Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2025
Cost-Utility Analysis of Control-IQ Technology Relative to Conventional Insulin Therapy in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
De Meulemeester Jolien, Fiorentino Francesca, Picado Nuno, Visser Margaretha M, Keymeulen Bart, De Block Christophe, Van Huffel Liesbeth, Taes Youri, Ballaux Dominique, Spincemaille Katrien, Marlier Joke, Vanhaverbeke Gerd, Lowyck Ine, Vercammen Chris, Colin Ides M, Preumont Vanessa, Mathieu Chantal, Luyten Jeroen, Wang Sharon M, Patel Bimal V, Pinsker Jordan E, Gillard Pieter
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the cost utility of the t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ technology (Control-IQ) relative to multiple daily injections (MDIs) and standard insulin pump therapy, both used in combination with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), in adults with type 1 diabetes from a payer perspective in Belgium.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A lifetime cost-utility analysis was conducted using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model. Baseline characteristics and treatment effects were informed by the Belgian real-world, multicenter, prospective INRANGE study. Direct medical costs included treatment, complication management, and severe hypoglycemic events. Country-specific costs were based on RIZIV-INAMI data and other publicly available sources. Utility values were based on published literature and included the reduction in fear of hypoglycemia associated with Control-IQ as reported in the INRANGE study. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs). Scenario analyses explored variations in the comparator (MDI + CGM only), reduced HbA1c efficacy, and time horizon.
RESULTS: Control-IQ yielded 19.50 QALYs versus 17.92 for MDI and standard insulin pump therapy plus CGM, with total costs of €193,588 and €160,129, respectively, resulting in an ICUR of €21,111/QALY. Scenario analyses confirmed robustness: MDI + CGM as sole comparator (ICUR: €41,701/QALY), reduced HbA1c efficacy (ICUR: €25,967/QALY), and a 20-year time horizon (ICUR: €30,183/QALY).
CONCLUSIONS: Control-IQ provides clinical benefits relative to MDI and standard insulin pump therapy plus CGM in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium and appears to be cost-effective in this setting, considering commonly used thresholds. These findings support the broader adoption of automated insulin delivery systems in diabetes management.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A lifetime cost-utility analysis was conducted using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model. Baseline characteristics and treatment effects were informed by the Belgian real-world, multicenter, prospective INRANGE study. Direct medical costs included treatment, complication management, and severe hypoglycemic events. Country-specific costs were based on RIZIV-INAMI data and other publicly available sources. Utility values were based on published literature and included the reduction in fear of hypoglycemia associated with Control-IQ as reported in the INRANGE study. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs). Scenario analyses explored variations in the comparator (MDI + CGM only), reduced HbA1c efficacy, and time horizon.
RESULTS: Control-IQ yielded 19.50 QALYs versus 17.92 for MDI and standard insulin pump therapy plus CGM, with total costs of €193,588 and €160,129, respectively, resulting in an ICUR of €21,111/QALY. Scenario analyses confirmed robustness: MDI + CGM as sole comparator (ICUR: €41,701/QALY), reduced HbA1c efficacy (ICUR: €25,967/QALY), and a 20-year time horizon (ICUR: €30,183/QALY).
CONCLUSIONS: Control-IQ provides clinical benefits relative to MDI and standard insulin pump therapy plus CGM in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium and appears to be cost-effective in this setting, considering commonly used thresholds. These findings support the broader adoption of automated insulin delivery systems in diabetes management.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
HumansDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Insulin Infusion SystemsCost-Benefit AnalysisInsulinHypoglycemic AgentsContinuous Glucose MonitoringAdultQuality-Adjusted Life YearsBelgiumFemaleMaleGlycated HemoglobinMiddle AgedHypoglycemiaBlood GlucoseProspective StudiesCost-Effectiveness AnalysisBlood Glucose Self-Monitoring