Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/55663
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorUnchalee Permsuwanen_US
dc.contributor.authorPiyameth Dilokthornsakuen_US
dc.contributor.authorSurasak Saokaewen_US
dc.contributor.authorKednapa Thavornen_US
dc.contributor.authorNathorn Chaiyakunapruken_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-05T02:59:31Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-05T02:59:31Z-
dc.date.issued2016-09-21en_US
dc.identifier.issn11786981en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84989173753en_US
dc.identifier.other10.2147/CEOR.S113559en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84989173753&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/55663-
dc.description.abstract© 2016 Permsuwan et al. Background: The management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in elderly population poses many challenges. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors show particular promise due to excellent tolerability profiles, low risk of hypoglycemia, and little effect on body weight. This study evaluated, from the health care system’s perspective, the long-term cost-effectiveness of DPP-4 inhibitor monotherapy vs metformin and sulfonylurea (SFU) monotherapy in Thai elderly T2DM patients. Methods: The clinical efficacy was estimated from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Baseline cohort characteristics and cost parameters were obtained from published studies and hospital databases in Thailand. A validated IMS CORE Diabetes Model version 8.5 was used to project clinical and economic outcomes over a lifetime horizon using a 3% annual discount rate. Costs were expressed in 2014 Thai Baht (THB) (US dollar value). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. Base-case assumptions were assessed through several sensitivity analyses. Results: For treating elderly T2DM patients, DPP-4 inhibitors were more expensive and less effective, ie, a dominated strategy, than the metformin monotherapy. Compared with SFU, treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors gained 0.031 more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at a total cost incurred over THB113,701 or US$3,449.67, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of THB3.63 million or US$110,133.50 per QALY. At the acceptable Thai ceiling threshold of THB160,000/QALY (US$4,854.37/QALY), DPP-4 inhibitors were not a cost-effective treatment. Conclusion: DPP-4 inhibitor monotherapy is not a cost-effective treatment for elderly T2DM patients compared with metformin monotherapy and SFU monotherapy, given current resource constraints in Thailand.en_US
dc.subjectEconomics, Econometrics and Financeen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleCost-effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor monotherapy in elderly type 2 diabetes patients in Thailanden_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Researchen_US
article.volume8en_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsNaresuan Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsUniversity of Phayaoen_US
article.stream.affiliationsMonash University Malaysiaen_US
article.stream.affiliationsOttawa Hospital Research Instituteen_US
article.stream.affiliationsUniversity of Ottawa, Canadaen_US
article.stream.affiliationsInstitute for Clinical and Evaluative Sciencesen_US
article.stream.affiliationsUniversity of Queenslanden_US
article.stream.affiliationsUniversity of Wisconsin Madisonen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.