A PHARMACOECONOMIC EVALUATION FOR DIABETES TYPE 2 (DM 2) WITH INHIBITORS OF DIPEPTIDYL PEPTIDASE-4 (DPP-4) AND THIAZOLIDINEDIONES (TZD) IN MONOTHERAPY
Author(s)
Jos Manuel Celaya, MD, Medical Advisor Cardiovascular & Metabolism1, F. Fon, MD, Medical Advisor1, Clotilde Ayala, MSc, Researcher2, Oscar Antunez, MSc, Medical adviser3, Fernando Garcia-Contreras, MSc, MD41Novartis, Mexico City, Mexico; 2 Epieconomics Research, Mexico City, DF, Mexico; 3 Novartis, Mexico, DF, Mexico; 4 Mexican Institute of Social Security, México, Distrito Federal, Mexico
OBJECTIVES: The inhibitors of the DPP-4 has been shown to enhance the physiological effects of incretin hormones such as glucagone-like peptide and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide thereby increasing ƒÑ-cells and £]-cells sensitivity to glucose. The objective of the study is comparing the cost-effectiveness ratios, between vildagliptin 100mg, sitagliptin 100 mg, rosiglitazone 8mg and pioglitazone 30mg. METHODS: A meta-analysis of published rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, sitagliptin and vildagliptin trials were performed the effectiveness were obtained by means of a fit put-analysis according to the basal one of HbA1c of 9%. A decision analytic model with a decision tree with Bayesian approach was developed. Cost-effectiveness analysis was made. Resources utilization included emergency room patients, outpatients and hospital inpatients services, drugs, etc. Data were obtained from hospital records. The information was validated by an expert panel. The unit costs were gotten from the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS). The perspective was from IMSS. Analysis was conducted on a 12 month period and discounting rate was not used. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and incremental net benefits were obtained. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed and acceptability curves were constructed. RESULTS: The lower expected cost was with vildagliptin US$9176, while higher expected cost was with pioglitazone US$12,002, the lowest cost per succesfull unit was the one based on vildagliptin US$8,342, while the highest was the one based on sitagliptin US $16,718. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) analyses show that vildagliptin was a dominant alternative over sitagliptin, pioglitazone and rosiglitazone. The incremental net benefits were higher for vildaglitin strategy in independent way to willingness to pay. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Vildagliptin 100mg dominant is the dominant alternative as monotherapy over sitagliptin, rosiglitazone y pioglitazone in type 2 diabetic patients.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2007-10, ISPOR Europe 2007, Dublin, Ireland
Value in Health, Vol. 10, No. 6 (November/December 2007)
Code
PDB4
Topic
Clinical Outcomes
Topic Subcategory
Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy
Disease
Diabetes/Endocrine/Metabolic Disorders