ObjectiveChoosing therapies for type 2 diabetes that are both effective and cost-effective is vital as healthcare systems worldwide aim to maximize health of the population. The present analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist) versus insulin glargine U100 (the most commonly used basal insulin) and versus dulaglutide (an alternative once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist), from a societal perspective in the Netherlands.Research design and methodsThe IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to project outcomes for once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1 mg versus insulin glargine U100, once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg, and once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg. Clinical data were taken from the SUSTAIN 4 and SUSTAIN 7 clinical trials. The analysis captured direct and indirect costs, mortality, and the impact of diabetes-related complications on quality of life.ResultsProjections of outcomes suggested that once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg was associated with improved quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.19 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus insulin glargine U100 and 0.07 QALYs versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg. Once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg was associated with mean increases in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.27 QALYs versus insulin glargine U100 and 0.13 QALYs versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg. Improvements came at an increased cost versus insulin glargine U100, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from a societal perspective of €4988 and €495 per QALY gained for once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1 mg, respectively, falling below Netherlands-specific willingness-to-pay thresholds. Improvements versus dulaglutide came at a reduced cost from a societal perspective for both doses of once-weekly semaglutide.ConclusionsOnce-weekly semaglutide is cost-effective versus insulin glargine U100, and dominant versus dulaglutide 0.75 and 1.5 mg for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, and represents a good use of healthcare resources in the Netherlands.

Hypoglycaemic events and unawareness of these events are common in Belgian insulin-treated diabetes patients. Patients often fail to report hypoglycaemic events to their physician and many physicians do not inquire about hypoglycaemia, meaning the current burden of hypoglycaemic events may be underestimated.

Calculated ICERs for both comparisons fell below the commonly quoted willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained. Therefore, liraglutide is likely to be cost-effective vs sitagliptin and glimepiride from a healthcare payer perspective in France.

Background Drug costs are increasing in Europe, and there is a heightened need to reduce pressure on healthcare systems. In 2017, oncology, autoimmune disease, and diabetes featured as the three highest therapy areas for drug spend in the EU-28. However, the absolute 1-year drug spend growth for diabetes did not feature within the ten fastest growing therapy areas. Objective This study explores the association between drug spend and disease burden in oncology, autoimmune disease, and diabetes in the EU-28. Methods Oncology, autoimmune disease and diabetes therapeutic areas were investigated using four methodologies. Historical and forecasted drug spend was analysed using the IQVIA MIDAS ® drug sales database. Clinical and economic burden was estimated from targeted literature reviews. Trend analyses compared changes in drug spend with clinical burden using the Global Burden of Disease tool as the epidemiological reference. Cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from UK health technology assessments were compared to interpret the health economic value. Results Oncology had the highest historical drug spend and growth compared with autoimmune disease and diabetes. Total drug spend and growth in oncology is forecasted to exceed diabetes by twofold. Increasing oncology drug spend historically did not correspond with reductions in mortality and morbidity. Diabetes had the lowest drug spend and greatest QALY/€1000 spent benefit. Conclusion This study indicates that drug spend may not correlate to clinical burden across diseases. Future research could stimulate debate on whether more equitable drug funding may improve disease management.

Hospitalizations for hypoglycemia are expensive and associated with an increased risk of depression and traumatic fractures as well as increased in-hospital mortality. Interventions that can help reduce the risk of hypoglycemia, and consequently the burden on hospitals and society, without compromising glycemic control, will help to further improve diabetes management.