Top

Diabetes Therapy

Published in:

Open Access 01-02-2017 | Original Research

Evaluating the Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of Daily Administered GLP-1 Receptor Agonists for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in the United Kingdom

Authors: Barnaby Hunt, Qing Ye, William J. Valentine, Donna Ashley

Published in: Diabetes Therapy | Issue 1/2017

Abstract

Introduction

The glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist class has grown in the last decade, with several agents available in the UK. However there is currently a paucity of evidence regarding the relative cost-effectiveness of liraglutide 1.2 mg versus other daily administered GLP-1 receptor agonists, due to a lack of head-to-head trial data. Therefore the present analysis was performed, using results from a network meta-analysis (NMA), to compare the cost-effectiveness of three currently available daily administered GLP-1 receptor agonists for treatment of diabetes in the UK setting.

Methods

A validated and published diabetes model was used to make long-term projections of clinical outcomes and direct costs (2015 GBP) for patients receiving liraglutide 1.2 mg once-daily, exenatide 10 μg twice daily and lixisenatide 20 μg once-daily. Treatment effects were taken from an NMA evaluating the efficacy of GLP-1 receptor agonists and were applied in a cohort based on the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes 6 (LEAD-6) trial. Costs and utilities were based on published sources.

Results

Liraglutide 1.2 mg was associated with improved quality-adjusted life expectancy versus exenatide [9.19 versus 9.17 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] and lixisenatide (9.19 versus 9.12 QALYs). Improvements were driven by benefits in glycemic control, leading to a reduced incidence of diabetes-related complications. Liraglutide 1.2 mg was associated with reduced costs versus exenatide (GBP 36,394 versus GBP 36,547) and lixisenatide (GBP 36,394 versus GBP 36,496), with cost savings as a result of complications avoided entirely offsetting increased acquisition costs. Based on the projected outcomes, liraglutide was found to be dominant over both exenatide and lixisenatide.

Conclusion

Liraglutide 1.2 mg is likely to be considered cost-effective versus alternative daily administered GLP-1 receptor agonists for treatment of type 2 diabetes in the UK.

International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 7th ed. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation; 2015.

Health and Social Care Information Centre. Quality and outcomes framework—prevalence, achievements and exceptions report. http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB15751/qof-1314-report.pdf.

Health and Social Care Information Centre. National Diabetes Inpatient Audit 2012. http://www.hscic.gov.uk/diabetesinpatientaudit.

Collaboration Emerging Risk Factors. Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies. Lancet. 2010;375(9733):2215–22.CrossRef

UK Renal Registry 16th Annual Report: 2013. https://www.renalreg.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Report2013.pdf.

Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil HA, Matthews DR, Manley SE, Cull CA, Hadden D, Turner RC, Holman RR. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of Type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ. 2000:321;405–12.

Webb DR, Khunti K, Gray LJ, Srinivasan BT, Farooqi A, Wareham N, Griffin SC. Davies MJ; ADDITION-Leicester study group. Intensive multifactorial intervention improves modelled coronary heart disease risk in screen-detected Type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Diabet Med. 2012;29(4):531–40.CrossRefPubMed

Gaede P, Vedel P, Larsen N, Jensen GV, Parving HH, Pedersen O. Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:383–93.CrossRefPubMed

Hex N, Bartlett C, Wright D, Taylor M, Varley D. Estimating the current and future costs of Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom, including direct health costs and indirect societal and productivity costs. Diabet Med. 2012;29(7):855–62.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Prasad-Reddy L, Isaacs D. A clinical review of GLP-1 receptor agonists: efficacy and safety in diabetes and beyond. Drugs Context. 2015;4:212283.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Uccellatore A, Genovese S, Dicembrini I, Mannucci E, Ceriello A. Comparison review of short-acting and long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. Diabetes Ther. 2015;6(3):239–56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Marso SP, Daniels GH, Brown-Frandsen K, Kristensen P, Mann JF, Nauck MA, Nissen SE, Pocock S, Poulter NR, Ravn LS, Steinberg WM, Stockner M, Zinman B, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, LEADER Steering Committee; LEADER Trial Investigators. Liraglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(4):311–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Best JH, Hoogwerf BJ, Herman WH, Pelletier EM, Smith DB, Wenten M, Hussein MA. Risk of cardiovascular disease events in patients with type 2 diabetes prescribed the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist exenatide twice daily or other glucose-lowering therapies: a retrospective analysis of the LifeLink database. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(1):90–5.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Marre M, Shaw J, Brändle M, Bebakar WM, Kamaruddin NA, Strand J, Zdravkovic M, Le Thi TD. Colagiuri S; LEAD-1 SU study group. Liraglutide, a once-daily human GLP-1 analogue, added to a sulphonylurea over 26 weeks produces greater improvements in glycaemic and weight control compared with adding rosiglitazone or placebo in subjects with Type 2 diabetes (LEAD-1 SU). Diabet Med. 2009;26(3):268–78.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Nauck M, Frid A, Hermansen K, Shah NS, Tankova T, Mitha IH, Zdravkovic M, Düring M. Matthews DR; LEAD-2 Study Group. Efficacy and safety comparison of liraglutide, glimepiride, and placebo, all in combination with metformin, in type 2 diabetes: the LEAD (liraglutide effect and action in diabetes)-2 study. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(1):84–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Garber A, Henry R, Ratner R, Garcia-Hernandez PA, Rodriguez-Pattzi H, Olvera-Alvarez I, Hale PM, Zdravkovic M. Bode B; LEAD-3 (Mono) Study Group. Liraglutide versus glimepiride monotherapy for type 2 diabetes (LEAD-3 Mono): a randomised, 52-week, phase III, double-blind, parallel-treatment trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9662):473–81.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Russell-Jones D, Vaag A, Schmitz O, Sethi BK, Lalic N, Antic S, Zdravkovic M, Ravn GM. Simó R; Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes 5 (LEAD-5) met + SU Study Group. Liraglutide vs insulin glargine and placebo in combination with metformin and sulfonylurea therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (LEAD-5 met + SU): a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2009;52(10):2046–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Pratley RE, Nauck M, Bailey T, Montanya E, Cuddihy R, Filetti S, Thomsen AB, Søndergaard RE, Davies M; 1860-LIRA-DPP-4 Study Group. Liraglutide versus sitagliptin for patients with type 2 diabetes who did not have adequate glycaemic control with metformin: a 26-week, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial. Lancet. 2010;375(9724):1447–56.

19.

Bunck MC, Diamant M, Cornér A, Eliasson B, Malloy JL, Shaginian RM, Deng W, Kendall DM, Taskinen MR, Smith U, Yki-Järvinen H, Heine RJ. One-year treatment with exenatide improves beta-cell function, compared with insulin glargine, in metformin-treated type 2 diabetic patients: a randomized, controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(5):762–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Buse JB, Rosenstock J, Sesti G, Schmidt WE, Montanya E, Brett JH, Zychma M, Blonde L, LEAD-6 Study Group. Liraglutide once a day versus exenatide twice a day for type 2 diabetes: a 26-week randomised, parallel-group, multinational, open-label trial (LEAD-6). Lancet. 2009;374(9683):39–47.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Rosenstock J, Raccah D, Korányi L, Maffei L, Boka G, Miossec P, Gerich JE. Efficacy and safety of lixisenatide once daily versus exenatide twice daily in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin: a 24-week, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study (GetGoal-X). Diabetes Care. 2013;36(10):2945–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Nauck M, Rizzo M, Johnson A, Bosch-Traberg H, Madsen J, Cariou B. Once-daily liraglutide versus lixisenatide as add-on to metformin in Type 2 diabetes: a 26-week randomized controlled clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(9):1501–9.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Lorenzi M, Ploug UJ, Vega G, Jansen JP. Liraglutide vs other daily GLP-1 analogous in people with type 2 diabetes: a network meta-analysis. Abstract presented at ISPOR 18th Annual European Congress, 7–11 November 2015, Milan, Italy.

24.

Davies MJ, Chubb BD, Smith IC, Valentine WJ. Cost-utility analysis of liraglutide compared with sulphonylurea or sitagliptin, all as add-on to metformin monotherapy in Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 2012;29(3):313–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Beaudet A, Palmer JL, Timlin L, Wilson B, Bruhn D, Boye KS, Lloyd A. Cost-utility of exenatide once weekly compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK. J Med Econ. 2011;14(3):357–66.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Woehl A, Evans M, Tetlow AP, McEwan P. Evaluation of the cost effectiveness of exenatide versus insulin glargine in patients with sub-optimally controlled type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2008;7:24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Ray JA, Boye KS, Yurgin N, Valentine WJ, Roze S, McKendrick J, Tucker DM, Foos V, Palmer AJ. Exenatide versus insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK: a model of long-term clinical and cost outcomes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2007;23(3):609–22.CrossRefPubMed

28.

National Insitute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE technology appraisal guidance [TA203]: liraglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: The manufacturer’s submission. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta203/chapter/the-manufacturers-submission.

29.

Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, Lammert M, Spinas GA. The CORE Diabetes Model: projecting long-term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes mellitus (Types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision-making. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):5–26.CrossRef

30.

Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine W, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, Lammert M, Spinas GA. Validation of the CORE Diabetes Model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):27–40.CrossRef

31.

McEwan P, Foos V, Palmer JL, Lamotte M, Lloyd A, Grant D. Validation of the IMS CORE diabetes model. Value Health. 2014;17(6):714–24.CrossRefPubMed

32.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The guidelines manual 2012. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/article/PMG6/chapter/1%20Introduction. Accessed 18 Aug 2015.

33.

Schmidt LJ, Habacher W, Augustin T, Krahulec E, Semlitsch T. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of lixisenatide in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014;16(9):769–79.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Kapitza C, Forst T, Coester HV, Poitiers F, Ruus P, Hincelin-Méry A. Pharmacodynamic characteristics of lixisenatide once daily versus liraglutide once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on metformin. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013;15(7):642–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Liraglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: NICE technology appraisal guidance 203. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta203. Accessed 18 Aug 2015.

36.

Personal Social Services Research Unit. Unit costs of health and social care 2013. Available at: http://www.pssru.ac.uk/project-pages/unit-costs/2013/. Accessed 19 Dec 2014.

37.

Hayes AJ, Leal J, Gray AM, Holman RR, Clarke PM. UKPDS outcomes model 2: a new version of a model to simulate lifetime health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using data from the 30 year United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study: UKPDS 82. Diabetologia. 2013;56(9):1925–33.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Divino V, DeKoven M, Hallinan S, Varol N, Wirta SB, Lee WC, Reaney M. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment patterns among type 2 diabetes patients in six European countries. Diabetes Ther. 2014;5(2):499–520.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Dias SW, N.J.; Sutton, A.J.; Ades, A.E. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 1: Introduction to Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making, 2011; last updated April 2012. Available from: http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/TSD1%20Introduction.final.08.05.12.pdf. Accessed 28 Aug 2015.

40.

Bode B. An overview of the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of liraglutide. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;97(1):27–42.CrossRefPubMed

41.

National institute for Health and Care Excellence. Clinical Guideline 48. MI: secondary prevention (CG48). Appendix B. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/CG48. Accessed 13 Mar 2014.

42.

Dyer MT, Goldsmith KA, Khan SN, Sharples LD, Freeman C, Hardy I, Buxton MJ, Schofield PM. Clinical and cost-effectiveness analysis of an open label, single-centre, randomised trial of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) versus percutaneous myocardial laser revascularisation (PMR) in patients with refractory angina pectoris: the SPiRiT trial. Trials. 2008;9:40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Cameron CG, Bennett HA. Cost-effectiveness of insulin analogues for diabetes mellitus. CMAJ. 2009;180(4):400–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Technology Appraisal 94: statins for the prevention of cardiovascular events, Appendix B. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA94. Accessed 31 Jul 2014.

45.

Youman P, Wilson K, Harraf F, Kalra L. The economic burden of stroke in the United Kingdom. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(Suppl 1):43–50.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Department of Health. NHS reference costs 2012-13. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-reference-costs-2012-to-2013. Accessed 13 Mar 2014.

47.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Chronic kidney disease (CG73). Appendix 2. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/12069/42116/42116.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2014.

48.

Clarke P, Gray A, Legood R, Briggs A, Holman R. The impact of diabetes-related complications on healthcare costs: results from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS Study No. 65). Diabet Med. 2003;20(6):442–50.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Meads C, Hyde C. What is the cost of blindness? Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87(10):1201–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Ghatnekar O, Willis M, Persson U. Cost-effectiveness of treating deep diabetic foot ulcers with Promogran in four European countries. J Wound Care. 2002;11(2):70–4.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Clarke P, Gray A, Holman R. Estimating utility values for health statenices of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62). Med Decis Mak. 2002;22(4):340–9.CrossRef

52.

Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care. 2000;38(6):583–637.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Evans M, Khunti K, Mamdani M, Galbo-Jorgensen CB, Gundgaard J, Bogelund M, et al. Health-related quality of life associated with daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemic events: a time trade-off survey in five countries. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11(1):90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Bagust A, Beale S. Modelling EuroQol health-related utility values for diabetic complications from CODE-2 data. Health Econ. 2005;14(3):217–30.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Evaluating the Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of Daily Administered GLP-1 Receptor Agonists for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in the United Kingdom
Authors: Barnaby Hunt
Qing Ye
William J. Valentine
Donna Ashley
Publication date: 01-02-2017
Publisher: Springer Healthcare
Published in: Diabetes Therapy / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1869-6953
Electronic ISSN: 1869-6961
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13300-016-0219-2

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin

Prof. Florian Limbourg

Prof. Anoop Chauhan

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Pediatric Cardiology Video

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

Cardiopulmonary Comorbidity Video

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Valvular Heart Disease Video

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits

Illustration of figure on mountain summit/© Orapun / Stock.adobe.com, STEP AAG HeroTeaserCollection image/© Tarek / Generated with AI / Stock.adobe.com, ACC 2024 Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, ACC 2024 Pulmonary Vascular Disease: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, ACC 2024 Valvular Heart Disease: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, ACC 2024 HF and Cardiomyopathies: Year in Review/© 2024 American College of Cardiology, Woman out walking/© Seventyfour / stock.adobe.com (symbolic image with model), Woman checking smartwatch /© saltdium / stock.adobe.com (symbolic image with model), Cardiac catheterization/© Damian / stock.adobe.com

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Lack of Evidence to Guide Deprescribing of Antihyperglycemics: A Systematic Review

Costs of Managing Patients with Diabetes in a Large Health Maintenance Organization in Israel: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Diabetes Distress or Major Depressive Disorder? A Practical Approach to Diagnosing and Treating Psychological Comorbidities of Diabetes

Exenatide Add-on to Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Therapy Reduces Bolus Insulin Doses in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label Trial

Flash Glucose-Sensing Technology as a Replacement for Blood Glucose Monitoring for the Management of Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: a Multicenter, Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial

Fear of Self-Injecting and Self-Testing and the Related Risk Factors in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage