INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of the insulin degludec/liraglutide combination (IDegLira) versus basal insulin intensification strategies for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) not optimally controlled on basal insulin in the Czech Republic. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using the QuintilesIMS Health CORE Diabetes model, an interactive internet-based model that simulates clinical outcomes and costs for cohorts of patients with diabetes. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Czech Republic public payer. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the sensitivity of the model to plausible variations in key parameters. RESULTS: The use of IDegLira was associated with an improvement in the quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.31 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), at an additional cost of Czech Koruna (CZK) 107,829 over a patient's lifetime compared with basal-bolus therapy, generating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CZK 345,052 per QALY gained. In a scenario analysis, IDegLira was associated with an ICER of CZK 693,763 per QALY gained compared to basal insulin + glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA). The ICERs are below the generally accepted willingness-to-pay threshold (CZK 1,100,000/QALY gained at the time of this analysis). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this evaluation suggest that IDegLira is a cost-effective treatment option compared with basal-bolus therapy and basal insulin + GLP-1 RA for patients with T2DM in the Czech Republic whose diabetes is not optimally controlled with basal insulin. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

3rd Internal Clinic Clinic of Endocrinology and Metabolism General University Hospital Prague Czech Republic

Department of Internal Medicine Faculty Hospital Motol Prague Czech Republic

Novo Nordisk s r o Prague Czech Republic

Ossian Health Economics and Communications Basel Switzerland

See more in PubMed

Campbell RK, Martin TM. The chronic burden of diabetes. Am J Manag Care. 2009;15:S248–S254. PubMed

Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic (ÚZIS). Health Minister: brief overview of activity in the field of diabetology and endocrinology for the period 2007–2015. Available at: http://www.uzis.cz/publikace/zdravotnictvi-cr-strucny-prehled-cinnosti-oboru-diabetologie-endokrinologie-za-obdobi-2007–2015. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Bagust A, Beale S. Deteriorating beta-cell function in type 2 diabetes: a long-term model. QJM. 2003;96:281–288. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcg040. PubMed DOI

Diabetes UK. Diabetes: facts and stats. 2014. Available at: http://www.diabetes.org.uk/Documents/About%20Us/Statistics/Diabetes-key-stats-guidelines-April2014.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Dolezal T, Pisarikova Z, Bartaskova D. The cost of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Czech Republic. Value Health. 2008;11:PDB31.

International Diabetes Federation (IDF). Diabetes atlas. 7th edn, 2015. Available at: http://www.idf.org/idf-diabetes-atlas-seventh-edition. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2015: a patient-centered approach: update to a position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:140–149. doi: 10.2337/dc14-2441. PubMed DOI

Fonseca V. Defining and characterising the progression of type 2 diabetes. Br J Diabetes Vasc Dis. 2008;8:S3. doi: 10.1177/1474651408100520. DOI

American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2017. Diabetes Care. 2017;40. PubMed

Czech Diabetes Society. Recommendations for teh care of patients with diabetes and its complications. Available at: http://www.diab.cz/en/introduction. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Dale J, Martin S, Gadsby R. Insulin initiation in primary care for patients with type 2 diabetes: 3-year follow-up study. Prim Care Diabetes. 2010;4:85–89. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2010.03.001. PubMed DOI

Giugliano D, Maiorino MI, Bellastella G, Chiodini P, Ceriello A, Esposito K. Efficacy of insulin analogs in achieving the hemoglobin A1c target of < 7% in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:510–517. doi: 10.2337/dc10-1710. PubMed DOI PMC

de Pablos-Velasco P, Parhofer KG, Bradley C, et al. Current level of glycaemic control and its associated factors in patients with type 2 diabetes across Europe: data from the PANORAMA study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2014;80:47–56. doi: 10.1111/cen.12119. PubMed DOI

Peyrot M, Barnett AH, Meneghini LF, Schumm-Draeger PM. Insulin adherence behaviours and barriers in the multinational global attitudes of patients and physicians in insulin therapy study. Diabet Med. 2012;29:682–689. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03605.x. PubMed DOI PMC

United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Lancet. 1998;352:837–853. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)07019-6. PubMed DOI

Home PD, Boulton AJM, Jimenez J, Landgraf R, Osterbrink B, Christiansen JS. Issues relating to the early or earlier use of insulin in type 2 diabetes. Pract Diabetes Int. 2003;20:63–71. doi: 10.1002/pdi.433. DOI

Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach: position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) Diabetes Care. 2012;35:1364–1379. doi: 10.2337/dc12-0413. PubMed DOI PMC

Dushay J, Abrahamson MJ. Insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes: making it work. J Fam Pract. 2010;59:E1–E8. PubMed

European Medicines Agency. Xultophy® (IDegLira) Summary of product characteristics. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/002647/WC500177657.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Buse JB, Vilsboll T, Thurman J, et al. Contribution of Liraglutide in the fixed-ratio combination of Insulin Degludec and Liraglutide (IDegLira) Diabetes Care. 2014;37:2926–2933. doi: 10.2337/dc14-0785. PubMed DOI

Lingvay I, Manghi FP, Garcia-Hernandez P, et al. Effect of insulin glargine up-titration vs insulin degludec/liraglutide on glycated hemoglobin levels in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: the DUAL V randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315:898–907. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.1252. PubMed DOI

Freemantle N, Mamdani M, Vilsboll T, Kongso JH, Kvist K, Bain SC. IDegLira versus alternative intensification strategies in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin therapy. Diabetes Ther. 2015;6:573–591. doi: 10.1007/s13300-015-0142-y. PubMed DOI PMC

Sassi F. Calculating QALYs, comparing QALY and DALY calculations. Health Policy Plan. 2006;21:402–408. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czl018. PubMed DOI

State Institute for Drug Control (SÚKL). http://www.sukl.cz/. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

State Institute for Drug Control (SÚKL). Reimbursement decision. http://www.sukl.eu/modules/procedures/doc.php?id=167487234. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Hunt B, Glah D, van der Vliet M. Modeling the long-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira in patients with type 2 diabetes who are failing to meet glycemic targets on basal insulin alone in The Netherlands. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8:753–765. doi: 10.1007/s13300-017-0266-3. PubMed DOI PMC

Hunt B, Mocarski M, Valentine WJ, Langer J. IDegLira versus insulin glargine U100: a long-term cost-effectiveness analysis in the US setting. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8:531–544. doi: 10.1007/s13300-017-0251-x. PubMed DOI PMC

McEwan P, Foos V, Palmer JL, Lamotte M, Lloyd A, Grant D. Validation of the IMS CORE diabetes model. Value Health. 2014;17:714–724. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.07.007. PubMed DOI

Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. The CORE Diabetes Model: projecting long-term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes mellitus (types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision-making. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):S5–S26. doi: 10.1185/030079904X1980. PubMed DOI

World Health Organization. Life tables by country. Czech Republic. Available from: http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.692. Accessed May 2015.

State Institute for Drug Control (SÚKL). Health economic guidance for the Czech Republic. http://www.sukl.cz/file/85481_1_1. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Sovinova H, Csemy L. The use of tobacco and alcohol in the Czech Republic 2012. National Institute of Public Health, 2013. http://www.szu.cz/uploads/documents/czzp/zavislosti/TabAlkoAngl.pdf. Accessed May 2015.

Bagust A, Beale S. Modelling EuroQol health-related utility values for diabetic complications from CODE-2 data. Health Econ. 2005;14:217–230. doi: 10.1002/hec.910. PubMed DOI

Clarke P, Gray A, Holman R. Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62) Med Decis Making. 2002;22:340–349. doi: 10.1177/027298902400448902. PubMed DOI

Evans M, Khunti K, Mamdani M, et al. Health-related quality of life associated with daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemic events: a time trade-off survey in five countries. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:90. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-90. PubMed DOI PMC

Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care. 2000;38:583–637. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200006000-00004. PubMed DOI

Currie CJ, Morgan CL, Poole CD, Sharplin P, Lammert M, McEwan P. Multivariate models of health-related utility and the fear of hypoglycaemia in people with diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:1523–1534. doi: 10.1185/030079906X115757. PubMed DOI

Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. Validation of the CORE Diabetes Model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):S27–S40. doi: 10.1185/030079904X2006. PubMed DOI

American Diabetes Association Consensus Panel Guidelines for computer modeling of diabetes and its complications. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:2262–2265. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.9.2262. PubMed DOI

Dias SW, N.J.; Sutton, A.J.; Ades, A.E. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 1: Introduction to evidence synthesis for decision making, 2011; last updated April 2012. http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/TSD1%20Introduction.final.08.05.12.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUNETHTA). Guideline—comparators and comparisons: direct and indirect comparisons. February 2013. https://5026.fedimbo.belgium.be/sites/5026.fedimbo.belgium.be/files/Direct%20and%20indirect%20comparisons.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2017.

Zinman B, Schmidt WE, Moses A, Lund N, Gough S. Achieving a clinically relevant composite outcome of an HbA1c of < 7% without weight gain or hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of the liraglutide clinical trial programme. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14:77–82. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2011.01493.x. PubMed DOI

Aroda V, Jaeckel E, Jarlov H, Abrahamsen T, Vilsbøll T. Incidence of gastrointestinal side effects similar between IDegLira and non-GLP-1 RA comparators. Presented at American Diabetes Association (ADA 2015) 75th Scientific Sessions, June 5–9, Boston, MA, p 1009.

Alves C, Batel-Marques F, Macedo AF. A meta-analysis of serious adverse events reported with exenatide and liraglutide: acute pancreatitis and cancer. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;98:271–284. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2012.09.008. PubMed DOI

Treating Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Uncontrolled on Basal Insulin in the Czech Republic: Cost-Effectiveness of IDegLira Versus iGlarLixi