ArticleJournal of diabetes and metabolic disorders2025
Cost-Effectiveness analysis of insulin therapies for patients with type 2 diabetes in Iran: a long-term analysis using the UKPDS model.
Article in Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four insulin therapies- neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, insulin glargine-100 (IGlar-100), insulin detemir (IDet), and insulin lispro protamine (ILPS) -used in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Iran. Given the substantial economic burden of diabetes and the varying costs and clinical outcomes associated with different insulin types, this research provides evidence to inform optimal resource allocation and treatment decisions. Methods: A long-term cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the healthcare system perspective using the UKPDS Outcomes Model 2 (UKPDS-OM2). A sample of insulin-treated patients from the Iranian observational study of Diabetes Care (DiaCare) was simulated over a 40-year time horizon. Costs included direct treatment costs and diabetes-related complications. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, and uncertainty was assessed using the bootstrap method. Results: ILPS was the least costly intervention ($5,891.06 purchasing power parity (PPP)), with a quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of 8.22 years. IGlar-100 was dominated by ILPS, as it incurred higher costs with no added benefits. Also, compared to ILPS, NPH and IDet showed ICERs that exceeded the cost-effectiveness threshold, indicating that they are not cost-effective options. Conclusion: The results of this study indicate that ILPS, compared to other evaluated insulins, is a cost-effective option, and thus the optimal choice in terms of efficiency at the population level. These findings provide critical insights for healthcare policymakers to guide decisions regarding diabetes treatment coverage and reimbursement strategies, ultimately improving patient access to cost-effective care.
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.