Economic Evaluation of Orlistat in Overweight and Obese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Objective: To estimate the economic value of pharmacological treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in overweight and obese patients using orlistat in addition to standard diabetes therapy (i.e., a sulphonlyurea, metformin or insulin) and weight management strategies as compared with standard diabetes therapy and weight management strategies alone in a US-based healthcare setting. The perspective of the study was from the viewpoint of a US healthcare provider. Design and setting: Markov state transition model simulating diabetes-related complications and mortality for a period of 11 years. Patients were modelled to continue orlistat therapy for a 52-week period, assuming a 3-year period of weight regain where after 3 years bodyweight would match that of the placebo group. The impact of orlistat on glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) values was evaluated directly using data from four randomised, placebo-controlled, 1-year trials of orlistat in overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes who also received standard diabetes pharmacotherapy and intensive lifestyle modification. Incidence rates of micro- and macrovascular complications associated with type 2 diabetes and the estimated relative reduction in incidence rates associated with a decrease in mean updated HbA1C values were derived from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) estimates for a reference population of male patients, 52 years of age. US cost estimates were derived from published sources and presented in 2001 US dollars. Discounting of 3% was applied. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was applied to evaluate the robustness of the results of the persistence of the effect of orlistat after treatment. Main outcome measures: Average costs and event-free life-years gained during the 11-year period expressed as the incremental costs divided by the incremental gain in life expectancy. Results: Treatment with orlistat, 120mg three times daily, increased event-free life expectancy by 0.13 years over an 11-year period. Average treatment costs were estimated to be $US19 Conclusion: Adding orlistat as a pharmacological treatment to conventional diabetes and weight management approaches seems to be a cost-effective treatment option for overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes.Antihyperglycaemics, Cost-effectiveness, Lipase-inhibitors, Obesity, Orlistat, Pharmacoeconomics, Type-2-diabetes-mellitus

Shaping a research agenda to ensure a successful European health technology assessment: insights generated during the inaugural convention of the European access academy

Julian E, Pavlovic M, Sola-Morales O, et al. Shaping a research agenda to ensure a successful European health technology assessment: insights generated during the inaugural convention of the European access academy. Health Economics Review . 2022;12(1): 54.OBJECTIVES: Key challenges for a joint European Health Technology Assessment (HTA) include consolidated approaches towards the choice of adequate comparator(s), selection of endpoints that are relevant to patients with a given disease, dealing with remaining uncertainties as well as transparent and consistent management of related processes. We aimed to further crystallize related core domains within these four areas that warrant further research and scrutiny.; METHODS: Building on the outcomes of a previously conducted questionnaire survey, four key areas, processes, uncertainty, comparator choice and endpoint selection, were identified. At the inaugural convention of the European Access Academy dedicated working groups were established defining and prioritizing core domains for each of the four areas. The working groups consisted of~10 participants each, representing all relevant stakeholder groups (patients/ clinicians/ regulators/ HTA & payers/ academia/ industry). Story books identifying the work assignments were shared in advance. Two leads and one note taker per working group facilitated the process. All rankings were conducted on an ordinal Likert Response Scale scoring from 1 (low priority) to 7 (high priority).; RESULTS: Identified key domains include for processes: i) address (resource-) challenge of multiple PICOs (Patient/ Intervention/ Comparator/ Outcomes), ii) time and capacity challenges, iii) integrating all involved stakeholders, iv) conflicts and aligning between different multi-national stakeholders, v) interaction with health technology developer; for uncertainty: i) early and inclusive collaboration, ii) agreement on feasibility of RCT and acceptance of uncertainty, iii) alignment on closing evidence gaps, iv) capacity gaps; for comparator choice: i) criteria for the choice of comparator in an increasingly fragmented treatment landscape, ii) reasonable number of comparators in PICOs, iii) shape Early Advice so that comparator fulfils both regulatory and HTA needs, iv) acceptability of Indirect Treatment Comparisons (ITC), v) ensure broad stakeholder involvement in comparator selection; for endpoint selection: i) approaching new endpoints; ii) patient preferences on endpoints; iii) position of HTA and other stakeholders; iv) long-term generation and secondary use of data; v) endpoint challenges in RCTs.; CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a joint European HTA assessment is a unique opportunity for a stronger European Health Union. We identified 19 domains related to the four key areas, processes, uncertainty, comparator choice and endpoint selection that urgently need to be addressed for this regulation to become a success. © 2022. The Author(s)