Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36330105›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec/insulin aspart versus biphasic insulin aspart in Chinese population with type 2 diabetes.

Qiong Luo, Li Zhou, Naitong Zhou, Ming Hu

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02762578 (A Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart and BIAsp 30 in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes BOOST), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02762578 phase3completednot on this map

A Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart and BIAsp 30 in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes BOOST: INTENSIFY PREMIX/ALL 2

TypeinterventionalSponsorNovo Nordisk A/SRan2016 to 2017Enrolled543ConditionsDiabetes, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Armsinsulin degludec/insulin aspart, biphasic insulin aspart
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qiong LuoWest China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Li ZhouWest China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Naitong ZhouWest China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ming HuWest China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the long-term cost effectiveness of insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) vs. biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) for the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately managed on basal insulin in China. Methods: The CORE (the Center for Outcomes Research) Diabetes Model, which has been published and verified, was used to simulate disease progression and calculate the total direct medical costs, life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 30 years, from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system. The patient demographic information and clinical data needed for the model were gathered from a phase III treat-to-target clinical trial (NCT02762578) and other Chinese cohort studies. Medical costs on treating diabetes were calculated based on clinical trial and local sources. The diabetes management and complications costs were derived from published literature. A discounting rate of 5% was applied to both health and cost outcomes. And one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out to test the reliability of the results. Results: Compared with BIAsp 30, treatment with IDegAsp was associated with an incremental benefit of 0.001 LYs (12.439 vs. 12.438) and 0.280 QALYs (9.522 vs. 9.242) over a 30-year time horizon, and increased CNY (Chinese Yuan) 3,888 (390,152 vs. 386,264) for total costs. IDegAsp was cost-effective vs. BIAsp 30 therapy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CNY 13,886 per QALY gained. Results were robust across a range of sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Compared with BIAsp 30, IDegAsp was a cost-effective treatment option for people with T2DM with inadequate glycemic management on basal insulin in China.

Indexed as

Biphasic InsulinsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Clinical Trials, Phase III as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin AspartInsulin, Long-ActingReproducibility of ResultsBiphasic InsulinsGlycated HemoglobinHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin Aspartinsulin degludecInsulin, Long-ActingBiphasic insulin aspart 30Chinacost-effectiveness analysisinsulin degludec/insulin asparttype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID36330105
PMCPMC9623119
OpenAlexW4306681788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.