Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40298310›Full record

ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2025

Tirzepatide vs semaglutide and liraglutide for weight loss in patients with overweight or obesity without diabetes: A short-term cost-effectiveness analysis in the United States.

Ligang Liu, Jiayu Cui, Marjorie V Neidecker, Milap C Nahata

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Oral Adverse Effects of Semaglutide Therapy: A Narrative Review.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
    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.

Ligang LiuInstitute of Therapeutic Innovations and Outcomes, College of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Jiayu CuiCVS Health, Woonsocket, RI.
Marjorie V NeideckerCollege of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Milap C NahataInstitute of Therapeutic Innovations and Outcomes, College of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University, Columbus.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and their analogues have emerged as effective pharmacotherapies for obesity.

objectiveTo assess the short-term cost-effectiveness of subcutaneous tirzepatide, semaglutide, liraglutide, and oral semaglutide for managing obesity or overweight in patients without diabetes.

methodsA decision tree model was developed using a 68-week time window with consideration of serious adverse events and treatment discontinuation from a US payer's perspective. The study population were adults with obesity or overweight with at least 1 weight-related comorbidity but without diabetes. Clinical data were obtained from clinical trials. Model utilities, disutilities, and the costs of serious adverse events were sourced from published literature. Medication costs were assigned from Red Book. All costs were calculated in 2024 US dollars. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated based on the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. A willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY was used. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the effect of parameter uncertainty on the results.

resultsIn the base-case analysis, both subcutaneous tirzepatide and oral semaglutide were cost-effective vs subcutaneous liraglutide and subcutaneous semaglutide. Compared with oral semaglutide, subcutaneous tirzepatide was cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $34,212 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses indicated the results were highly sensitive to medication costs and the effectiveness of medications. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that subcutaneous tirzepatide was most likely to remain cost-effective, with a 98% probability at a willingness to pay of $150,000 per QALY compared with other medications.

conclusionsSubcutaneous tirzepatide and oral semaglutide were cost-effective therapies compared with subcutaneous liraglutide and subcutaneous semaglutide for the short-term management of obesity in adults without diabetes. At or under a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, subcutaneous tirzepatide was most cost-effective, surpassing oral semaglutide. These findings provide valuable insights for health care decision-makers in selecting antiobesity medications.

Indexed as

Anti-Obesity AgentsGlucagon-Like PeptidesLiraglutideObesityOverweightTirzepatideWeight LossAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisCost-Effectiveness AnalysisDecision TreesFemaleGlucagon-Like Peptide 1HumansHypoglycemic AgentsMaleAnti-Obesity AgentsGlucagon-Like Peptide 1Glucagon-Like PeptidesHypoglycemic AgentsLiraglutideSemaglutideTirzepatide

Identifiers

PMID40298310
PMCPMC12039506

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.