Dataset Information

Lifetime cost-effectiveness simulation of once-weekly exenatide in type 2 diabetes: A cost-utility analysis based on the EXSCEL trial.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

The Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial assessed once-weekly exenatide (EQW) vs. placebo, added to usual care in 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01144338). We assessed the lifetime cost-effectiveness of adding EQW vs. usual care alone from a healthcare perspective.

Methods

Medical resource use and EQ-5D utilities were collected throughout the study. Within-trial results were extrapolated to a lifetime horizon using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model version 2 (UKPDS-OM2), predicting predict cardiovascular and microvascular events. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated separately for US and UK settings, with outcomes measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

Results

EQW plus usual care gained 0.162 QALYs at an additional cost of $41,545/patient, compared with usual care in a US setting. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $259,223/QALY. In a UK setting, the QALY gain was 0.151 at an additional cost of £6357: an ICER of £42,589/QALY. Sensitivity analyses ranged between $34,369-$269,571 and £3430-£46,560 per QALY gained.

Conclusions

In a lifetime extrapolation, adding EQW to usual care increased QALYs and costs compared with usual care alone. The base-case ICERs exceeded the commonly-cited cost-effectiveness thresholds of $100,000/QALY and £20,000/QALY. However, ICERs were considerably lower in some subgroups, and in sensitivity analyses.

SUBMITTER: Becker F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8844554 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Lifetime cost-effectiveness simulation of once-weekly exenatide in type 2 diabetes: A cost-utility analysis based on the EXSCEL trial.

Becker Frauke F Dakin Helen A HA Reed Shelby D SD Li Yanhong Y Leal José J Gustavson Stephanie M SM Wittbrodt Eric E Hernandez Adrian F AF Gray Alastair M AM Holman Rury R RR

Diabetes research and clinical practice 20211120

<h4>Aims</h4>The Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial assessed once-weekly exenatide (EQW) vs. placebo, added to usual care in 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01144338). We assessed the lifetime cost-effectiveness of adding EQW vs. usual care alone from a healthcare perspective.<h4>Methods</h4>Medical resource use and EQ-5D utilities were collected throughout the study. Within-trial results were extrapolated to a lifetime horizon u ...[more]

PMID: 34813910

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo determine whether there were racial differences in short-term cardiometabolic responses to once-weekly exenatide (EQW) in the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL).MethodsEXSCEL enrolled 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes (hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 6.5-10.0% [48-86 mmol/mol]) with or without cardiovascular disease who were randomized double-blind to EQW or placebo. Background glucose-lowering/other cardiovascular therapies were unaltered for 6 months post-randomization unless clinically essential, facilitating comparison of EQW-associated effects in 14,665 evaluable participants self-identifying as White (n = 11,113), Asian (n = 1444), Black (n = 870), or Other Race (n = 1,238. Placebo-adjusted 6 month absolute changes in cardiometabolic variables were assessed using generalized linear models.ResultsMean 6-month placebo-adjusted HbA1c reductions were similar in the four groups (range 0.54-0.67% [5.9 to 7.3 mmol/mol], P = 0.11 for race×treatment interaction), with no significant difference in Asians (reference) versus other groups after covariate adjustment (all P ≥ 0.10). Six-month placebo-adjusted mean changes in systolic (-1.8 to 0.0 mmHg) and diastolic (0.2 to 1.2 mmHg) blood pressure, serum LDL (- 0.06 to 0.02 mmol/L) and HDL (0.00 to 0.01 mmol/L) cholesterol, and serum triglycerides (-0.1 to 0.0 mmol/L) were similar in the racial groups (P ≥ 0.19 for race×treatment interaction and all P ≥ 0.13 for comparisons of Asians with other races). Resting pulse rate increased more in Asians (4 beats/min) than in other groups (≤ 3 beats/min, P = 0.016 for race×treatment interaction and all P ≤ 0.050 for comparisons of Asians with other races).ConclusionsShort-term cardiometabolic responses to EQW were similar in the main racial groups in EXSCEL, apart from a greater pulse rate increase in Asians.Trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov NCT01144338.

Project description:Introduction: The substantial financial burden associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) over a lifetime cannot be neglected. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacoeconomic value of three once-weekly GLP-1 RAs, namely subcutaneous semaglutide (sc. SEMA), dulaglutide (DULA), and extended-release exenatide (e-r EXEN), in treating patients with T2D that cannot be controlled with metformin-based background therapy, and to find a suitable price reduction for non-cost-effective medications, to provide reasonable recommendations to the administration for adjusting drug prices. Methods: The baseline characteristics of the simulation patient cohort were sourced from a comprehensive meta-analysis synthesizing 453 trials evaluating 21 hypoglycemic agents from nine categories of drugs. The UKPDS OM2 was applied to project the long-term effectiveness and costs from a Chinese health care provider's perspective. After cost-utility analysis, the reasonable price adjustment of non-cost-effective options was explored via binary search. Uncertainty was measured by means of sensitivity analysis. Results: After a 40-year simulation, the sc. SEMA, DULA, and e-r EXEN groups yielded 9.6315, 9.5968, and 9.5895 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively. In terms of expenditure, the total costs for the sc. SEMA, DULA, and e-r EXEN groups were $42012.47, $24931.27, and $40264.80, respectively. DULA was dominant over e-r EXEN due to the higher QALYs and lower total costs. The ICURs of sc. SEMA vs. DULA and sc. SEMA vs. e-r EXEN were $492994.72/QALY and $41622.69/QALY (ICUR > λ), respectively, indicating that sc. SEMA was not more cost-effective than DULA or e-r EXEN. The INMB and absolute NMB yielded the same conclusions which were robust to one-way, scenario, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. After several assumptions in the binary search, sc. SEMA and e-r EXEN appear to become cost-effective when their annual costs are decreased by 57.67% and 70.34%, respectively, with DULA as a counterpart. Conclusion: From the cost-utility analysis, DULA appears to be the most cost-effective option among sc. SEMA, DULA, and e-r EXEN for the treatment of patients with T2D receiving metformin-based background therapy. With a 57.67% or 70.34% reduction in cost, sc. SEMA or e-r EXEN, respectively, would become as cost-effective as DULA in China.

Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic metabolic disease with substantial morbidity, mortality, and economic impacts. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, such as once-daily (QD) liraglutide and once-weekly (QW) exenatide, are FDA-approved treatment for T2DM. Head-to-head trials and meta-analyses comparing these agents have reported clinically meaningful improvements but small differences in glycemic control between both agents. In this study, we calculate and compare the cost-effectiveness implications of these alternative effectiveness outcomes.MethodsWe developed a decision model to evaluate the short-term cost-effectiveness of exenatide QW 2 mg versus liraglutide QD 1.8 mg in T2DM patients, with effectiveness measured as reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). In the base case, the model tracks change in HbA1c and direct medical expenditure over a 6-month time horizon. We calculated and compared the cost per 1% reduction in HbA1c of models populated with clinical data from a head-to-head randomized, controlled trial (DURATION-6) and a network meta-analysis. Expenditure inputs were derived from wholesale acquisition costs and published sources.ResultsIn the base case, 6-month expenditure for the liraglutide and exenatide strategies were $3,509 and $2,618, respectively. Using clinical data from DURATION-6 and the network meta-analysis, the liraglutide strategy had an incremental cost per 1% reduction in HbA1c of $4,773 and $27,179, respectively. The most influential model parameters were drug costs, magnitude of HbA1c reduction in patients on treatment for >1 month, and liraglutide gastrointestinal adverse event rate. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) using DURATION-6 data, the exenatide strategy was optimal at willingness-to-pay levels below $4,800 per 1% reduction in HbA1c. In a PSA using meta-analysis data, the exenatide strategy was dominant.ConclusionsOur modeled results demonstrate that the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of liraglutide QD 1.8 mg relative to exenatide QW 2 mg depend largely on the chosen source of the clinical data.

Project description:Background In the EXSCEL (Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering), exenatide once-weekly resulted in a nonsignificant reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events ( MACEs ) and a nominal 14% reduction in all-cause mortality in 14 752 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2 DM ) with and without cardiovascular disease. Whether patients at increased risk for events experienced a comparatively greater treatment benefit with exenatide is unknown. Methods and Results In the EXSCEL population, we created risk scores for MACEs and all-cause mortality using step-wise selection of baseline characteristics. A risk score was calculated for each patient, and a time-to-event model for each end point was developed including the risk score, treatment assignment, and risk-treatment interaction. Interaction P values evaluating for a differential treatment effect by baseline risk were reported. Over a median follow-up of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2, 4.4), 1091 (7.4%) patients died and 1744 (11.8%) experienced a MACE . Independent predictors of MACEs and all-cause mortality included age, sex, comorbidities (eg, previous cardiovascular event), body mass index, blood pressure, hemoglobin A1c, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. The all-cause mortality and MACE risk models had modest discrimination with optimism-corrected c-indices of 0.73 and 0.71, respectively. No interaction was observed between treatment effect and risk profile for either end point (both interactions, P>0.1). Conclusions Baseline characteristics (eg, age, previous cardiovascular events) and routine laboratory values (eg, hemoglobin A1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate) provided modest prognostic value for mortality and MACEs in a broad population of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Exenatide's effects on mortality and MACEs were consistent across the spectrum of baseline risk. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 01144338.

Project description:BackgroundThe cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown.MethodsWe randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy.ResultsIn all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionsAmong patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo. (Funded by Amylin Pharmaceuticals; EXSCEL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01144338 .).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Once-weekly exenatide (EQW) had a neutral effect on hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in the EXSCEL study (Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering), with no differential treatment effect on major adverse cardiac events by baseline heart failure (HF) status. EQW's effects on secondary end points based on HHF status have not been reported. The objective was to explore the effects of EQW on secondary end points in patients with and without baseline HF and test the effects of EQW on recurrent HHF events. METHODS:The prespecified analysis of the randomized controlled EXSCEL trial, which enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with and without additional cardiovascular disease, analyzed EQW effects on all-cause death, each major adverse cardiac event component, first HHF, and repeat HHF, by baseline HF status (regardless of ejection fraction). A subgroup analysis of the population stratified by preserved or reduced baseline ejection fraction was performed. RESULTS:Of 14 752 EXSCEL participants, 2389 (16.2%) had HF at baseline. Compared with those without HF at baseline, patients with preexisting HF were older, and more likely to be male and white, with a higher burden of other cardiovascular diseases. Overall, those assigned to EQW had a lower incidence of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.77-0.97]) and the composite outcome of all-cause death or HHF (HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.80-0.99]). When stratified by presence or absence of baseline HF, there was no observed reduction in all-cause death with EQW with baseline HF (HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.85-1.29]), while the risk of mortality was reduced with EQW in the no-HF group (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.68-0.92]) with an interaction P value of 0.031. The reduction in all-cause death or HHF seen with EQW in patients without baseline HF (HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.71-0.93]) was not seen in patients with baseline HF (HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.89-1.29]; interaction P=0.015). First, plus recurrent, HHF was reduced in the exenatide group versus placebo (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68-0.99]; P=0.038). CONCLUSIONS:In EXSCEL, the use of EQW in patients with or without HF was well tolerated, but benefits of EQW on reduction in all-cause death and first hospitalization for HF were attenuated in patients with baseline HF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01144338.

Dataset Information

Lifetime cost-effectiveness simulation of once-weekly exenatide in type 2 diabetes: A cost-utility analysis based on the EXSCEL trial.

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Lifetime cost-effectiveness simulation of once-weekly exenatide in type 2 diabetes: A cost-utility analysis based on the EXSCEL trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets