Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The cost-effectiveness of lifestyle modification or metformin in preventing type 2 diabetes in adults with impaired glucose tolerance.

BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) demonstrated that interventions can delay or prevent the development of type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the lifetime cost-utility of the DPP interventions.

DESIGN: Markov simulation model to estimate progression of disease, costs, and quality of life.

DATA SOURCES: The DPP and published reports.

TARGET POPULATION: Members of the DPP cohort 25 years of age or older with impaired glucose tolerance.


PERSPECTIVES: Health system and societal.

INTERVENTIONS: Intensive lifestyle, metformin, and placebo interventions as implemented in the DPP.

OUTCOME MEASURES: Cumulative incidence of diabetes, microvascular and neuropathic complications, cardiovascular complications, survival, direct medical and direct nonmedical costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and cost per QALY.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Compared with the placebo intervention, the lifestyle and metformin interventions were estimated to delay the development of type 2 diabetes by 11 and 3 years, respectively, and to reduce the absolute incidence of diabetes by 20% and 8%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of microvascular, neuropathic, and cardiovascular complications were reduced and survival was improved by 0.5 and 0.2 years. Compared with the placebo intervention, the cost per QALY was approximately 1100 dollars for the lifestyle intervention and $31 300 for the metformin intervention. From a societal perspective, the interventions cost approximately 8800 dollars and 29,900 dollars per QALY, respectively. From both perspectives, the lifestyle intervention dominated the metformin intervention.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Cost-effectiveness improved when the interventions were implemented as they might be in routine clinical practice. The lifestyle intervention was cost-effective in all age groups. The metformin intervention did not represent good use of resources for persons older than 65 years of age.

LIMITATIONS: Simulation results depend on the accuracy of the underlying assumptions, including participant adherence.

CONCLUSIONS: Health policy should promote diabetes prevention in high-risk individuals.

Full text links

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Group 7SearchHeart failure treatmentPapersTopicsCollectionsEffects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for the Treatment of Patients With Heart Failure Importance: Only 1 class of glucose-lowering agents-sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors-has been reported to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events primarily by reducingSeptember 1, 2017: JAMA CardiologyAssociations of albuminuria in patients with chronic heart failure: findings in the ALiskiren Observation of heart Failure Treatment study.CONCLUSIONS: Increased UACR is common in patients with heart failure, including non-diabetics. Urinary albumin creatininineJul, 2011: European Journal of Heart FailureRandomized Controlled TrialEffects of Liraglutide on Clinical Stability Among Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Review

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app