Exenatide looks attractive in the UK setting
- PDF / 142,331 Bytes
- 1 Pages / 623.591 x 841.847 pts Page_size
- 53 Downloads / 176 Views
Lifetime direct medical costs (£) 29 26 24 21 18
401 704 006 308 611
Incremental cost (£)/ QALY gained 22 420 16 318 10 217 4116 Dominantb
percentage of US wholesale cost Exenatide was more effective and cost less than insulin glargine.
Using 100% of the US wholesale cost for exenatide, the lifetime direct medical costs** of exenatide were estimated to be £29 401 versus £19 489 for insulin glargine, leading to an incremental cost-utility ratio of £22 420/QALY gained [see table]. At 20% of the US wholesale cost, exenatide was cost saving (£878) – and thus dominant – compared with insulin glargine. * supported by Eli Lilly ** The model considered pharmacy and treatment complication costs (2004 values) and adopted the perspective of the UK NHS; a discount rate of 3.5% per annum was applied to both costs and clinical outcomes. Ray JA, et al. Exenatide versus insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK: a model of long-term clinical and cost outcomes. Current Medical 801074271 Research and Opinion 23: 609-622, No. 3, Mar 2007
1173-5503/10/0529-0001/$14.95 Adis © 2010 Springer International Publishing AG. All rights reserved
PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 2 Jun 2007 No. 529
1
Data Loading...
