ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2025
A cost-utility analysis of long-acting insulin analogues (detemir, glargine and degludec) for the treatment of adult type 1 diabetes in South Africa.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundType 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) is a life-threatening condition that is managed with administered insulin. Intermediate- to long-acting insulin represents the basal insulin constituent of the total insulin used in treating T1DM. In South Africa, intermediate-acting Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin has been the mainstay basal insulin recommended in the public sector, despite the availability of newer (ultra) long-acting insulin analogues. A cost-utility analysis of the newer long-acting insulin analogues insulins degludec, glargine U100, glargine U300 and detemir in comparison to current practice (NPH insulin) has yet to be performed in the South African public health sector context.
methodsA cost-utility analysis was carried out utilising Markov modelling. Long-acting insulins degludec, glargine and detemir were compared to NPH insulin in the model. For each comparator, two Markov states were created, one in which no complications occurred and another representing severe nocturnal hypoglycaemic events. Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) gained per patient year was the health outcome assessed over a one-year time horizon.
resultsNPH insulin was the least costly and least effective; while Determir and Glargine U100 were extended and absolutely dominated respectively. The ICER for Glargine U300 in comparison to NPH was USD 40,104.91 per QALY gained, while Degludec was USD 64,831.20 per QALY gained in comparison to Glargine U300.
conclusionsThe ICERs of long acting insulins were considerably higher than South Africa's indicative cost-effectiveness threshold. The status quo of NPH insulin in the management of T1DM in adults remains the most cost-effective option for the South African public health sector.
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.