PMID- 22533526
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20130429
LR  - 20220330
IS  - 1941-837X (Electronic)
IS  - 1369-6998 (Linking)
VI  - 15
IP  - 6
DP  - 2012
TI  - Economic outcomes of exenatide vs liraglutide in type 2 diabetes patients in the 
      United States: results from a retrospective claims database analysis.
PG  - 1039-50
LID - 10.3111/13696998.2012.688903 [doi]
AB  - OBJECTIVE: The safety and efficacy of the GLP-1 receptor agonists exenatide BID 
      (exenatide) and liraglutide for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have 
      been established in clinical trials. Effective treatments may lower overall 
      treatment costs. This study examined cost offsets and medication adherence for 
      exenatide vs liraglutide in a large, managed care population in the US. METHODS: 
      This was a retrospective cohort analysis comprising adult patients with T2DM who 
      initiated exenatide or liraglutide between 1/1/2010 and 6/30/2010 and had 6 
      months pre-index and post-index continuous eligibility. Patients were propensity 
      score-matched to controls for baseline differences. Medication adherence was 
      measured by proportion of days covered (PDC). Paired t-test and McNemar's test 
      were used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Matched exenatide and liraglutide cohorts 
      (n=1347 pairs) had similar average total 6-month follow-up costs ($6688 vs 
      $7346). However, exenatide patients had significantly lower mean pharmacy costs 
      ($2925 vs $3272, p<0.001). Among liraglutide patients, patients receiving the 
      1.8 mg dose had significantly higher average total costs compared to those 
      receiving the 1.2 mg dose ($8031 vs $6536, p=0.026), with higher mean pharmacy 
      costs in the 1.8 mg cohort ($3935 vs $3146, p<0.001). There were no significant 
      differences in inpatient or outpatient costs or medication adherence between 
      groups (mean PDC: exenatide 56% vs liraglutide 57%, p=0.088). LIMITATIONS: The 
      study assumed that all information needed for case classification and matching of 
      cohorts was present and not differential across cohorts. The study did not 
      control for covariates that were unavailable, such as HbA1c and duration of 
      diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients initiating exenatide vs liraglutide for T2DM had 
      similar medication adherence and total healthcare costs; however, exenatide 
      patients had significantly lower total pharmacy costs. Patients prescribed 1.8 mg 
      liraglutide had significantly higher costs compared to those on 1.2 mg.
FAU - Pelletier, Elise M
AU  - Pelletier EM
AD  - Department of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, IMS Health, Inc., 
      Watertown, MA 02472, USA. epelletier@us.imshealth.com
FAU - Pawaskar, Manjiri
AU  - Pawaskar M
FAU - Smith, Paula J
AU  - Smith PJ
FAU - Best, Jennie H
AU  - Best JH
FAU - Chapman, Richard H
AU  - Chapman RH
LA  - eng
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
DEP - 20120524
PL  - England
TA  - J Med Econ
JT  - Journal of medical economics
JID - 9892255
RN  - 0 (Hypoglycemic Agents)
RN  - 0 (Peptides)
RN  - 0 (Venoms)
RN  - 839I73S42A (Liraglutide)
RN  - 89750-14-1 (Glucagon-Like Peptide 1)
RN  - 9P1872D4OL (Exenatide)
SB  - IM
MH  - Adolescent
MH  - Adult
MH  - Age Factors
MH  - Aged
MH  - Diabetes Complications
MH  - Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/*drug therapy/economics
MH  - Exenatide
MH  - Fees, Pharmaceutical/standards
MH  - Female
MH  - Glucagon-Like Peptide 1/*analogs & derivatives/economics/therapeutic use
MH  - Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data
MH  - Health Services/economics/statistics & numerical data
MH  - Humans
MH  - Hypoglycemic Agents/*economics/therapeutic use
MH  - Insurance Claim Review/statistics & numerical data
MH  - Liraglutide
MH  - Male
MH  - Medication Adherence/*statistics & numerical data
MH  - Middle Aged
MH  - Peptides/*economics/therapeutic use
MH  - Retrospective Studies
MH  - Sex Factors
MH  - United States
MH  - Venoms/*economics/therapeutic use
MH  - Young Adult
EDAT- 2012/04/27 06:00
MHDA- 2013/04/30 06:00
CRDT- 2012/04/27 06:00
PHST- 2012/04/27 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2012/04/27 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2013/04/30 06:00 [medline]
AID - 10.3111/13696998.2012.688903 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - J Med Econ. 2012;15(6):1039-50. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2012.688903. Epub 2012 May 
      24.