Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Mar;29(3):313-20.
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03429.x.

Cost-utility analysis of liraglutide compared with sulphonylurea or sitagliptin, all as add-on to metformin monotherapy in Type 2 diabetes mellitus

M J Davies  1 , B D Chubb, I C Smith, W J Valentine
Affiliations
Free PMC article
Comparative Study

Cost-utility analysis of liraglutide compared with sulphonylurea or sitagliptin, all as add-on to metformin monotherapy in Type 2 diabetes mellitus

M J Davies et al. Diabet Med. 2012 Mar.
Free PMC article

Abstract

Aim: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of liraglutide as add-on to metformin vs. glimepiride or sitagliptin in patients with Type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with first-line metformin.

Methods: Data were sourced from a clinical trial comparing liraglutide vs. glimepiride, both in combination with metformin, and a clinical trial comparing liraglutide vs. sitagliptin, both as add-on to metformin. Only the subgroup of patients in whom liraglutide was added to metformin monotherapy was included in the cost-utility analysis. The CORE Diabetes Model was used to simulate outcomes and costs with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg vs. glimepiride and vs. sitagliptin over patients' lifetimes. Treatment effects were taken directly from the trials. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5% per annum and costs were accounted from a third-party payer (UK National Health System) perspective.

Results: Treatment with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg resulted, respectively, in mean increases in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.32 ± 0.15 and 0.28 ± 0.14 quality-adjusted life years vs. glimepiride, and 0.19 ± 0.15 and 0.31 ± 0.15 quality-adjusted life years vs. sitagliptin, and was associated with higher costs of £ 3003 ± £ 678 and £ 4688 ± £ 639 vs. glimepiride, and £ 1842 ± £ 751 and £ 3224 ± £ 683 vs. sitagliptin, over a patient's lifetime. Both liraglutide doses were cost-effective, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £ 9449 and £ 16,501 per quality-adjusted life year gained vs. glimepiride, and £ 9851 and £ 10,465 per quality-adjusted life year gained vs. sitagliptin, respectively.

Conclusions: Liraglutide, added to metformin monotherapy, is a cost-effective option for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes in a UK setting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve of liraglutide vs. glimepiride, base case. QALY, quality-adjusted life year.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve of liraglutide vs. sitagliptin, base case. QALY, quality-adjusted life year.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organization. Diabetes. Fact sheet no. 312. 2009. Available at http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs312/en/ Last accessed 14 January 2011.
    1. Williams R, Van Gaal L, Lucioni C. Assessing the impact of complications on the costs of type II diabetes. Diabetologia. 2002;45:S13–S17. - PubMed
    1. Koopmanschap M. Coping with type II diabetes: the patient’s perspective. Diabetologia. 2002;45:S18–S22. - PubMed
    1. National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions. Type 2 Diabetes: National Clinical Guideline for Management in Primary and Secondary Care (update) London: Royal College of Physicians; 2008. - PubMed
    1. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil HAW, Matthews DR, Manley SE, Cull CA, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. Br Med J. 2000;321:405–412. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms