ArticleClinical drug investigation2025
Cost-Effectiveness of Adding Dapagliflozin and Empagliflozin to Standard Treatment for Diabetic Kidney Disease in China.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDapagliflozin and empagliflozin are emerging as promising treatment options for diabetic kidney disease (DKD).
objectiveThis study sought to evaluate the cost effectiveness of incorporating dapagliflozin and empagliflozin into the standard treatment for DKD in China.
methodsA Markov model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin plus standard treatment versus standard treatment alone for DKD treatment from a healthcare perspective. Costs and utility data was obtained from published literatures within the Chinese context. The primary outcome included total cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). GDP per capita of 2023 in China (¥89,358) was utilized as the willingness-to-pay threshold.
resultsCompared to standard treatment alone, add-on therapy of dapagliflozin or empagliflozin resulted in a higher total cost than those solely receiving standard treatment (+¥19,203.56 and +¥9496.92, respectively). However, both dapagliflozin and empagliflozin also yielded more life-years (+1.72 vs. +1.40) and QALYs (+1.40 vs. +0.88). The ICER per life-year and ICER per QALY was ¥11,178.52 and ¥18,192.50 for dapagliflozin and ¥6773.10 and ¥10,811.64 for empagliflozin, respectively. The incremental net monetary benefit was ¥75,120.54 and ¥68,994.90 for dapagliflozin and empagliflozin, respectively. Sensitivity analysis supported the main findings of the base-case analysis as the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin or empagliflozin was sustained for most plausible ranges of parameter values.
conclusionsConsidering that the ICER falls below the predefined willingness-to-pay threshold, incorporating dapagliflozin and empagliflozin into standard treatment for DKD is likely to be a cost-effective strategy in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40658333What 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.