conference abstracts were screened against inclusion criteria, which included studies performed in patients who had T2DM before experiencing an MI or stroke. Primary cost studies and economic models were included. Costs were converted to 2012 pounds sterling.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies were identified: 13 primary cost studies and 41 economic evaluations using secondary sources for complication costs. Primary studies provided costs from 10 countries. Estimates for a fatal event ranged from £2482-£5222 for MI and from £4900-£6694 for stroke. Costs for the year a non-fatal event occurred ranged from £5071-£29,249 for MI and from £5171-£38,732 for stroke. Annual follow-up costs ranged from £945-£1616 for an MI and from £4704-£12,926 for a stroke. Economic evaluations from 12 countries were identified, and costs of complications showed similar variability to the primary studies.

DISCUSSION

The costs identified within primary studies varied between and within countries. Many studies used costs estimated in studies not specific to patients with T2DM. Data gaps included a detailed breakdown of resource use, which affected the ability to compare data across countries.

CONCLUSIONS

In the development of economic models for patients with T2DM, the use of accurate estimates of costs associated with MI and stroke is important. When country-specific costs are not available, clear justification for the choice of estimates should be provided.

Cost effectiveness of full coverage of the medical management of smoking cessation in France

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the incremental cost effectiveness of full coverage of the medical management of smoking cessation from the perspective of statutory health insurance (SHI) in France.

DESIGN AND POPULATION

Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a Markov state-transition decision analytic model was used to compare full SHI coverage of smoking cessation and actual coverage based on an annual €50 lump sum per insured person among current French smokers aged 15-75 years. We used a scenario approach to take into account the many different behaviours of smokers and the likely variability of SHI policy choices in terms of participation rate and number and frequency of attempts covered.

INTERVENTIONS

Drug treatments for smoking cessation combined with six medical consultations including individual counselling.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The cost effectiveness of full coverage was expressed by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in 2009 euros per life-year gained (LYG) at the lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

The cost effectiveness per LYG for smokers ranged from €1786 to €2012, with an average value of €1911. The minimum value was very close to the maximum value with a difference of only €226. The cost-effectiveness ratio was only minimally sensitive to the participation rate, the number of attempts covered and the cessation rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to other health measures in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease already covered by SHI, full coverage of smoking cessation is the most cost-effective approach.

Screening for type 2 diabetes and dysglycemia

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and dysglycemia (impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose) are increasingly contributing to the global burden of diseases. The authors reviewed the published literature to critically evaluate the evidence on screening for both conditions and to identify the gaps in current understanding. Acceptable, relatively simple, and accurate tools can be used to screen for both T2DM and dysglycemia. Lifestyle modification and/or medication (e.g., metformin) are cost-effective in reducing the incidence of T2DM. However, their application is not yet routine practice. It is unclear whether diabetes-prevention strategies, which influence cardiovascular risk favorably, will also prevent diabetic vascular complications. Cardioprotective therapies, which are cost-effective in preventing complications in conventionally diagnosed T2DM, can be used in screen-detected diabetes, but the magnitude of their effects is unknown. Economic modeling suggests that screening for both T2DM and dysglycemia may be cost-effective, although empirical data on tangible benefits in preventing complications or death are lacking. Screening for T2DM is psychologically unharmful, but the specific impact of attributing the label of dysglycemia remains uncertain. Addressing these gaps will inform the development of a screening policy for T2DM and dysglycemia within a holistic diabetes prevention and control framework combining secondary and high-risk primary prevention strategies.

Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus

Aspirin is effective for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with a history of vascular disease, as so-called secondary prevention. In general populations with no history of previous myocardial infarction or stroke, aspirin also seems useful for primary prevention of cardiovascular events, although the absolute benefits are smaller than those seen in patients with previous cardiovascular disease. Patients with diabetes mellitus are at an increased risk of cardiovascular events, but new trials have raised questions about the benefit of aspirin for primary prevention in patients with this disorder. This Review comprehensively examines the basic pharmacology of aspirin and provides an overview of the randomized, controlled trials of aspirin therapy that have included patients with diabetes mellitus. On the basis of currently available evidence from primary prevention trials, aspirin is estimated to reduce the relative risk of myocardial infarction and stroke by about 10% in patients with diabetes mellitus; however, aspirin also increases the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. As such, low-dose aspirin therapy (75-162 mg) is reasonable for patients with diabetes mellitus and a 10-year risk of cardiovascular events >10%. Results from upcoming large trials will help clarify the effects of aspirin with greater precision, including whether the benefits differ between men and women.