Cost-Utility Analysis of Semaglutide for type 2 diabetes after its Addition to the National Medical Insurance System in China.

INTRODUCTION: The main research purpose is to compare the long-term cost effective of semaglutide (SEMA) with that of dulaglutide (DULA) for patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes throughout their lifetime. If necessary, the second aim is to investigate a further price cut for SEMA to provide sound advice for government drug price adjustments.

METHODS: Cost-utility analysis was performed by the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model 2 (UKPDS OM2) from the perspective of healthcare providers in China. Baseline characteristics and clinical efficacy of SEMA and DULA were sourced from the high-dose comparison in the SUSTAIN-7 trial. Binary search was used to identify room for further reduction in the price of SEMA. The impact of individual parameters was assessed with sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS: Main analysis (SEMA vs. DULA) revealed a mean diffidence in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 0.04 QALYs and costs of $1132.29. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was $26957.44/QALY, demonstrating that SEMA was a better option compared with DULA. In sensitivity analyses, the discount rate made the greatest contribution to ICUR. In the binary search, there was still room to further reduce the SEMA cost by approximately 6.83% to be very cost-effective, taking DULA as a reference.

CONCLUSION: After its addition to the National Medical Insurance System in China, SEMA is expected to be a cost-effective choice compared with DULA for type 2 diabetes patients with inadequately controlled from the cost-utility analysis. However, there is still room to further reduce the annual cost of SEMA. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.