ArticleAdvances in therapy2025
Cost-Effectiveness of Tirzepatide Versus Liraglutide, Both Adjunct to Diet and Exercise, for Patients with Obesity or Overweight: A UK Perspective.
Article in Advances in therapy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study estimated the cost-effectiveness from a UK healthcare system perspective of tirzepatide (5 mg, 10 mg, 15 mg) compared to liraglutide (3 mg) both adjunct to a reduced-calorie diet and increased physical activity in patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m
methodsA lifetime simulation model evaluated the costs and long-term clinical outcomes of each treatment. The base-case population was aligned to the population from the SURMOUNT-1 trial. The subgroup analysis included a 2-year stopping rule for liraglutide to reflect the NICE reimbursement criteria. Treatment efficacy was informed by a network meta-analysis. Patients were at risk of developing obesity-related complications such as diabetes and cardiovascular complications, calculated using published risk equations applied to modelled changes in risk factors. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) were calculated.
resultsIn the trial population, all doses of tirzepatide were dominant to liraglutide, with estimated cost savings and QALY gains. In liraglutide's UK recommended population the estimated ICERs for tirzepatide vs liraglutide were £5401-7864/QALY gained across doses; the change in results is primarily due to the 2-year stopping rule for liraglutide in this population. In both populations, all doses of tirzepatide demonstrated reductions in at least five of seven complications compared to liraglutide, most notably for knee replacements (29-46% reduction) and diabetes (25-48% reduction).
conclusionOn the basis of this simulation model, at the UK willingness-to-pay threshold (£20,000/QALY gained), tirzepatide is a cost-effective treatment compared to liraglutide for overweight and obesity, in both the full license SURMOUNT-1 trial population and in liraglutide's specific NICE reimbursed population.
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.