Abstract
AimWhen glycaemic control for people with type 2 diabetes is not achieved with metformin and sulfonylurea alone, adding another oral anti‐diabetes drug, such as a sodium–glucose co‐transporter 2 (SGLT2) or dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 (DPP‐4) inhibitor, is an alternative to starting insulin. The aim of this study is to determine the cost‐effectiveness of dapagliflozin (an SGLT2 inhibitor) compared with DPP‐4 inhibitors when added to metformin and sulfonylurea in people with type 2 diabetes in the Netherlands.MethodsA cost–utility analysis is performed using the Cardiff diabetes model, a fixed‐time increment stochastic simulation model informed by ‘United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study 68’ risk equations. The base‐case analysis uses a 40‐year time horizon, a Dutch societal perspective and differential discounting (4% for costs, 1.5% for effects). Inputs are obtained from the literature and Dutch price lists. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis are performed.ResultsDapagliflozin is dominant compared with DPP‐4 inhibitors, resulting in a €990 cost saving and a 0.28 quality‐adjusted life year gain over 40 years. Cost savings are associated mainly with treatment costs and a reduced incidence of micro‐ and macrovascular complications, among others nephropathy, myocardial infarction and stroke. Results are robust to changes in input parameters.ConclusionsDapagliflozin is a cost‐saving alternative to DPP‐4 inhibitors when added to metformin and sulfonylurea. The incidence of micro‐ and macrovascular complications is lower for people treated with dapagliflozin. Uncertainty around this outcome is low.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.