Long-term cost-effectiveness of pioglitazone versus placebo in addition to existing diabetes treatment: A US analysis based on PROactive

Value in Health

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 1-9

  Valentine, William J ^a   Tucker, Daniel ^a   Palmer, Andrew J ^c   Minshall, Michael E ^a   Foos, Volker ^c   Silberman, Cheryl ^b  

^a IQVIA   (United States)

^b TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS   (United States)

^c Takeda Global Research and Development Ltd ^*

Author keywords

Costs; Modeling; Outcomes; Pioglitazone; Type 2 diabetes

Indexed keywords

PIOGLITAZONE; PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIABETES MELLITUS; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; UNITED STATES;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIABETES COMPLICATIONS; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; DRUG THERAPY, COMBINATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPOGLYCEMIC AGENTS; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; THIAZOLIDINEDIONES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 58849154651     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00403.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, et al. Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care 2004 27 : 1047 53.
2. International Diabetes Federation. Facts and figures: did you know? 2004. Available from: http://www.idf.org/home/index.cfm?node=6 [Accessed November 14, 2006 NA, Bilous RW, Kelly WF, et al. Excess mortality in a population with diabetes and the impact of material deprivation: longitudinal, population based study. BMJ 2001 9 : 1389 93.
3. The UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998 352 : 837 53.
4. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Cost effectiveness analysis of improved blood pressure control in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 40. BMJ 1998 12 : 720 6.
5. The UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Effect of intensive blood glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). Lancet 1998 12 : 854 65.
6. Clarke PM, Gray AM, Briggs A, et al. Cost-utility analyses of intensive blood glucose and tight blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 72). Diabetologia 2005 48 : 868 77.
7. Gaede P, Vedel P, Larsen N, et al. Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2003 348 : 383 93.
8. Clarke P, Gray A, Holman R. Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62). Med Decis Making 2002 22 : 340 9.
9. Derosa G, Cicero AF, Gaddi A, et al. Metabolic effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone in patients with diabetes and metabolic syndrome treated with glimepiride: a twelve-month, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial. Clin Ther 2004 26 : 744 54.
10. Chiquette E, Ramirez G, Defronzo R. A meta-analysis comparing the effect of thiazolidinediones on cardiovascular risk factors. Arch Intern Med 2004 164 : 2097 104.
11. Charbonnel B, Dormandy J, Erdmann E, et al. The prospective pioglitazone clinical trial in macrovascular events (PROactive): can pioglitazone reduce cardiovascular events in diabetes? Study design and baseline characteristics of 5238 patients. Diabetes Care 2004 27 : 1647 53.
12. The PROactive Website. Main Presentation. 2005. Available from: http://www.proactive-results.com [Accessed November 15, 2006 JA, Charbonnel B, Eckland DJ, et al. Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005 366 : 1279 89.
13. European Diabetes Policy Group. A desktop guide to Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med 1999 16 : 716 30.
14. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. The CORE Diabetes Model: projecting long-term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes mellitus (types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision-making. Curr Med Res Opin 2004 20 (Suppl. 8 S5 26.
15. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine W, et al. Validation of the CORE Diabetes Model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Curr Med Res Opin 2004 20 (Suppl. 1 S27 40.
16. Bagust A, Modelling Beale S. EuroQol health-related utility values for diabetic complications from CODE-2 data. Health Econ 2005 14 : 217 30.
17. Valentine WJ, Bottomley J, Palmer AJ, et al. PROactive 06: cost effectiveness of pioglitazone in type 2 diabetes in the UK. Diabet Med 2007 24 : 982 1002.
18. Leibson CL, O'Brien PC, Atkinson E, et al. Relative contributions of incidence and survival to increasing prevalence of adult-onset diabetes mellitus: a population-based study. Am J Epidemiol 1997 146 : 12 22.
19. Murabito JM, D'Agostino RB, Silbershatz H, Wilson WF. Intermittent claudication. A risk profile from The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 1997 96 : 44 9.
20. Kannel WB, D'Agostino RB, Silbershatz H, et al. Profile for estimating risk of heart failure. Arch Intern Med 1999 159 : 1197 204.
21. Stevens RJ, Kothari V, Adler AI, et al. The UKPDS risk engine: a model for the risk of coronary heart disease in Type II diabetes (UKPDS 56). Clin Sci (Lond) 2001 101 : 671 9.
22. Kothari V, Stevens RJ, Adler AI, et al. UKPDS 60: risk of stroke in type 2 diabetes estimated by the UK Prospective Diabetes Study risk engine. Stroke 2002 33 : 1776 81.
23. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York : Oxford University Press, 1996.
24. US Department of Labor - Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer price index calculator. 2005. Available from: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl [Accessed October 4, 2006 Bk&Cr ed.). New York : Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2005.
25. Coffey JT, Brandle M, Zhou H, et al. Valuing health-related quality of life in diabetes. Diabetes Care 2002 25 : 2238 43.
26. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, et al. Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996 276 : 1253 8.
27. Briggs AH, Wonderling DE, Mooney CZ. Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ 1997 6 : 327 40.
28. Weinstein MC. From cost-effectiveness ratios to resource allocation: where to draw the line? In : Sloan FA, ed., Valuing Health Care: Costs, Benefits, and Effectiveness of Pharmaceuticals and Other Medical Technologies. New York : Cambridge University Press, 1995.
29. Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, et al. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Making 2000 20 : 332 42.
30. Guillausseau PJ. PROactive study. Lancet 2006 367 : 23 7.
31. Gaede P, Parving HH, Pedersen O. PROactive study. Lancet 2006 367 : 23 4.
32. Yki-Jarvinen H. The PROactive study: some answers, many questions. Lancet 2005 366 : 1241 2.
33. Yudkin JS, Freemantle N. PROactive study. Lancet 2006 367 : 24 5.
34. Grover SA, Coupal L, Zowall H, et al. How cost-effective is the treatment of dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes but without cardiovascular disease? Diabetes Care 2001 24 : 45 50.
35. O'Brien JA, Patrick AR, Caro J. Estimates of direct medical costs for microvascular and macrovascular complications resulting from type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States in 2000. Clin Ther 2003 25 : 1017 38.
36. Etemad LR, McCollam PL. Total first-year costs of acute coronary syndrome in a managed care setting. J Manag Care Pharm 2005 11 : 300 6.
37. Wixon CL, Mills JL, Westerband A, et al. An economic appraisal of lower extremity bypass graft maintenance. J Vasc Surg 2000 32 : 1 12.
38. DRG Guidebook. A Comprehensive Resource to the DRG Classification System (17th ed.). Salt Lake City : St. Anthony Publishing, 2001.
39. Shearer A, Scuffham P, Gordois A, Oglesby A. Predicted costs and outcomes from reduced vibration detection in people with diabetes in the U.S. Diabetes Care 2003 26 : 2305 10.