Evaluation of the Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitor versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in People with Type 1 Diabetes in Canada.
Canada
cost-effectiveness
real-time continuous glucose monitoring
type 1 diabetes
Journal
ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR
ISSN: 1178-6981
Titre abrégé: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101560564
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
27
05
2021
accepted:
28
07
2021
entrez:
19
8
2021
pubmed:
20
8
2021
medline:
20
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) system is one of the most sophisticated RT-CGM systems developed to date and became available in Canada in 2019. A health economic analysis was performed to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 RT-CGM system versus SMBG in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in Canada. The analysis was performed using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model. Based on clinical trial data, patients with mean baseline HbA1c of 8.6% were assumed to have a HbA1c reduction of 1.0% with RT-CGM versus 0.4% reduction with SMBG. RT-CGM was also associated with a quality of life (QoL) benefit owing to reduced incidence of hypoglycemia, reduced fear of hypoglycemia (FoH) and elimination of fingerstick testing. Direct medical costs were sourced from published literature, and inflated to 2019 Canadian dollars (CAD). Dexcom G6 RT-CGM was projected to improve mean quality-adjusted life expectancy by 2.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) relative to SMBG (15.52 versus 13.43 QALYs) but mean total lifetime cots were CAD 35,353 higher with RT-CGM (CAD 227,357 versus CAD 192,004) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD 16,931 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that assumptions relating to the QoL benefit associated with reduced FoH and the elimination of fingerstick testing with RT-CGM as well as SMBG usage and change in HbA1c were the key drivers of cost-effectiveness. For adults with T1D in Canada, RT-CGM is associated with improved glycemic control and QoL benefits owing to a reduced FoH and elimination of the requirement for fingerstick testing and over a lifetime time horizon is cost-effective relative to SMBG.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) system is one of the most sophisticated RT-CGM systems developed to date and became available in Canada in 2019. A health economic analysis was performed to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 RT-CGM system versus SMBG in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in Canada.
METHODS
METHODS
The analysis was performed using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model. Based on clinical trial data, patients with mean baseline HbA1c of 8.6% were assumed to have a HbA1c reduction of 1.0% with RT-CGM versus 0.4% reduction with SMBG. RT-CGM was also associated with a quality of life (QoL) benefit owing to reduced incidence of hypoglycemia, reduced fear of hypoglycemia (FoH) and elimination of fingerstick testing. Direct medical costs were sourced from published literature, and inflated to 2019 Canadian dollars (CAD).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Dexcom G6 RT-CGM was projected to improve mean quality-adjusted life expectancy by 2.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) relative to SMBG (15.52 versus 13.43 QALYs) but mean total lifetime cots were CAD 35,353 higher with RT-CGM (CAD 227,357 versus CAD 192,004) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD 16,931 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that assumptions relating to the QoL benefit associated with reduced FoH and the elimination of fingerstick testing with RT-CGM as well as SMBG usage and change in HbA1c were the key drivers of cost-effectiveness.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
For adults with T1D in Canada, RT-CGM is associated with improved glycemic control and QoL benefits owing to a reduced FoH and elimination of the requirement for fingerstick testing and over a lifetime time horizon is cost-effective relative to SMBG.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34408456
doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S304395
pii: 304395
pmc: PMC8366033
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
717-725Informations de copyright
© 2021 Roze et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
PL is a current employee of Dexcom, which manufactures the G6 RT-CGM system. SR and JJI are current employees of HEVA HEOR, which has received consulting fees from Dexcom. JSP is a current employee of Ossian Health Economics and Communications, which has received consulting fees from Dexcom. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.
Références
J Med Econ. 2017 Nov;20(11):1128-1135
pubmed: 28745578
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Feb;21(2):81-85
pubmed: 30575414
Value Health. 2014 Sep;17(6):714-24
pubmed: 25236995
Diabetes Care. 2013 Jul;36(7):2009-14
pubmed: 23378621
Can J Diabetes. 2018 Apr;42 Suppl 1:S104-S108
pubmed: 29650081
Can J Diabetes. 2018 Apr;42 Suppl 1:S80-S87
pubmed: 29650115
Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Aug;22(8):1523-34
pubmed: 16870077
JAMA. 2017 Jan 24;317(4):371-378
pubmed: 28118453
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018 Aug;20(8):561-565
pubmed: 30044123
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 Jun 03;11:90
pubmed: 23731777
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020 Oct;22(10):768-776
pubmed: 32167394
Diabetes Care. 2020 Jan;43(1):37-43
pubmed: 31530663
Can J Diabetes. 2018 Feb;42(1):11-17
pubmed: 28528246
Value Health. 2014 Jun;17(4):462-70
pubmed: 24969008
Diabetes Ther. 2017 Aug;8(4):947-951
pubmed: 28616804
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017 Jun;19(S3):S25-S37
pubmed: 28585879
Clin Ther. 2014 Nov 1;36(11):1576-87
pubmed: 25151573
Value Health. 2013 Dec;16(8):1140-9
pubmed: 24326167
J Med Econ. 2011;14(5):646-55
pubmed: 21854191
Value Health. 2017 Mar;20(3):507-511
pubmed: 28292497
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Mar;21(3):128-132
pubmed: 30681379
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2018 Feb 21;18(2):1-160
pubmed: 29541282
Diabetes Care. 2017 Jun;40(6):736-741
pubmed: 28389582
J Diabetes Complications. 2016 Jan-Feb;30(1):167-77
pubmed: 26439754
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Apr;21(4):155-158
pubmed: 30896290
Can J Diabetes. 2018 Dec;42(6):659-663
pubmed: 29885881
Curr Med Res Opin. 2004 Aug;20 Suppl 1:S5-26
pubmed: 15324513
Curr Med Res Opin. 2004 Aug;20 Suppl 1:S27-40
pubmed: 15324514
Can J Diabetes. 2018 Apr;42 Suppl 1:S150-S153
pubmed: 29650088
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017 May;11(3):522-528
pubmed: 28745091
J Diabetes Res. 2020 Feb 6;2020:5817074
pubmed: 32090120
Can J Diabetes. 2018 Apr;42 Suppl 1:S47-S53
pubmed: 29650111