+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

An analysis of the cost-effectiveness of switching from biphasic human insulin 30, insulin glargine, or neutral protamine Hagedorn to biphasic insulin aspart 30 in people with type 2 diabetes



An analysis of the cost-effectiveness of switching from biphasic human insulin 30, insulin glargine, or neutral protamine Hagedorn to biphasic insulin aspart 30 in people with type 2 diabetes



Journal of Medical Economics 18(4): 263-272



The aim of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of switching from biphasic human insulin 30 (BHI), insulin glargine (IGlar), or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin (all ± oral glucose-lowering drugs [OGLDs]) to biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in people with type 2 diabetes in India, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia. The IMS CORE Diabetes Model was used to determine the clinical outcome, costs, and cost-effectiveness of switching from treatment with BHI, IGlar, or NPH to BIAsp 30 over a 30-year time horizon. A 1-year analysis was also performed based on quality-of-life data and treatment costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were expressed as a fraction of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, and cost-effectiveness was defined as ICER <3-times GDP per capita. Switching treatment from BHI, IGlar, or NPH to BIAsp 30 was associated with an increase in life expectancy of >0.7 years, reduction in all diabetes-related complications, and was considered as cost-effective or highly cost-effective in India, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia (BHI to BIAsp 30, 0.26 in India, 1.25 in Indonesia, 0.01 in Saudi Arabia; IGlar to BIAsp 30, -0.68 in India, -0.21 in Saudi Arabia; NPH to BIAsp 30, 0.15 in India, -0.07 in Saudi Arabia; GDP per head per annum/quality-adjusted life-year). Cost-effectiveness was maintained in the 1-year analyses. Switching from treatment with BHI, IGlar, or NPH to BIAsp 30 (all ± OGLDs) was found to be cost-effective in India, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia, both in the long and short term.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 057177034

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 25426701

DOI: 10.3111/13696998.2014.991791


Related references

Cost-Effectiveness of Biphasic Insulin Aspart 50 Versus Biphasic Human Insulin 50 in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in China. Value in Health 19(7): A897-A898, 2016

Long-term clinical and cost outcomes of treatment with biphasic insulin aspart 30/70 versus insulin glargine in insulin naïve type 2 diabetes patients: cost-effectiveness analysis in the UK setting. Current Medical Research and Opinion 21(12): 2063-2071, 2005

Insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes patients failing oral agents: cost-effectiveness of biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 vs. insulin glargine in the US. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 9(1): 103-113, 2007

The cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine vs. neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin in type 2 diabetes: a focus on health economics. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 10 Suppl 2: 66-75, 2008

Cost-effectiveness of biphasic insulin aspart versus insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes in China. Advances in Therapy 27(11): 814-827, 2011

Modulation of insulin dose titration using a hypoglycaemia-sensitive algorithm: insulin glargine versus neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 17(1): 15-22, 2015

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of Insulin Glargine Versus Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin for Type 2 Diabetes in Thailand. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 14(3): 281-292, 2017

Cost-effectiveness of switching to biphasic insulin aspart 30 from human insulin in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes in South Korea. Value in Health 12 Suppl 3: S55-S61, 2010

An analysis of the short- and long-term cost-effectiveness of starting biphasic insulin aspart 30 in insulin-naïve people with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 106(2): 319-327, 2015

Improved postprandial glycemic control with biphasic insulin aspart relative to biphasic insulin lispro and biphasic human insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 25(5): 883-888, 2002

Daily insulin doses and injection frequencies of neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH) insulin, insulin detemir and insulin glargine in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a multicenter analysis of 51 964 patients from the German/Austrian DPV-wiss database. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews 30(5): 395-404, 2015

Cost-Effectiveness of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart Versus Biphasic Insulin Aspart in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes from a Danish Health-Care Perspective. Diabetes Therapy 7(4): 809-823, 2016

Switching from biphasic human insulin to biphasic insulin aspart 30 in type 2 diabetes: results from the ASEAN subgroup of the A₁chieve study. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 100 Suppl 1: S24-S29, 2013

Safety and effectiveness of biphasic insulin aspart 30 in people with type 2 diabetes switching from basal-bolus insulin regimens in the A1chieve study. Primary Care Diabetes 8(2): 111-117, 2015

Clinical experience of switching from biphasic human insulin to biphasic insulin aspart 30 in Indian patients with type 2 diabetes in the A1chieve study. Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism 19(1): 110-115, 2015