No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundThe advent of Basaglar®, which is a biosimilar insulin glargine formulation for Lantus® has brought hope that it will result in similar outcomes and lower costs. However, some health practitioners raised some concerns about the therapeutic equivalence of this new biosimilar. Therefore, we aimed to examine the clinical and financial impact of switching from Lantus® to Basaglar®.MethodsThis was a single–center retrospective chart review study of adult patients (e.g., ≥18 years) with diabetes mellitus (DM) who were treated with insulin glargine (Lantus®) for at least 12 months and then switched to Basaglar® for another 12 months. The potential cost savings for the years 2018 to 2021 and the cost avoidance for 2022 were estimated using different conversion ratios between the two insulin glargine products (Basaglar® and Lantus®) and acquisition prices.ResultsOne–hundred patients with DM who were previously treated with Lantus® and switched to Basaglar® were retrospectively recruited. About two–thirds of the patients (68%) had type 2 DM, and the male and female patients were equally represented. The mean glycated hemoglobin (A1C) at baseline was 9, and the mean difference in the A1C levels before and after switching to Basaglar® was not significant (0.18, p-value = 0.503, 95% CI [−0.36–0.72]). Although the difference in the total daily insulin units between Lantus® and Basaglar® was not significant, the difference was leaning toward statistical significance despite the small sample size (−1.88, P-value = 0.25, 95% CI [−5.15–1.38]). Switching from Lantus® to Basaglar® could have led to significant cost savings that would range from approximately 1.77 to 23.7 million United States Dollars (USD) for the years 2018 to 2021 assuming an equal conversion ratio. However, those cost savings might not be realized if the switching to Basaglar® required higher daily insulin units, and the difference in the public tender acquisition price between Lantus® and Basaglar® is less than 15%.ConclusionBasaglar® and potentially other biosimilar insulin glargine products can lead to significant cost savings without compromising the quality of care. However, their acquisition prices should be discounted.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Heavy uterine bleeding (HUB) affects 4.0%–51.6% of women and is responsible for the high prevalence of iron-deficiency anemia (IDA). Ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) is a novel Type I polynuclear iron (III)-hydroxide carbohydrate complex that is highly stable and requires short administration time. The current study estimated the budgetary impact of adopting FCM to treat IDA in HUB patients from the perspective of a tertiary care hospital in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A budget impact model was adopted to compare the total annual costs of iron sucrose complex (ISC) versus FCM from a tertiary care hospital setting perspective in a 1-year time horizon. RESULTS: The total annual cost in ”ISC” scenario was higher than in ”FCM” scenario (Saudi Riyal [SAR] 1,079,535 vs. SAR 724,981), resulting in a cost saving of SAR 355,000 over a 1-year time horizon with FCM. Lower expenditure on health professionals and lower costs of disposables and overhead were the main drivers to the cost savings accounting for nearly 96% of the savings. Although the direct IV iron cost was higher in ”FCM” scenario, the increase in pharmaceutical drug cost was offset by the savings in the cost associated with disposables (−SAR 232,000) and resource utilization (−SAR 451,195). CONCLUSION: FCM was associated with cost savings as compared to ISC for the treatment of IDA in HUB patients from the tertiary care hospital perspective in the KSA.