西班牙胰岛素治疗 2 型糖尿病患者的实时连续血糖监测与自我血糖监测的成本效益比较。

IF 2.1 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-11-05 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CEOR.S483459
Juan Francisco Merino-Torres, Sabrina Ilham, Hamza Alshannaq, Richard F Pollock, Waqas Ahmed, Gregory J Norman
{"title":"西班牙胰岛素治疗 2 型糖尿病患者的实时连续血糖监测与自我血糖监测的成本效益比较。","authors":"Juan Francisco Merino-Torres, Sabrina Ilham, Hamza Alshannaq, Richard F Pollock, Waqas Ahmed, Gregory J Norman","doi":"10.2147/CEOR.S483459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Management of advanced type 2 diabetes (T2D) typically involves daily insulin therapy alongside frequent blood glucose monitoring, as treatments such as oral antidiabetic agents are therapeutically insufficient. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rt-CGM) has been shown to facilitate greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and improvements in patient satisfaction relative to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). This study aimed to investigate the cost-utility of rt-CGM versus SMBG in Spanish patients with insulin-treated T2D..</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The analysis was conducted using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM V9.5). Baseline characteristics of the simulated patient cohort and treatment efficacy data were sourced from a large-scale, United States-based retrospective cohort study. Costs were obtained from Spanish sources and inflated to 2022 Euros (EUR) where required. A remaining lifetime horizon (maximum 50 years) was used, alongside an annual discount rate of 3% for future costs and health effects. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of EUR 30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was adopted, based on precedent across previous cost-effectiveness studies set in Spain. A Spanish payer perspective was adopted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over patient lifetimes, rt-CGM yielded 9.933 QALYs, versus 8.997 QALYs with SMBG, corresponding to a 0.937 QALY gain with rt-CGM. Total costs in the rt-CGM arm were EUR 2347 higher with rt-CGM versus SMBG (EUR 125,365 versus EUR 123,017). The base case incremental cost-utility ratio was therefore EUR 2506 per QALY gained, substantially lower than the WTP threshold of EUR 30,000 per QALY. The analysis also projected a reduction in cumulative incidence of ophthalmic, renal, neurological, and cardiovascular events in rt-CGM users, with reductions of 16.03%, 13.07%, 7.34%, and 9.09%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to SMBG, rt-CGM is highly likely to be a cost-effective intervention for patients living with insulin-treated T2D in Spain.</p>","PeriodicalId":47313,"journal":{"name":"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research","volume":"16 ","pages":"785-797"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11549913/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Utility of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in People with Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes in Spain.\",\"authors\":\"Juan Francisco Merino-Torres, Sabrina Ilham, Hamza Alshannaq, Richard F Pollock, Waqas Ahmed, Gregory J Norman\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/CEOR.S483459\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Management of advanced type 2 diabetes (T2D) typically involves daily insulin therapy alongside frequent blood glucose monitoring, as treatments such as oral antidiabetic agents are therapeutically insufficient. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rt-CGM) has been shown to facilitate greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and improvements in patient satisfaction relative to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). This study aimed to investigate the cost-utility of rt-CGM versus SMBG in Spanish patients with insulin-treated T2D..</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The analysis was conducted using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM V9.5). Baseline characteristics of the simulated patient cohort and treatment efficacy data were sourced from a large-scale, United States-based retrospective cohort study. Costs were obtained from Spanish sources and inflated to 2022 Euros (EUR) where required. A remaining lifetime horizon (maximum 50 years) was used, alongside an annual discount rate of 3% for future costs and health effects. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of EUR 30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was adopted, based on precedent across previous cost-effectiveness studies set in Spain. A Spanish payer perspective was adopted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over patient lifetimes, rt-CGM yielded 9.933 QALYs, versus 8.997 QALYs with SMBG, corresponding to a 0.937 QALY gain with rt-CGM. Total costs in the rt-CGM arm were EUR 2347 higher with rt-CGM versus SMBG (EUR 125,365 versus EUR 123,017). The base case incremental cost-utility ratio was therefore EUR 2506 per QALY gained, substantially lower than the WTP threshold of EUR 30,000 per QALY. The analysis also projected a reduction in cumulative incidence of ophthalmic, renal, neurological, and cardiovascular events in rt-CGM users, with reductions of 16.03%, 13.07%, 7.34%, and 9.09%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to SMBG, rt-CGM is highly likely to be a cost-effective intervention for patients living with insulin-treated T2D in Spain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"785-797\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11549913/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S483459\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S483459","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:晚期 2 型糖尿病(T2D)的治疗通常需要每天使用胰岛素,同时频繁监测血糖,因为口服抗糖尿病药物等治疗方法的疗效不佳。与自我血糖监测(SMBG)相比,实时连续血糖监测(rt-CGM)能更有效地降低糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)水平,提高患者满意度。本研究旨在调查西班牙胰岛素治疗的 T2D 患者使用 rt-CGM 与 SMBG 的成本效益:分析采用 IQVIA 核心糖尿病模型 (CDM V9.5) 进行。模拟患者队列的基线特征和疗效数据来自美国的一项大规模回顾性队列研究。成本来源于西班牙,并在必要时膨胀至 2022 欧元(EUR)。采用剩余生命期(最长 50 年),并对未来成本和健康影响采用 3% 的年贴现率。根据西班牙以往成本效益研究的先例,采用了每质量调整生命年(QALY)30,000 欧元的支付意愿(WTP)阈值。研究采用了西班牙支付方的观点:在患者的整个生命周期中,rt-CGM 产生了 9.933 QALY,而 SMBG 产生了 8.997 QALY,相当于 rt-CGM 增加了 0.937 QALY。与 SMBG 相比,rt-CGM 治疗组的总成本高出 2347 欧元(125365 欧元对 123017 欧元)。因此,基础病例的增量成本效用比为每 QALY 2506 欧元,大大低于每 QALY 30000 欧元的 WTP 临界值。分析还预测,rt-CGM 使用者的眼科、肾脏、神经系统和心血管事件的累积发生率将分别降低 16.03%、13.07%、7.34% 和 9.09%:与 SMBG 相比,rt-CGM 极有可能成为西班牙胰岛素治疗 T2D 患者的一种经济有效的干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-Utility of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in People with Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes in Spain.

Objective: Management of advanced type 2 diabetes (T2D) typically involves daily insulin therapy alongside frequent blood glucose monitoring, as treatments such as oral antidiabetic agents are therapeutically insufficient. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rt-CGM) has been shown to facilitate greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and improvements in patient satisfaction relative to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). This study aimed to investigate the cost-utility of rt-CGM versus SMBG in Spanish patients with insulin-treated T2D..

Methods: The analysis was conducted using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM V9.5). Baseline characteristics of the simulated patient cohort and treatment efficacy data were sourced from a large-scale, United States-based retrospective cohort study. Costs were obtained from Spanish sources and inflated to 2022 Euros (EUR) where required. A remaining lifetime horizon (maximum 50 years) was used, alongside an annual discount rate of 3% for future costs and health effects. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of EUR 30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was adopted, based on precedent across previous cost-effectiveness studies set in Spain. A Spanish payer perspective was adopted.

Results: Over patient lifetimes, rt-CGM yielded 9.933 QALYs, versus 8.997 QALYs with SMBG, corresponding to a 0.937 QALY gain with rt-CGM. Total costs in the rt-CGM arm were EUR 2347 higher with rt-CGM versus SMBG (EUR 125,365 versus EUR 123,017). The base case incremental cost-utility ratio was therefore EUR 2506 per QALY gained, substantially lower than the WTP threshold of EUR 30,000 per QALY. The analysis also projected a reduction in cumulative incidence of ophthalmic, renal, neurological, and cardiovascular events in rt-CGM users, with reductions of 16.03%, 13.07%, 7.34%, and 9.09%, respectively.

Conclusion: Compared to SMBG, rt-CGM is highly likely to be a cost-effective intervention for patients living with insulin-treated T2D in Spain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
83
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信