Cost-effectiveness of switching to biphasic insulin aspart from human premix insulin in a US setting

Palmer, James L.; Knudsen, M.S.; Aagren, Mark; Thomsen, Trine L.

doi:10.3111/13696991003723999

Cited by 14 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The CDM has been used extensively to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of new therapies for the treatment of diabetes [4][5][6][7][8]. The model is also routinely used to inform reimbursement decisions, public health issues, resource planning, clinical trial design, and optimal patient management strategies [9][10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the IMS CORE Diabetes Model

McEwan

Foos²,

Palmer³

et al. 2014

Value in Health

Self Cite

180

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the IMS CORE Diabetes Model

McEwan

Foos²,

Palmer³

et al. 2014

Value in Health

Self Cite

180

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If not available, the approach contains 16 complete cost data sets from several countries, including Australia, 14 Canada, 15,16 China, 17 Czech Republic, 18 Germany, 19 Saudi-Arabia, 20 Sweden, 21,22 Switzerland, 23 Thailand, 24 the United Kingdom, 25,26 and the United States. 27-29 The user can select 1 of those cost data sets. When another cost data set is used, the 16 existing cost data sets can serve as comparator (to verify the cost data).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More than 1 source was found for some countries, including Canada, 15,16 Sweden, 21,22 the United Kingdom, 25,26 and the United States. 27-29 In comparisons to determine the influence of selecting an appropriate source, results showed that the selection of the appropriate source has some influence, but in most cases, it is very limited. For more details, see Appendix V.…”

Section: Sensitivity Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Description of a New Predictive Modeling Approach That Correlates the Risk and Associated Cost of Well-Defined Diabetes-Related Complications With Changes in Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)

Fortwaengler¹,

Parkin²,

Neeser³

et al. 2016

J Diabetes Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The modeling approach described here is designed to support the development of spreadsheet-based simple predictive models. It is based on 3 pillars: association of the complications with HbA1c changes, incidence of the complications, and average cost per event of the complication. For each pillar, the goal of the analysis was (1) to find results for a large diversity of populations with a focus on countries/regions, diabetes type, age, diabetes duration, baseline HbA1c value, and gender; (2) to assess the range of incidences and associations previously reported. Unlike simple predictive models, which mostly are based on only 1 source of information for each of the pillars, we conducted a comprehensive, systematic literature review. Each source found was thoroughly reviewed and only sources meeting quality expectations were considered. The approach allows avoidance of unintended use of extreme data. The user can utilize (1) one of the found sources, (2) the found range as validation for the found figures, or (3) the average of all found publications for an expedited estimate. The modeling approach is intended for use in average insulin-treated diabetes populations in which the baseline HbA1c values are within an average range (6.5% to 11.5%); it is not intended for use in individuals or unique diabetes populations (eg, gestational diabetes). Because the modeling approach only considers diabetes-related complications that are positively associated with HbA1c decreases, the costs of negatively associated complications (eg, severe hypoglycemic events) must be calculated separately.

show abstract

“…[111–113] BIAsp 30 was demonstrated to be dominant over BHI 30 in the Saudi Arabian setting and was cost effective in the South Korean and US settings (table VII). …”

Section: Newer Concepts Of Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Ten Years of Experience with Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30

Liebl

Prusty

Valensi

et al. 2012

Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) includes 30% soluble rapid-acting insulin aspart (IAsp) along with an intermediate-acting 70% protaminated IAsp that provides coverage of prandial and basal insulin in a single injection. As BIAsp 30 has been available internationally for 10 years, this review provides a comprehensive overview of the discovery of BIAsp 30, its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile, safety and efficacy outcomes from the clinical trial programme, ‘real-life’ clinical insights provided by observational study data, and cost effectiveness and quality-of-life information. These studies have demonstrated that BIAsp 30 once or twice daily is an appropriate option for insulin initiation. BIAsp 30 also provides a switch option in patients on biphasic human insulin (BHI). Switching from BHI to BIAsp 30 is associated with improved postprandial glucose (PPG) and reduced nocturnal and major hypoglycaemia, although daytime hypoglycaemia is higher with BIAsp 30. Intensification of BIAsp 30 can be achieved by increasing the number of daily doses up to three times daily with meals. Therefore, BIAsp 30 provides an intensification option for individuals who are not achieving control with basal insulin and would prefer the simplicity of a single biphasic insulin instead of progressing to a basal-bolus approach. BIAsp 30 has a simple dose-titration algorithm, which enables patients to effectively self-titrate their insulin dose. Cost-effectiveness analyses have demonstrated that BIAsp 30 is cost effective or dominant compared with BHI 30 or insulin glargine in a number of healthcare settings. In conclusion, BIAsp 30 offers a simple and flexible option for insulin initiation and intensification that provides coverage of both fasting and prandial glucose.

show abstract

Cost-effectiveness of switching to biphasic insulin aspart from human premix insulin in a US setting

Abstract: The application of treatment effect data derived from a Canadian cohort to the US setting was a limitation of the cost-effectiveness analysis. The findings of this cost-effectiveness analysis are not applicable to insulin-naïve diabetes patients.

Cited by 14 publications

References 37 publications

Validation of the IMS CORE Diabetes Model

Validation of the IMS CORE Diabetes Model

Description of a New Predictive Modeling Approach That Correlates the Risk and Associated Cost of Well-Defined Diabetes-Related Complications With Changes in Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c)

Ten Years of Experience with Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About