The short-term cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide versus once-weekly dulaglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Colombian adults [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

• Published in: F1000 research Vol. 12; p. 914
• Main Authors: Liebisch-Rey, Hans, Suarez-Chacon, Andrea-Marcela, Fuentes, Yuli-V., Blanco, Jhosep, Kock, Joshua, Lechtig-Wassermann, Sharon, Bustos, Rosa Helena
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Faculty of 1000 Ltd 2023; F1000 Research Limited
• Subjects: Agonists; Antidiabetics; Blood glucose; Cardiovascular diseases; Clinical trials; Cost analysis; Cost control; Diabetes; Diabetes mellitus (non-insulin dependent); Disease; Drug prices; Glucagon; Glucagon-like peptide 1; Heart attacks; Hypoglycemia; Kidney diseases; Metformin; Mortality; Patients; Peptides; Sensitivity analysis; Colombia; Semaglutide; Pharmacoeconomic; Dulaglutide; Cost-effectiveness
• ISSN: 2046-1402; 2046-1402
• DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.128441.2

Background Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is a highly prevalent disease worldwide and in Colombia, representing one of the main causes of death and placing a considerable burden on healthcare systems. 13 classes of drugs are approved for the treatment of T2DM, with Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists being a first-line treatment option for patients with or at high risk of certain cardiovascular diseases and chronic kidney disease. The objective of this study is to conduct a short-term cost-effectiveness analysis of once-weekly semaglutide versus once-weekly dulaglutide in Colombian adults with T2DM, from a third-party payer perspective. Methods Numbers needed to treat were calculated for different single and composite endpoints of the SUSTAIN 7 trial, annual costs for once weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg were extracted from the public SISMED database. With these inputs a cost of control model was developed, to obtain the annual cost of bringing one T2DM patient to relevant clinical outcomes by using semaglutide or dulaglutide. Results Semaglutide was considered cost-effective compared to dulaglutide across all pre-specified endpoints, even in the different scenarios evaluated in the sensitivity analyses, and in a particularly pronounced manner for weight loss outcomes. Semaglutide at a dose of 1.0 mg once-weekly was cost-effective compared to dulaglutide 1.5 mg across all outcomes in the short-term, making it an appropriate first-line choice in the treatment of T2DM when deciding between these two GLP-1 receptor agonists. Conclusions This is the first short-term cost-effectiveness study of semaglutide and dulaglutide in T2DM Colombian patients. Our modeled results suggest that once-weekly semaglutide represents a cost-effective option for treating individuals with T2DM in Colombia who are not achieving glycaemia control with metformin, and it would be expected to improve HbA1C, promote greater weight loss and reduce costs from a third-payer perspective compared with treatment with dulaglutide.