scholarly journals Long-term Cost-Effectiveness of Dexcom G6 Real-time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes in the U.K.

Diabetes Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 2411-2417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Roze ◽  
John Isitt ◽  
Jayne Smith-Palmer ◽  
Mehdi Javanbakht ◽  
Peter Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Self Monitoring

scholarly journals Long-term Cost-Effectiveness of Dexcom G6 Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes in the U.K.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Roze ◽  
John Isitt ◽  
Jayne Smith-Palmer ◽  
Mehdi Javanbakht ◽  
Peter Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Baseline Hba1c ◽  
Self Monitoring ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life

<b>Objective</b> <p>A long-term health economic analysis was performed to establish the cost-effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) (Dexcom G6) versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) alone in UK-based patients with type 1 diabetes. </p> <p><b>Methods</b></p> <p>The analysis utilized the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model. Clinical input data were sourced from the DIAMOND trial in adults with type 1 diabetes; simulations were performed separately in the overall population of patients with baseline HbA1c ≥7.5% (58 mmol/mol); and a secondary analysis was performed in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥8.5% (69 mmol/mol). The analysis was performed from the NHS healthcare payer perspective over a lifetime time horizon. </p> <p><b>Results</b></p> <p>In the overall population, G6 RT-CGM was associated with a mean incremental gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 1.49 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus SMBG (mean [standard deviation; SD] 11.47 [2.04] QALYs versus 9.99 [1.84] QALYs). Total mean (SD) lifetime costs were also GBP 14,234 higher with RT-CGM (GBP 102,468 [35,681] versus GBP 88,234 [39,027]) resulting in an ICER of GBP 9,558 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the findings were sensitive to changes in the quality of life benefit associated with reduced fear of hypoglycemia and avoidance of fingerstick testing as well as the HbA1c benefit associated with RT-CGM use. </p> <p><b>Conclusions</b></p> <p>For UK-based type 1 diabetes patients, the G6 RT-CGM device is associated with significant improvements in clinical outcomes and, over patient lifetimes, is a cost-effective disease management option relative to SMBG, based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of GBP 20,000 per QALY gained. </p>

scholarly journals Long-term Cost-Effectiveness of Dexcom G6 Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes in the U.K.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Roze ◽  
John Isitt ◽  
Jayne Smith-Palmer ◽  
Mehdi Javanbakht ◽  
Peter Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Baseline Hba1c ◽  
Self Monitoring ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life

<b>Objective</b> <p>A long-term health economic analysis was performed to establish the cost-effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) (Dexcom G6) versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) alone in UK-based patients with type 1 diabetes. </p> <p><b>Methods</b></p> <p>The analysis utilized the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model. Clinical input data were sourced from the DIAMOND trial in adults with type 1 diabetes; simulations were performed separately in the overall population of patients with baseline HbA1c ≥7.5% (58 mmol/mol); and a secondary analysis was performed in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥8.5% (69 mmol/mol). The analysis was performed from the NHS healthcare payer perspective over a lifetime time horizon. </p> <p><b>Results</b></p> <p>In the overall population, G6 RT-CGM was associated with a mean incremental gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 1.49 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus SMBG (mean [standard deviation; SD] 11.47 [2.04] QALYs versus 9.99 [1.84] QALYs). Total mean (SD) lifetime costs were also GBP 14,234 higher with RT-CGM (GBP 102,468 [35,681] versus GBP 88,234 [39,027]) resulting in an ICER of GBP 9,558 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the findings were sensitive to changes in the quality of life benefit associated with reduced fear of hypoglycemia and avoidance of fingerstick testing as well as the HbA1c benefit associated with RT-CGM use. </p> <p><b>Conclusions</b></p> <p>For UK-based type 1 diabetes patients, the G6 RT-CGM device is associated with significant improvements in clinical outcomes and, over patient lifetimes, is a cost-effective disease management option relative to SMBG, based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of GBP 20,000 per QALY gained. </p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document