OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pioglitazone versus placebo, given in addition to existing treatment regimens, in patients with type 2 diabetes and evidence of macrovascular disease in Switzerland. METHODS: Event rates corresponding to macrovascular outcomes from the PROactive (Prospective Pioglitazone Clinical Trial in Macrovascular Events) trial of pioglitazone were used to project long-term clinical outcomes as part of a modified version of the previously validated CORE Diabetes Model. Direct medical costs associated with treatment regimens, complications and patient management were accounted in 2005 values based on Swiss-specific unit costs. Time horizon was set to lifetime (35 years). Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at 2.5% annually in line with Swiss recommendations. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Addition of pioglitazone was associated with a reduced incidence of most diabetes-related complications, improved life expectancy (0.258 years) and improved quality-adjusted life expectancy (0.180 QALYs) compared with placebo. Pioglitazone treatment increased direct costs by CHF 10,914 per patient over a lifetime horizon. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pioglitazone versus placebo was CHF 42,274 per life-year gained and CHF 60,596 per QALY gained. ICERs were sensitive to variation in time horizon and duration of pioglitazone treatment effects. With a willingness to pay of CHF 80,000 per QALY in the Swiss setting, there was a 62.5% chance that pioglitazone would be cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of pioglitazone to existing therapy was projected to reduce the long-term cumulative incidence of most diabetes complications and improve quality-adjusted life expectancy. Evaluation of incremental direct medical costs associated with these clinical benefits indicated that pioglitazone is likely to be a cost-effective treatment option in the Swiss setting over patient lifetimes.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pioglitazone versus placebo, given in addition to existing treatment regimens, in patients with type 2 diabetes and evidence of macrovascular disease in Switzerland. METHODS: Event rates corresponding to macrovascular outcomes from the PROactive (Prospective Pioglitazone Clinical Trial in Macrovascular Events) trial of pioglitazone were used to project long-term clinical outcomes as part of a modified version of the previously validated CORE Diabetes Model. Direct medical costs associated with treatment regimens, complications and patient management were accounted in 2005 values based on Swiss-specific unit costs. Time horizon was set to lifetime (35 years). Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at 2.5% annually in line with Swiss recommendations. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Addition of pioglitazone was associated with a reduced incidence of most diabetes-related complications, improved life expectancy (0.258 years) and improved quality-adjusted life expectancy (0.180 QALYs) compared with placebo. Pioglitazone treatment increased direct costs by CHF 10,914 per patient over a lifetime horizon. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pioglitazone versus placebo was CHF 42,274 per life-year gained and CHF 60,596 per QALY gained. ICERs were sensitive to variation in time horizon and duration of pioglitazone treatment effects. With a willingness to pay of CHF 80,000 per QALY in the Swiss setting, there was a 62.5% chance that pioglitazone would be cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of pioglitazone to existing therapy was projected to reduce the long-term cumulative incidence of most diabetes complications and improve quality-adjusted life expectancy. Evaluation of incremental direct medical costs associated with these clinical benefits indicated that pioglitazone is likely to be a cost-effective treatment option in the Swiss setting over patient lifetimes.
Authors: Xinyang Hua; Thomas Wai-Chun Lung; Andrew Palmer; Lei Si; William H Herman; Philip Clarke Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 4.981