ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2021
Cost-Effectiveness of iGlarLixi Versus iDegLira in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Inadequately Controlled by GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Oral Antihyperglycemic Therapy.
Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of iGlarLixi vs. IDegAsp in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a BRAVO model-based evaluation.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Simplifying Complex Insulin Regimen on Glycometabolic Parameters and Target Organ Damage in Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of diabetes research · 2025Article
- Cost-utility analysis of empagliflozin compared with dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of iGlarLixi Versus IDegAsp and Appropriate Price Exploration of iGlarLixi for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients in China.Clinical drug investigation · 2023Article
- Fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists as a promising strategy for treating diabetes.World journal of diabetes · 2023Review
- Real-world effectiveness of IDegLira compared with intensified conventional insulin therapy in adults with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study.BMC endocrine disorders · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of iGlarLixi Versus Premix BIAsp 30 in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Suboptimally Controlled by Basal Insulin in the UK.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec/insulin aspart versus biphasic insulin aspart in Chinese population with type 2 diabetes.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of iGlarLixi in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Suboptimally Controlled on Basal Insulin Plus Metformin in the UK.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and basal insulin, insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi), and insulin degludec plus liraglutide (iDegLira), have demonstrated safety and efficacy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on GLP-1 RAs. However, a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis between these FRCs from a UK Health Service perspective has not been conducted.
methodsThe IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was used to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes in patients with T2DM receiving iGlarLixi (based on the LixiLan-G trial) versus iDegLira (based on relative treatment effects from an indirect treatment comparison using data from DUAL III). Utilities, medical costs, and costs of diabetes-related complications were derived from literature. Model outputs included costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated with a local willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY. Extensive scenario, one-way sensitivity, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the model.
resultsiGlarLixi was less costly (iGlarLixi, £30,011; iDegLira, £40,742), owing to lower acquisition costs, and similar in terms of QALYs gained (iGlarLixi, 8.437; iDegLira, 8.422). Extensive scenario and sensitivity analyses supported the base case findings.
conclusionIn patients with T2DM and inadequate glycemic control despite GLP-1 RAs, use of iGlarLixi was associated with substantial cost savings and comparable utility outcomes. iGlarLixi can be considered as cost-effective versus iDegLira from the UK Health Service perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.