ArticleInternational journal of obesity (2005)2024
Cost-effectiveness of weight-management pharmacotherapies in Canada: a societal perspective.
Article in International journal of obesity (2005), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- GLP-1 receptor agonists for treating obesity without diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of economic evaluations.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Long-Term Cost and Health Impact of a Digital Obesity Intervention in Germany: Economic Modeling Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Semaglutide 2.4 mg for Obese Patients with MASH: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the Italian NHS Perspective.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2026Article
- Are Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists and Bariatric Surgery the Answer to Childhood Obesity?Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- A cost-effectiveness analysis of behavioural, pharmacological, and surgical obesity treatments in Canada.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- Semaglutide 2.4 mg versus Liraglutide 3 mg for the Treatment of Obesity in Greece: A Short-Term Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2025Article
- Exploring Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists Usage Among Non-Diabetic Healthcare Providers: A Cross-Sectional Multi-Country Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 2.4 mg versus liraglutide 3 mg for the treatment of obesity in Greece.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Critical Analysis of Markov Modeling for the Economic Evaluation of Obesity Interventions: A Systematic Review.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Review
- Cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 2.4 mg in chronic weight management in Portugal.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of weight-management pharmacotherapies approved by Canada Health, i.e., orlistat, naltrexone 32 mg/bupropion 360 mg (NB-32), liraglutide 3.0 mg and semaglutide 2.4 mg as compared to the current standard of care (SoC).
methodsAnalyses were conducted using a cohort with a mean starting age 50 years, body mass index (BMI) 37.5 kg/m
resultsFrom a societal perspective, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CAD 50 000 per QALY, semaglutide 2.4 mg was the most cost-effective treatment, at an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of CAD 31 243 and CAD 29 014 per QALY gained versus the next best alternative, i.e., orlistat, and SoC, respectively. Semaglutide 2.4 mg extendedly dominated other pharmacotherapies such as NB-32 or liraglutide 3.0 mg and remained cost-effective both under a public and private payer perspective. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses varying post-treatment catch-up rates, longer treatment durations and using real-world cohort characteristics. Semaglutide 2.4 mg was the preferred intervention, with a likelihood of 70% at a WTP threshold of CAD 50 000 per QALY gained. However, when the modeled benefits of weight-loss on cancer, mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) or osteoarthritis surgeries were removed simultaneously, orlistat emerged as the best value for money compared with SoC, with an ICUR of CAD 35 723 per QALY gained.
conclusionSemaglutide 2.4 mg was the most cost-effective treatment alternative compared with D&E or orlistat alone, and extendedly dominated other pharmacotherapies such as NB-32 or liraglutide 3.0 mg. Results were sensitive to the inclusion of the combined benefits of mortality, cancer, CVD, and knee osteoarthritis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.