Cost-effectiveness of the tandem t: Slim X2 with control-IQ technology automated insulin delivery system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in Sweden.
ICER
QALY
automated insulin delivery
cost‐effectiveness
type 1 diabetes
Journal
Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association
ISSN: 1464-5491
Titre abrégé: Diabet Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8500858
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Sep 2024
06 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
06
08
2024
received:
27
12
2023
accepted:
21
08
2024
medline:
6
9
2024
pubmed:
6
9
2024
entrez:
6
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The present analysis estimated the cost-effectiveness of treatment with the Tandem t: slim X2 insulin pump with Control IQ technology (CIQ) in children with type 1 diabetes in Sweden. A four-state Markov model and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of CIQ use compared with treatment with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in conjunction with CGM. Data sources included clinical input data from a recent retrospective, observational study, cost data from local diabetes supply companies and government agencies, and published literature. Outcomes measures were quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at 10, 20 and 30-year time horizons based on cost per QALY and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A total of 84 type 1 diabetes children were included (CIQ, n = 37; MDI, n = 19; CSII, n = 28). For all time horizons, the use of CIQ was a dominant strategy (e.g. more effective and less costly) compared with MDI or CSII use: 10-year ICER, SEK -88,010.37 and SEK -91,723.92; 20-year ICER, SEK -72,095.33 and SEK -87,707.79; and 30-year ICER, SEK -65,573.01 and SEK -85,495.68, respectively. PSA confirmed that CIQ use was less costly compared with MDI and CSII. Initiation of CIQ use in children with type 1 diabetes is cost-saving, besides previously shown improved glycaemic control, and increased quality of life. Further investigations are needed to more fully elucidate the cost-effectiveness of these technologies in different countries with existing differences in payment models.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e15432Subventions
Organisme : This work was supported by research support from external funds: Sparbankstiftelsen, and fundings from Scientific Council in Region Halland, and an unrestricted grant from Rubin Medical AB, Sweden. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation or writing of the report.
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.
Références
International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas, 10th Ed. Brussels, International Diabetes Federation, 2021. Accessed January 31, 2023. https://diabetesatlas.org.
Prigge R, McKnight JA, Wild SH, et al. International comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes: an update and extension. Diabet Med. 2021;10:e14766. doi:10.1111/dme.14766
Wood JR, Miller KM, Maahs DM, et al. Most youth with type 1 diabetes in the T1D exchange clinic registry do not meet American Diabetes Association or International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent clinical guidelines. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:2035‐2037.
Galler A, Tittel SR, Baumeister H, et al. Worse glycemic control, higher rates of diabetic ketoacidosis, and more hospitalizations in children, adolescents, and young adults with type 1 diabetes and anxiety disorders. Pediatr Diabetes. 2021;22:519‐528. doi:10.1111/pedi.13177
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group, Nathan DM, Genuth S, et al. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long‐term complications of insulin‐dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977‐986.
Phillip M, Nimri R, Bergenstal RM, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of automated insulin delivery technologies in clinical practice. Endocr Rev. 2023;44(2):254‐280. doi:10.1210/endrev/bnac022
Adolfsson P, Björnsson V, Ogionwo‐Langhe E, Fredlund J, Holmgren A. Long‐term outcomes on glucose control, sleep, and health economy after implementation of tandem control IQ in a pediatric population. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2022;24(Suppl 1):EP33.
Adolfsson P. Long‐term glycemic and psychosocial benefits of t:slim X2 insulin pump with control‐IQ technology. Hybrid 58th EASD annual meeting; September 19‐23, 2022; Stocholm, Sweden.
Adolfsson P, Björnsson V, Heringhaus A, Sjunnesson K. A prospective controlled study evaluating the long‐term outcomes on glucose control, sleep, and health economy after implementation of tandem control‐IQ Technology in a Pediatric Population with relatively good glucose control already At start. Poster Presented at 15th Annual International Conference on Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD); April 27‐30, 2022; Barcelona, Spain.
Forlenza GP, Ekhlaspour L, Breton M, et al. Successful At‐home use of the tandem control‐IQ artificial pancreas system in young children during a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(4):159‐169. doi:10.1089/dia.2019.0011
Ekhlaspour L, Forlenza GP, Chernavvsky D, et al. Closed loop control in adolescents and children during winter sports: use of the tandem control‐IQ AP system. Pediatr Diabetes. 2019;20:759‐768. doi:10.1111/pedi.12867
Messer LH, Berget C, Ernst A, Towers L, Slover RH, Forlenza GP. Initiating hybrid closed loop: a program evaluation of an educator‐led control‐IQ follow‐up at a large pediatric clinic. Pediatr Diabetes. 2021;22(4):586‐593. doi:10.1111/pedi.13183
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Office of Policy, Performance, and Evaluation. Economic Evaluation Overview. Accessed April 18, 2024. https://www.cdc.gov/policy/polaris/economics/index.html#:~:text=Public%20health%20professionals%20can%20use,of%20different%20public%20health%20interventions
Svensson M, Nilsson F. TLV:s betalningsvilja för nya läkemedel har analyserats—Kostnadseffektivitet och sjukdomens svårighetsgrad avgörande för subvention—cancerläkemedel får kosta mer [the Swedish dental and pharmaceutical benefits Agency's willingness to pay for new drugs has been analyzed]. Lakartidningen. 2016;113:DX44.
Gumbie M, Olin E, Parkinson B, Bowman R, Cutler H. The cost‐effectiveness of Cochlear implants in Swedish adults. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):319. doi:10.1186/s12913-021-06271-0
Lee JM, Rhee K, O'grady MJ, et al. Health utilities for children and adults with type 1 diabetes. Med Care 2011 49(10):924–931. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318216592c
Evans M, Khunti K, Mamdani M, et al. Health‐related quality of life associated with daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemic events: a time trade‐off survey in five countries. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;3(11):90. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-11-90
Drummond ME, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press; 2005.
van den Hout WB. The value of productivity: human‐capital versus friction‐cost method. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(Suppl 1):89‐91.
Konjunkturinstituet The National Institute of Economic Research (NIER). Accessed May 30, 2023. https://www.konj.se
Svensson M, Nilsson FOL, Arnberg K. Reimbursement decisions for Pharmaceuticals in Sweden: the impact of disease severity and cost effectiveness. PharmacoEconomics. 2015;33:1229‐1236. doi:10.1007/s40273-015-0307-6
Jendle J, Buompensiere MI, Holm AL, de Portu S, Malkin SJP, Cohen O. The cost‐effectiveness of an advanced hybrid closed‐loop system in people with type 1 diabetes: a health economic analysis in Sweden. Diabetes Ther. 2021;12(11):2977‐2991. doi:10.1007/s13300-021-01157-0
Bianchi C, Miccoli R, Del Prato S. Hyperglycemia and vascular metabolic memory: truth or fiction? Curr Diab Rep. 2013;13(3):403‐410. doi:10.1007/s11892-013-0371-2
Lachin JM, Ionut Bebu I, Nathan DM, DCCT/EDIC Research Group. The beneficial effects of earlier versus later implementation of intensive therapy in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2021;44(10):dc211331. doi:10.2337/dc21-1331
Kim KJ, Choi J, Bae JH, et al. Time to reach target glycosylated hemoglobin is associated with long‐term durable glycemic control and risk of diabetic complications in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 6‐year observational study. Diabetes Metab J. 2021;45(3):368‐378. doi:10.4093/dmj.2020.0046
Hu S, Yang H, Chen Z, et al. Clinical outcome and cost‐effectiveness analysis of CSII versus MDI in children and adolescent with type 1 diabetes mellitus in a public health care system of China. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021;30(12):604028. doi:10.3389/fendo.2021.604028
St Charles M, Lynch P, Graham C, Minshall ME. A cost‐effectiveness analysis of continuous subcutaneous insulin injection versus multiple daily injections in type 1 diabetes patients: a third‐party US payer perspective. Value Health. 2009;12(5):674‐686. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00478.x
Battelino T, Danne T, Bergenstal RM, et al. Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: recommendations from the international consensus on time in range. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1593‐1603.
Speight J, Holmes‐Truscott E, Singh H, Little S, Shaw JAM. Development and psychometric validation of the novel glucose monitoring experiences questionnaire among adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(12):691‐701. doi:10.1089/dia.2019.0189
Hafner M, Stepanek M, Taylor J, Troxel WM, van Stolk C. Why sleep matters‐the economic costs of insufficient sleep: a cross‐country comparative analysis. Rand Health Q. 2017;6(4):11.
de Mattos ACMT, Campos YS, Fiorini VO, et al. Relationship between sleep disturbances, lipid profile and insulin sensitivity in type 1 diabetic patients: a cross‐sectional study. Arch Endocrinol Metab. 2020;64(4):412‐417.