IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v35y2017i3d10.1007_s40273-016-0466-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Consistent is the Relationship between Improved Glucose Control and Modelled Health Outcomes for People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus? a Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Xinyang Hua

    (University of Melbourne)

  • Thomas Wai-Chun Lung

    (University of Melbourne
    University of Sydney)

  • Andrew Palmer

    (University of Tasmania)

  • Lei Si

    (University of Tasmania)

  • William H. Herman

    (University of Michigan)

  • Philip Clarke

    (University of Melbourne)

Abstract

Background There are an increasing number of studies using simulation models to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Objective To evaluate the relationship between improvements in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and simulated health outcomes in type 2 diabetes cost-effectiveness studies. Methods A systematic review was conducted on MEDLINE and EMBASE to collect cost-effectiveness studies using type 2 diabetes simulation models that reported modelled health outcomes of blood glucose-related interventions in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) or life expectancy (LE). The data extracted included information used to characterise the study cohort, the intervention’s treatment effects on risk factors and model outcomes. Linear regressions were used to test the relationship between the difference in HbA1c (∆HbA1c) and incremental QALYs (∆QALYs) or LE (∆LE) of intervention and control groups. The ratio between the ∆QALYs and ∆LE was calculated and a scatterplot between the ratio and ∆HbA1c was used to explore the relationship between these two. Results Seventy-six studies were included in this research, contributing to 124 pair of comparators. The pooled regressions indicated that the marginal effect of a 1% HbA1c decrease in intervention resulted in an increase in life-time QALYs and LE of 0.371 (95% confidence interval 0.286–0.456) and 0.642 (95% CI 0.494–0.790), respectively. No evidence of heterogeneity between models was found. An inverse exponential relationship was found and fitted between the ratio (∆QALY/∆LE) and ∆HbA1c. Conclusion There is a consistent relationship between ∆HbA1c and ∆QALYs or ∆LE in cost-effectiveness analyses using type 2 diabetes simulation models. This relationship can be used as a diagnostic tool for decision makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinyang Hua & Thomas Wai-Chun Lung & Andrew Palmer & Lei Si & William H. Herman & Philip Clarke, 2017. "How Consistent is the Relationship between Improved Glucose Control and Modelled Health Outcomes for People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus? a Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 319-329, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-016-0466-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0466-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-016-0466-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-016-0466-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandra Tunis & Luc Sauriol & Michael Minshall, 2010. "Cost effectiveness of insulin glargine plus oral antidiabetes drugs compared with premixed insulin alone in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Canada," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 267-280, July.
    2. Don Husereau & Michael Drummond & Stavros Petrou & Chris Carswell & David Moher & Dan Greenberg & Federico Augustovski & Andrew Briggs & Josephine Mauskopf & Elizabeth Loder, 2013. "Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 361-367, May.
    3. W. Sauerbrei & P. Royston, 1999. "Building multivariable prognostic and diagnostic models: transformation of the predictors by using fractional polynomials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 162(1), pages 71-94.
    4. Jorge Elgart & Joaquin Caporale & Lorena Gonzalez & Eleonora Aiello & Maximiliano Waschbusch & Juan Gagliardino, 2013. "Treatment of type 2 diabetes with saxagliptin: a pharmacoeconomic evaluation in Argentina," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-9, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Asrul Akmal Shafie & Chin Hui Ng & Yui Ping Tan & Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk, 2017. "Systematic Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Insulin Analogues in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 141-162, February.
    2. Jinsong Geng & Hao Yu & Yiwei Mao & Peng Zhang & Yingyao Chen, 2015. "Cost Effectiveness of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors for Type 2 Diabetes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 581-597, June.
    3. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Screening of Dementia," Working Papers 2018:20, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    4. Marco Caliendo & Stefan Tübbicke, 2020. "New evidence on long-term effects of start-up subsidies: matching estimates and their robustness," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(4), pages 1605-1631, October.
    5. Najmiatul Fitria & Antoinette D. I. Asselt & Maarten J. Postma, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness of controlling gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 407-417, April.
    6. Qi Cao & Erik Buskens & Hans L. Hillege & Tiny Jaarsma & Maarten Postma & Douwe Postmus, 2019. "Stratified treatment recommendation or one-size-fits-all? A health economic insight based on graphical exploration," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 475-482, April.
    7. Thomas Grochtdreis & Hans-Helmut König & Alexander Dobruschkin & Gunhild von Amsberg & Judith Dams, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness analyses and cost analyses in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Dongzhe Hong & Lei Si & Minghuan Jiang & Hui Shao & Wai-kit Ming & Yingnan Zhao & Yan Li & Lizheng Shi, 2019. "Cost Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 777-818, June.
    9. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Nonpharmacological Interventions for Dementia Patients and their Caregivers - A Systematic Literature Review," Working Papers 2018:10, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    10. Strasak, Alexander M. & Umlauf, Nikolaus & Pfeiffer, Ruth M. & Lang, Stefan, 2011. "Comparing penalized splines and fractional polynomials for flexible modelling of the effects of continuous predictor variables," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 1540-1551, April.
    11. Jesse Elliott & Sasha Katwyk & Bláthnaid McCoy & Tammy Clifford & Beth K. Potter & Becky Skidmore & George A. Wells & Doug Coyle, 2019. "Decision Models for Assessing the Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(10), pages 1261-1276, October.
    12. Stefanie Hieke & Harald Binder & Alexandra Nieters & Martin Schumacher, 2014. "minPtest: a resampling based gene region-level testing procedure for genetic case-control studies," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 51-63, February.
    13. Don Husereau & Michael Drummond & Stavros Petrou & Dan Greenberg & Josephine Mauskopf & Federico Augustovski & Andrew Briggs & David Moher & Elizabeth Loder & Chris Carswell, 2015. "Reply to Roberts et al.: CHEERS is Sufficient for Reporting Cost-Benefit Analysis, but May Require Further Elaboration," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 535-536, May.
    14. Neily Zakiyah & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Frank Roijmans & Maarten J Postma, 2016. "Economic Evaluation of Family Planning Interventions in Low and Middle Income Countries; A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    15. Kathryn Schnippel & Naomi Lince-Deroche & Theo van den Handel & Seithati Molefi & Suann Bruce & Cynthia Firnhaber, 2015. "Cost Evaluation of Reproductive and Primary Health Care Mobile Service Delivery for Women in Two Rural Districts in South Africa," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, March.
    16. Rachel Elliott & Koen Putman & James Davies & Lieven Annemans, 2014. "A Review of the Methodological Challenges in Assessing the Cost Effectiveness of Pharmacist Interventions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(12), pages 1185-1199, December.
    17. Abualbishr Alshreef & Michelle Jenks & William Green & Simon Dixon, 2016. "Review of Economic Submissions to NICE Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(6), pages 623-634, December.
    18. Yue Yin & Yusi Tu & Mingye Zhao & Wenxi Tang, 2022. "Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions among Chinese Adults with Prediabetes: A Protocol for Network Meta-Analysis and CHIME-Modeled Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-12, January.
    19. Hui Shao & Vivian Fonseca & Charles Stoecker & Shuqian Liu & Lizheng Shi, 2018. "Novel Risk Engine for Diabetes Progression and Mortality in USA: Building, Relating, Assessing, and Validating Outcomes (BRAVO)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(9), pages 1125-1134, September.
    20. Huajie Jin & Paul Tappenden & Stewart Robinson & Evanthia Achilla & David Aceituno & Sarah Byford, 2020. "Systematic review of the methods of health economic models assessing antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-016-0466-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.