Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

  • Systematic Review
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Critiques of cost-effectiveness modelling in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) are scarce and are often undertaken in combination with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) models. However, T1DM is a separate disease, and it is therefore important to appraise modelling methods in T1DM.

Objectives

This review identified published economic models in T1DM and provided an overview of the characteristics and capabilities of available models, thus enabling a discussion of best-practice modelling approaches in T1DM.

Methods

A systematic review of Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process, and NHS EED was conducted to identify available models in T1DM. Key conferences and health technology assessment (HTA) websites were also reviewed. The characteristics of each model (e.g. model structure, simulation method, handling of uncertainty, incorporation of treatment effect, data for risk equations, and validation procedures, based on information in the primary publication) were extracted, with a focus on model capabilities.

Results

We identified 13 unique models. Overall, the included studies varied greatly in scope as well as in the quality and quantity of information reported, but six of the models (Archimedes, CDM [Core Diabetes Model], CRC DES [Cardiff Research Consortium Discrete Event Simulation], DCCT [Diabetes Control and Complications Trial], Sheffield, and EAGLE [Economic Assessment of Glycaemic control and Long-term Effects of diabetes]) were the most rigorous and thoroughly reported. Most models were Markov based, and cohort and microsimulation methods were equally common. All of the more comprehensive models employed microsimulation methods. Model structure varied widely, with the more holistic models providing a comprehensive approach to microvascular and macrovascular events, as well as including adverse events. The majority of studies reported a lifetime horizon, used a payer perspective, and had the capability for sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

Several models have been developed that provide useful insight into T1DM modelling. Based on a review of the models identified in this study, we identified a set of ‘best in class’ methods for the different technical aspects of T1DM modelling.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. de Ferranti SD, de Boer IH, Fonseca V, Fox CS, Golden SH, Lavie CJ, et al. Type 1 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association and American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(10):2843–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Achenbach P, Bonifacio E, Koczwara K, Ziegler AG. Natural history of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. 2005;54(Suppl 2):S25–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. van Belle TL, Coppieters KT, von Herrath MG. Type 1 diabetes: etiology, immunology, and therapeutic strategies. Physiol Rev. 2011;91(1):79–118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. American Diabetes Association. Economic costs of diabetes in the US in 2012. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(4):1033–46.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Miller KM, Foster NC, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, DuBose SN, DiMeglio LA, et al. Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the US: updated data from the T1D Exchange Clinic Registry. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(6):971–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lind M, Svensson AM, Kosiborod M, Gudbjornsdottir S, Pivodic A, Wedel H, et al. Glycemic control and excess mortality in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(21):1972–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Laing SP, Swerdlow AJ, Slater SD, Botha JL, Burden AC, Waugh NR, et al. The British Diabetic Association Cohort Study, II: cause-specific mortality in patients with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 1999;16(6):466–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Palmer AJ, Clarke P, Gray A, Leal J, Lloyd A, Grant D, et al. Computer modeling of diabetes and its complications: a report on the Fifth Mount Hood challenge meeting. Value Health. 2013;16(4):670–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mount Hood 4 Modeling Group. Computer modeling of diabetes and its complications: a report on the Fourth Mount Hood Challenge Meeting. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(6):1638–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chatterjee S, Davies M. Type 2 diabetes: recent advances in diagnosis and management. Prescriber. 2015;26(10):15–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tao B, Pietropaolo M, Atkinson M, Schatz D, Taylor D. Estimating the cost of type 1 diabetes in the US: a propensity score matching method. PLoS One. 2010;5(7):e11501.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Yi Y, Philips Z, Bergman G, Burslem K. Economic models in type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(9):2105–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tarride JE, Hopkins R, Blackhouse G, Bowen JM, Bischof M, Von KC, et al. A review of methods used in long-term cost-effectiveness models of diabetes mellitus treatment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(4):255–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, 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 1):S5–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cummins E, Royle P, Snaith A, Greene A, Robertson L, McIntyre L, et al. Clinical and cost-effectiveness of continuous subcutaneous infusion for diabetes: updating review. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Nathan DM. Lifetime benefits and costs of intensive therapy as practiced in the diabetes control and complications trial. JAMA. 1996;276(17):1409–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Tomar RH, Lee S, Wu SY, Klein R, Klein BE, Moss SE, et al. Disease progression and cost of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus: development and application of a simulation model. J Soc Health Syst. 1998;5(4):24–37.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Scuffham P, Carr L. The cost-effectiveness of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared with multiple daily injections for the management of diabetes. Diabet Med. 2003;20(7):586–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. McEwan P, Poole CD, Tetlow T, Holmes P, Currie CJ. Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine versus NPH insulin for the treatment of type 1 diabetes in the UK. Curr Med Res Opin. 2007;23(1):S7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Shearer A, Bagust A, Sanderson D, Heller S, Roberts S. Cost-effectiveness of flexible intensive insulin management to enable dietary freedom in people with Type 1 diabetes in the UK. Diabet Med. 2004;21(5):460–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mueller E, Maxion-Bergemann S, Gultyaev D, Walzer S, Freemantle N, Mathieu C, et al. Development and validation of the economic assessment of glycemic control and long-term effects of diabetes (EAGLE) model. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2006;8(2):219–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Grima DT, Thompson MF, Sauriol L. Modelling cost effectiveness of insulin glargine for the treatment of type 1 and 2 diabetes in Canada. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(3):253–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Airoldi M, Bevan G, Morton A, Oliveira M, Smith J. Requisite models for strategic commissioning: the example of type 1 diabetes. Health Care Manage Sci. 2008;11(2):89–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Beckwith J, Nyman JA, Flanagan B, Schrover R, Schuurman HJ. A health economic analysis of clinical islet transplantation. Clin Transplant. 2012;26(1):23–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Basarir H, Jacques R, Elliott J, et al. The cost-effectiveness of the Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE) structured education programme: an update using the Sheffield Type 1 Diabetes Policy Model. Diabet Med. 2013;30(10):1236–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. McQueen RB, Ellis SL, Campbell JD, Nair KV, Sullivan PW. Cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring and intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2011;9(13):1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Eddy DM, Schlessinger L. Archimedes: a trial-validated model of diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(11):3093–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Javitt JC, Aiello LP, Bassi LJ, Chiang YP, Canner JK. Detecting and treating retinopathy in patients with type I diabetes mellitus. Savings associated with improved implementation of current guidelines. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 1991;98(10):1565–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Allen C, Palta M, D’Alessio DJ. Incidence and differences in urban-rural seasonal variation of type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes in Wisconsin. Diabetologia. 1986;29(9):629–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Javitt JC, Aiello LP. Cost-effectiveness of detecting and treating diabetic retinopathy. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124(1 Pt 2):164–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Muhlhauser I, Sawicki PT, Blank M, Overmann H, Bender R, Berger M. Prognosis of persons with type 1 diabetes on intensified insulin therapy in relation to nephropathy. J Intern Med. 2000;248(4):333–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rubin A. Diabetes for dummies. New York: Hungry Minds; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Krolewski AS, Warram JH, Christlieb AR, Busick EJ, Kahn CR. The changing natural history of nephropathy in type I diabetes. Am J Med. 1985;78(5):785–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. DRS Research Group. Photocoagulation treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Clinical application of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (DRS) findings, DRS Report Number 8. The Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Ophthalmology. 1981;88(7):583–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Moss SE, Klein R, Klein BE. The prevalence and incidence of lower extremity amputation in a diabetic population. Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(3):610–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Bild DE, Selby JV, Sinnock P, Browner WS, Braveman P, Showstack JA. Lower-extremity amputation in people with diabetes. Epidemiology and prevention. Diabetes Care. 1989;12(1):24–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pampanelli S, Fanelli C, Lalli C, Ciofetta M, Sindaco PD, Lepore M, et al. Long-term intensive insulin therapy in IDDM: effects on HbA1c, risk for severe and mild hypoglycaemia, status of counterregulation and awareness of hypoglycaemia. Diabetologia. 1996;39(6):677–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Eastman RC, Javitt JC, Herman WH, Dasbach EJ, Copley-Merriman C, Maier W, et al. Model of complications of NIDDM. II. Analysis of the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of treating NIDDM with the goal of normoglycemia. Diabetes Care. 1997;20(5):735–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Eastman RC, Javitt JC, Herman WH, Dasbach EJ, Zbrozek AS, Dong F, et al. Model of complications of NIDDM. I. Model construction and assumptions. Diabetes Care. 1997;20(5):725–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rossing P, Hougaard P, Borch-Johnsen K, Parving HH. Predictors of mortality in insulin dependent diabetes: 10 year observational follow up study. BMJ. 1996;313(7060):779–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Klein R, Klein BE, Lee KE, Moss SE, Cruickshanks KJ. Prevalence of self-reported erectile dysfunction in people with long-term IDDM. Diabetes Care. 1996;19(2):135–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Palmer AJ, Weiss C, Sendi PP, Neeser K, Brandt A, Singh G, et al. The cost-effectiveness of different management strategies for Type I diabetes: a Swiss perspective. Diabetologia. 2000;43(1):13–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Soedamah-Muthu SS, Fuller JH, Mulnier HE, Raleigh VS, Lawrenson RA, Colhoun HM. All-cause mortality rates in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus compared with a non-diabetic population from the UK general practice research database, 1992–1999. Diabetologia. 2006;49(4):660–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Wu SY, Sainfort F, Tomar RH, Tollios JL, Fryback DG, Klein R, et al. Development and application of a model to estimate the impact of type 1 diabetes on health-related quality of life. Diabetes Care. 1998;21(5):725–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Selvin E, Marinopoulos S, Berkenblit G, Rami T, Brancati FL, Powe NR, et al. Meta-analysis: glycosylated hemoglobin and cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(6):421–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. McEwan P, Foos V, Palmer JL, Lamotte M, Lloyd A, Grant D. Validation of the IMS CORE diabetes model. Value Health. 2014;17(6):714–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, et al. Validation of the CORE diabetes model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):S27–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Eddy DM, Schlessinger L. Validation of the archimedes diabetes model. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(11):3102–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Basarir H, Pollard D, Brennan A, Elliott J, Heller S, Campbell MJ. The potential value of ongoing support in type-1 diabetes mellitus with dafneplus: exploratory pre-trial cost-effectiveness analysis on proposed trial end-point target for 12-month hba1c improvement. Value Health. 2014;17(7):A350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Heller S, Lawton J, Amiel S, Cooke D, Mansell P, Brennan A, et al. Improving management of type 1 diabetes in the UK: the Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating (DAFNE) programme as a research test-bed. A mixed-method analysis of the barriers to and facilitators of successful diabetes self-management, a health economic analysis, a cluster randomised controlled trial of different models of delivery of an educational intervention and the potential of insulin pumps and additional educator input to improve outcomes. Programme Grants Appl Res; 2014 Dec.

  51. Asche CV, Hippler SE, Eurich DT. Review of models used in economic analyses of new oral treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(1):15–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Becker C, Langer A, Leidl R. The quality of three decision-analytic diabetes models: a systematic health economic assessment. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;11(6):751–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Wolowacz S, Pearson I, Shannon P, Chubb B, Gundgaard J, Davies M, et al. Development and validation of a cost-utility model for Type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 2015;32(8):1023–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Eddy DM, Hollingworth W, Caro JJ, Tsevat J, McDonald KM, Wong JB. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):733–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Laing S, et al. The British Diabetic Association Cohort Study, I: all-cause mortality in patients with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 1999;16(6):459-65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Martin Henriksson and Ramandeep Jindal were employees of PAREXEL International when the study was conducted, which received funding from AstraZeneca to conduct the systematic literature review and manuscript preparation. Michael Willis is employed by the Swedish Institute for Health Economics, which received funding from AstraZeneca for consulting services, including design of the systematic literature review and manuscript preparation. Catarina Sternhufvud, Klas Bergenheim, and Elisabeth Sörstadius are employees of AstraZeneca; AstraZeneca provided financial funding of the study design and conduct and manuscript preparation. All authors were involved in the development of the systematic literature review and have reviewed and approved the final content of this manuscript.

Editorial support was provided by Elizabeth Griffiths and Sean Walsh at PAREXEL International and was funded by AstraZeneca.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. PAREXEL International, Stockholm, Sweden

    Martin Henriksson

  2. Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

    Martin Henriksson

  3. PAREXEL International, Chandigarh, India

    Ramandeep Jindal

  4. Global Medicines Development | Global Payer Evidence and Pricing, AstraZeneca, SE-431 83, Mölndal, Sweden

    Catarina Sternhufvud, Klas Bergenheim & Elisabeth Sörstadius

  5. The Swedish Institute for Health Economics, IHE, Lund, Sweden

    Michael Willis

Authors
  1. Martin Henriksson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ramandeep Jindal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Catarina Sternhufvud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Klas Bergenheim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elisabeth Sörstadius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michael Willis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catarina Sternhufvud.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 130 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Henriksson, M., Jindal, R., Sternhufvud, C. et al. A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. PharmacoEconomics 34, 569–585 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-015-0374-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-015-0374-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation