About the journal Archive Boards Authors Reviewers

Pharmacy Practice 2006; 4(3): 129-133.
available since 26-October-2006

Cost-effectiveness of intermediate or long-acting insulin versus Exenatide in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients not optimally controlled on dual oral diabetes medications.
Krystal L. EDWARDS, Brian K. IRONS, Tom XU.

Objective: To better understand exenatide’s role in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, this analysis assessed its cost-effectiveness in comparison to an intermediate (NPH) and long-acting insulin (glargine). Exenatide is a recently approved medication for the treatment of type 2 diabetes for use in addition to frequently used oral diabetes medications.
Methods: Two studies were identified by a Medline search (1996-Oct 2005) that were similar in study duration, baseline glycemic control, population size, and primary outcomes to appropriately assess the cost-effectiveness of either insulin in comparison to exenatide on both glycemic and weight control.
Results: Both NPH and glargine appear to be more cost effective than exenatide with respect to glycemic control (incremental CE ratios -1,968 and -65,520 respectively). Exenatide appears to be more cost effective for reductions in body weight than either NPH (CE ratio 235) or glargine (CE ratio 128).
Conclusions Compared to intermediate and long-acting insulin therapies, exenatide does not appear to be as cost effective for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.



Diabetes. Exenatide. Insulin. Glargine. Insulin Isophane. Cost-Benefit Analysis.  





version: Thursday, 11-Oct-2007 11:26