Budget Impact Analysis of Metformin Sustained Release for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in The Netherlands

Gout-Zwart, Judith J; Jong, Lisa A. de; Saptenno, Lisanne; Postma, Maarten J.

doi:10.1007/s41669-019-00179-6

Cited by 11 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The discounting rate was not always clearly reported in the included BIA studies. Four studies reported the discounting rate ranging from 3 to 5% (16,(23)(24)(25), eight studies (11,15,(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)27) did not consider the discounting rate in compliance with the ISPOR Task Force guidelines (7). Meanwhile, six studies (10, 12-14, 22, 26) did not mentioned the discounting rate in the articles.…”

Section: Methodology and Budget Results Of Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the five basal insulin BIA studies, one of them was about insulin glargine biosimilar (13). The rest of BIA studies targeted GLP-1 RA (n = 4, including once-weekly semaglutide, oral semaglutide, and benaglutide) (12,14,25,27), DPP-4i (n = 3, including vildagliptin, saxagliptin, and linagliptin) (10,15,23), SGLT-2i (n = 2, both were dapagliflozin) (11,17) and metformin (n = 1) (19).…”

Section: Data Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is worth noting that one study applied the patient-years instead of patient number to measure the size of target population (10). Two other characteristics were checked: nine studies (16, 18, 20-24, 26, 27) reported conflict of interests (50%), 12 studies (14,(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27) reported pharmaceutical company funding (66.7%), and three studies (10)(11)(12) contained no details of conflicts of interests or funding sources (16.7%).…”

Section: Characteristics Of Literature Includedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Budget Impact Analysis of Diabetes Drugs: A Systematic Literature Review

Luo

Ruan

Yao

et al. 2021

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Budget impact analysis (BIA) is an economic assessment that estimates the financial consequences of adopting a new intervention. BIA is used to make informed reimbursement decisions, as a supplement to cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs).Objectives: We systematically reviewed BIA studies associated with anti-diabetic drugs and assessed the extent to which international BIA guidelines were followed in these studies.Methods: We conducted a literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, Econlit, Medline, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data knowledge Service platform from database inception to June 30, 2021. ISPOR good practice guidelines were used as a methodological standard for assessing BIAs. We extracted and compared the study characteristics outlined by the ISPOR BIA Task Force to evaluate the guideline compliance of the included BIA.Results: A total of eighteen studies on the BIA for anti-diabetic drugs were identified. More than half studies were from developed countries. Seventeen studies were based on model and one study was based on real-world data. Overall, analysis considered a payer perspective, reported potential budget impacts over 1–5 years. Assumptions were mainly made about target population size, market share uptake of new interventions, and scope of cost. The data used for analysis varied among studies and was rarely justified. Model validation and sensitivity analysis were lacking in the current BIA studies. Rebate analysis was conducted in a few studies to explore the price discount that was required for new interventions to demonstrate cost equivalence to comparators.Conclusion: Existing studies evaluating budget impact for anti-diabetic drugs vary greatly in methodology, some of which showed low compliance to good practice guidelines. In order for the BIA to be useful for assisting in health plan decision-making, it is important for future studies to optimize compliance to national or ISPOR good practice guidelines on BIA. Model validation and sensitivity analysis should also be improved in future BIA studies. Continued improvement of BIA using real-world data is necessary to ensure high-quality analyses and to provide reliable results.

show abstract

Section: Methodology and Budget Results Of Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Literature Includedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Budget Impact Analysis of Diabetes Drugs: A Systematic Literature Review

Luo

Ruan

Yao

et al. 2021

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Limitations of current therapies are not just escalating the diabetes prevalence but also crossing the limits of economical budget. All these effects are demanding safer, efficient, easy to administrate, and budget-friendly treatment [ 5 ]. The traditional approach of treatment involves antidiabetic compounds from different plant species, and it is catching more and more attention as natural drugs show fewer side effects compared to synthetic drugs [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular Docking and Simulation Studies of Antidiabetic Agents Devised from Hypoglycemic Polypeptide‐P of Momordica charantia

Arif

Ahmad

Mustafa

et al. 2021

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diabetes mellitus termed as metabolic disorder is a collection of interlinked diseases and mainly body’s inability to manage glucose level which leads to cardiovascular diseases, renal failure, neurological disorders, and many others. The drugs contemporarily used for diabetes have many inevitable side effects, and many of them have become less responsive to this multifactorial disorder. Momordica charantia commonly known as bitter gourd has many bioactive compounds with antidiabetic properties. The current study was designed to use computational methods to discover the best antidiabetic peptides devised from hypoglycemic polypeptide-P of M. charantia. The binding affinity and interaction patterns of peptides were evaluated against four receptor proteins (i.e., as agonists of insulin receptor and inhibitors of sodium-glucose cotransporter 1, dipeptidyl peptidase-IV, and glucose transporter 2) using molecular docking approach. A total of thirty-seven peptides were docked against these receptors. Out of which, top five peptides against each receptor were shortlisted based on their S-scores and binding affinities. Finally, the eight best ligands (i.e., LIVA, TSEP, EKAI, LKHA, EALF, VAEK, DFGAS, and EPGGGG) were selected as these ligands strictly followed Lipinski’s rule of five and exhibited good ADMET profiling. One peptide EPGGGG showed activity towards insulin and SGLT1 receptor proteins. The top complex for both these targets was subjected to 50 ns of molecular dynamics simulations and MM-GBSA binding energy test that concluded both complexes as highly stable, and the intermolecular interactions were dominated by van der Waals and electrostatic energies. Overall, the selected ligands strongly fulfilled the drug-like evaluation criterion and proved to have good antidiabetic properties.

show abstract

“…Metformin is inexpensive but causes gastrointestinal side effects in up to 25% of patients (2). Extended-release (ER) formulations reduce side effects but may cost more, and they have not been clearly shown to improve adherence in routine practice (3). As a result, although it is common practice to change from immediate release (IR) formulations to ER once patients develop side effects, there is not a consensus on whether ER formulations should routinely be used when metformin is first prescribed (3).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%