Automated Insulin Delivery Versus Standard of Care in the Management of People Living with Type 1 Diabetes and HbA1c <8%: A Cost-Utility Analysis in The Netherlands.

IF 5.7 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Diabetes technology & therapeutics Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1089/dia.2024.0647
Erik H Serné, Maria Ida Buompensiere, Simona de Portu, Jayne Smith-Palmer, Johannes Pöhlmann, Ohad Cohen
{"title":"Automated Insulin Delivery Versus Standard of Care in the Management of People Living with Type 1 Diabetes and HbA1c <8%: A Cost-Utility Analysis in The Netherlands.","authors":"Erik H Serné, Maria Ida Buompensiere, Simona de Portu, Jayne Smith-Palmer, Johannes Pöhlmann, Ohad Cohen","doi":"10.1089/dia.2024.0647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems improve glycemic control in people living with type 1 diabetes (PwT1D). AID is cost-effective versus other management approaches in a range of country settings and populations. This cost-utility analysis adds an evaluation of the MiniMed<sup>TM</sup> 780G system versus standard of care (SoC) in PwT1D and baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level <8% not reaching glycemic targets, conducted from a societal perspective in The Netherlands. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The analysis was run using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model, over 50 years. Costs were discounted at 3% per year, effects at 1.5% per year. Baseline cohort characteristics and treatment effects were sourced from the MiniMed 780G arm of a prospective multicenter study. Costs and utility estimates were taken from Dutch databases and published sources. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to address uncertainty. <b><i>Results:</i></b> AID improved life expectancy by 0.52 years and quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.99 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) versus SoC. AID was associated with an incremental combined cost of EUR 28,635 due to higher acquisition costs, which were partially offset by reduced direct treatment costs for diabetes-related complications and reduced indirect costs due to less time off work. Based on combined costs, the MiniMed 780G system was associated with an incremental cost-utility ratio of EUR 29,836 per QALY gained. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> For PwT1D in The Netherlands, who had a baseline HbA1c <8% and do not reach glycemic targets, AID system initiation was projected to improve long-term clinical outcomes and reduce both direct costs for the treatment of diabetes-related complications and productivity losses. From a societal perspective, the MiniMed 780G likely represents good value for money in The Netherlands.</p>","PeriodicalId":11159,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes technology & therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes technology & therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2024.0647","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems improve glycemic control in people living with type 1 diabetes (PwT1D). AID is cost-effective versus other management approaches in a range of country settings and populations. This cost-utility analysis adds an evaluation of the MiniMedTM 780G system versus standard of care (SoC) in PwT1D and baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level <8% not reaching glycemic targets, conducted from a societal perspective in The Netherlands. Methods: The analysis was run using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model, over 50 years. Costs were discounted at 3% per year, effects at 1.5% per year. Baseline cohort characteristics and treatment effects were sourced from the MiniMed 780G arm of a prospective multicenter study. Costs and utility estimates were taken from Dutch databases and published sources. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to address uncertainty. Results: AID improved life expectancy by 0.52 years and quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.99 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) versus SoC. AID was associated with an incremental combined cost of EUR 28,635 due to higher acquisition costs, which were partially offset by reduced direct treatment costs for diabetes-related complications and reduced indirect costs due to less time off work. Based on combined costs, the MiniMed 780G system was associated with an incremental cost-utility ratio of EUR 29,836 per QALY gained. Conclusions: For PwT1D in The Netherlands, who had a baseline HbA1c <8% and do not reach glycemic targets, AID system initiation was projected to improve long-term clinical outcomes and reduce both direct costs for the treatment of diabetes-related complications and productivity losses. From a societal perspective, the MiniMed 780G likely represents good value for money in The Netherlands.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
引言胰岛素自动给药系统(AID)可改善 1 型糖尿病患者(PwT1D)的血糖控制。与其他管理方法相比,自动胰岛素给药系统在不同国家和人群中都具有成本效益。本成本效用分析增加了对 MiniMedTM 780G 系统与标准护理(SoC)在 PwT1D 和基线糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)水平方法中的对比评估:使用 IQVIA CORE 糖尿病模型进行了 50 年的分析。成本折现率为每年 3%,效果折现率为每年 1.5%。基线队列特征和治疗效果来自一项前瞻性多中心研究的 MiniMed 780G 部分。成本和效用估计值来自荷兰数据库和公开资料。针对不确定性进行了敏感性分析。研究结果AID 与 SoC 相比,预期寿命延长了 0.52 年,质量调整后预期寿命延长了 0.99 个质量调整寿命年 (QALY)。由于购置成本较高,AID 的综合成本增加了 28,635 欧元,但由于糖尿病相关并发症的直接治疗成本降低以及因停工时间减少而导致的间接成本降低,部分抵消了购置成本的增加。根据综合成本计算,MiniMed 780G 系统每获得 1 QALY 的增量成本效用比为 29,836 欧元。结论对于基线 HbA1c
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diabetes technology & therapeutics
Diabetes technology & therapeutics 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
14.80%
发文量
145
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics is the only peer-reviewed journal providing healthcare professionals with information on new devices, drugs, drug delivery systems, and software for managing patients with diabetes. This leading international journal delivers practical information and comprehensive coverage of cutting-edge technologies and therapeutics in the field, and each issue highlights new pharmacological and device developments to optimize patient care.
期刊最新文献
Accuracy of the 15.5-Day G7 iCGM in Adults with Diabetes. Automated Insulin Delivery Versus Standard of Care in the Management of People Living with Type 1 Diabetes and HbA1c <8%: A Cost-Utility Analysis in The Netherlands. Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in Youth with Type 2 Diabetes: A Pilot Randomized Study. Use of Glucose Monitoring Devices Among Adults with Diabetes in Germany: Results from Nationwide Surveys Conducted in 2017 and 2021/2022. Accuracy of Two Continuous Glucose Monitors Differs after Hydroxyurea in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Total Pancreatectomy with Islet Autotransplantation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1