Cost-effectiveness study of antidiabetic drugs in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients from Mumbai, India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20173653Keywords:
Antidiabetic, Cost-effectiveness, Diabetes mellitus, IndiaAbstract
Background: Diabetes is fast gaining the status of a potential epidemic in India, with >62 million individuals currently diagnosed with the disease. India currently faces an uncertain future in relation to the potential burden that diabetes may impose on the country. An estimated US$ 2.2 billion would be needed to sufficiently treat all cases of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in India. Many interventions can reduce the burden of this disease. However, health care resources are limited; thus, interventions for diabetes treatment should be prioritized. The present study assesses the cost-effectiveness of antidiabetic drugs in patients with T2DM from Mumbai, India.
Methods: A prospective cross-sectional study was performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of antidiabetic drugs in patients with T2DM. Face-to-face interviews were conducted by using a validated questionnaire in a total of 152 (76 males, 76 females) patients with T2DM from F-North Ward, Mumbai, India. Cost-effectiveness was determined on the basis of cost of antidiabetic drug/s, efficacy, adverse drug reactions, safety of administration, frequency of administration, and bioavailability.
Results: For treatment of T2DM in non-obese participants, Glimepiride+Pioglitazone costed least (`3.7) per unit of effectiveness followed by Glimepiride (`6.6), Gliclazide (`8.1), Repaglinide (`24.5), and Vildagliptin (`45.2). For treatment of T2DM in obese participants, Metformin cost least (` 6.7) per unit of effectiveness followed by Glimepiride + Metformin (`5.9) and Repaglinide (`24.5).
Conclusions: In case of non-obese participants, cost effectiveness and prescribed treatments did not show a match, while for obese participants prescribed treatments were in line with cost effectiveness.
References
Kannan, Arshad, Senthil K. A study on drug utilization of oral hypoglycemic agents in Type-2 diabetic patients. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2011;5:60-4.
About Diabetes. Available at: http://www.who.int/
diabetes/publications/diabetes_booklet/en/ Accessed on 19 September 2016.
Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of diabetes: Estimates for the year 2000and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1047-53.
Joshi SR, Parikh RM. India - diabetes capital of the world: now heading towards hypertension. J Assoc Physicians India. 2007;55:323–4.
Kumar A, Goel MK, Jain RB, Khanna P, Chaudhary V. India towards diabetes control: Key issues. Australas Med J. 2013;6(10):524-31.
Brunton L, Chabner B, Knollmann B. Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. 12th Edition. 2010.
Whiting Dr, Guariguata L, Weil C, Shaw J. IDF Diabetes atlas: Global estimates of the prevalence of diabetes for 2011 and 2030. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011;94:311-21.
González-Villalpando C, López-Ridaura R, Campuzano JC. González-Villalpando ME. The status of diabetes care in Mexican population: Are we making a difference? Results of the National Health and Nutrition Survey 2006. Salud Publica Mex. 2010;52(1):36–46.
Simpson SH, Corabian P, Jacobs P, Johnson JA. The cost of major comorbidity in people with diabetes mellitus. CMAJ. 2003;168(13):1661–7.
Yesudian C, Grepstad M, Visintin E, Ferrario A. The economic burden of diabetes in India: a review of the literature. Globalization Health. 2014;10:80.
Abdulganiyu G, Fola T. Cost-effectiveness analysis of anti-diabetic therapy in a university teaching hospital. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2014;5(3):82-91.
Derosa G. Pioglitazone plus glimepiride: a promising alternative in metabolic control. Int J Clin Pract. 2007;61(153):28–36.
UKPDS Group. UKPDS 28: a randomized trial of efficacy of early addition of metformin in sulfonylurea-treated type 2 diabetes. U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:87–92.
Turner RC, Cull CA, Frighi V, Holman RR. Glycemic control with diet, sulfonylurea, metformin, or insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: progressive requirement for multiple therapies (UKPDS 49). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. JAMA 1999;28:2005–12.
Kim HS, Kim DM, Cha BS, Park TS, Kim KA, Kim DL, et al. Efficacy of glimepiride/metformin fixed-dose combination vs metformin uptitration in type 2 diabetic patients inadequately controlled on low-dose metformin monotherapy: A randomized, open label, parallel group, multicenter study in Korea. J Diabetes Invest. 2014;5:701–8.
Geisen K, Vegh A, Krause E, Papp JG. Cardiovascular effects of conventional sulfonylureas and glimepiride. Horm Metab Res. 1996;28:496–507.
Muller G, Satoh Y, Geisen K. Extrapancreatic effects of sulfonylureas – a comparison between glimepiride and conventional sulfonylureas. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1995;28:115–37.
National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions (UK). Type 2 Diabetes: National Clinical Guideline for Management in Primary and Secondary Care (Update). Royal College of Physicians (UK), London: 2008.
Kara H, David H, Jonathan JQ. Economics for Drug Management. In: Kara H, David H, Jonathan JQ, editors. Text Book of Managing Drug Supply. 2nd Edition. USA: Kumarian press inc; 1997: 401-430.
