A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Sensor-Augmented Insulin Pump Therapy and Automated Insulin Suspension versus Standard Pump Therapy for Hypoglycemic Unaware Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

Abstract

Based on the Australian experience evaluating new interventions across a broad range of therapeutic areas, sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with LGS may be considered a cost-effective alternative to standard pump therapy with self-monitoring of blood glucose in hypoglycemia unaware patients with type 1 diabetes.

The Benefits, Limitations, and Cost-Effectiveness of Advanced Technologies in the Management of Patients With Diabetes Mellitus

“…They found that the cost per QALY was AUS$40 803 in patients ≥12 years. 69 Finally, Graham and colleagues, modeling the cost saving of RT-CGM using the same assumptions noted above, [10][11][12][13][14][15][16] found that RT-CGM reduced the yearly cost of hypoglycemia by 13% in a population of 10 million insured patients. 70 The cost-effectiveness of using RT-CGM in patients with type 2 diabetes not on prandial insulin was evaluated by Fonda and colleagues.…”

Cost‐effectiveness analysis of real‐time continuous monitoring glucose compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose for diabetes mellitus in Spain

“…Moreover, the inputs related to the device's effectiveness used in this paper pertained to the findings of a systematic literature review and meta‐analyses conducted by our research team and that included all relevant evidence available to date. The values obtained were somewhat lower than the effectiveness values used in other cost‐effectiveness analyses . Transition probabilities have, moreover, been collected from more recent literature both for T1DM and T2DM patients (Supplementary Table S1).…”

Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Global Reimbursement: An Update

“…33 In the past decade, eight publications have examined the cost-effectiveness of the RT-CGM in patients with T1DM (Table 2). [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] The results of these studies are presented in terms of cost per qualityadjusted life year (QALY) or cost per hypoglycemic event avoided. Results are wide ranging, possibly because of differences in assumptions that form the basis of the models.…”

“…It is important to note that only two of the eight published CEAs evaluated standalone RT-CGM, 34,37 whereas others evaluated sensor-augmented pump therapy 35,36,[38][39][40][41] ; the CEA performed by Huang et al was based on outcomes from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation trial, in which intervention group patients could have received either sensoraugmented insulin pump therapy or MDIs plus RT-CGM.…”