Economics of Switching from Vial to Disposable Pen Among Insulin Glargine-Treated Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Xie, Lin and Zhou, Steve and Wei, Wenhui and Gill, Jasvinder and Pan, Chunshen and Baser, Onur (2013): Economics of Switching from Vial to Disposable Pen Among Insulin Glargine-Treated Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Published in: Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics , Vol. 15, No. 3 (2013): pp. 230-236.

Abstract

Objective: The study was designed to evaluate real-world data on clinical and economic outcome differences between patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who use insulin glargine with vial-and-syringe delivery and those who switch to pen administration. Subjects and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed medical and pharmacy claims information from the national managed-care IMPACT® database (Ingenix Inc., Salt Lake City, UT). Adults with T2DM treated with insulin glargine were evaluated. Clinical and economic outcomes over 1 year were compared between individuals who had converted from administering glargine via vial-and-syringe to the SoloSTAR® (sanofi-aventis U.S., Bridgewater, NJ) pen (Switchers) and patients who continued to use vial-and-syringe administration (Continuers). Patients from each cohort were matched using propensity score matching for a comparison sample. Results: In total, 3,893 eligible patients were identified (665 Switchers and 3,228 Continuers), with a matched cohort with 603 patients in each group. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. One-year treatment persistence was signifi-cantly higher with Switchers versus Continuers (65.3% vs. 49.8%; P < 0.0001). Medication possession ratio was also signifi-cantly higher among Switchers (0.79 vs. 0.76; P = 0.0173). Insulin use and glycemic control were similar between groups. Healthcare utilization and total costs were also similar between groups. Higher prescription costs among Switchers were offset by lower overall and diabetes-related outpatient and inpatient costs.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Vial to Disposable Pen, Insulin Glargine-Treated Patients, Diabetes Mellitus
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C0 - General; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health

References

1.Brunton S: Initiating insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: benefits of insulin analogs and insulin pens. Diabetes Technol Ther 2008;10:247–256.

2.DeWitt DE, Hirsch IB: Outpatient insulin therapy in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: scientific review. JAMA 2003;289:2254–2264.

3.Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, Diamant M, Ferrannini E, Nauck M, Peters AL, Tsapas A, Wender R, Matthews DR: Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient- centered approach. Position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetologia 2012;55: 1557–1596.

4.Korytkowski M, Niskanen L, Asakura T: FlexPen: addressing issues of confidence and convenience in insulin delivery. Clin Ther 2005;27(Suppl B):S89–S100.

5.Goldstein HH: Pen devices to improve patient adherence with insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes. Postgrad Med 2008;120:172–179.

6.Magwire ML: Addressing barriers to insulin therapy: the role of insulin pens. Am J Ther 2011;18:392–402.

7.Peyrot M, Rubin RR, Lauritzen T, Skovlund SE, Snoek FJ, Matthews DR, Landgraf R, Kleinebreil L; International DAWN Advisory Panel: Resistance to insulin therapy among patients and providers: results of the cross-national Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes, and Needs (DAWN) study. Diabetes Care 2005;28:2673–2679.

8.Korytkowski M, Bell D, Jacobsen C, Suwannasari R: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, comparative, twoperiod crossover trial of preference, efficacy, and safety profiles of a prefilled, disposable pen and conventional vial/syringe for insulin injection in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus. Clin Ther 2003;25:2836–2848.

9.Carter J, Roberts A: Usability of a pre-filled insulin injection device in a 3-month observational survey of everyday clinical practice in Australia. Curr Med Res Opin 2008;24: 2741–2749.

10.Summers KH, Szeinbach SL, Lenox SM: Preference for insulin delivery systems among current insulin users and nonusers. Clin Ther 2004;26:1498–1505.

11.Lee WC, Balu S, Cobden D, Joshi AV, Pashos CL: Medication adherence and the associated health-economic impact among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus converting to insulin pen therapy: an analysis of third-party managed care claims data. Clin Ther 2006;28:1712–1725.

12.Cobden D, Lee WC, Balu S, Joshi AV, Pashos CL: Health outcomes and economic impact of therapy conversion to a biphasic insulin analog pen among privately insured patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Pharmacotherapy 2007;27:948–962.

13.Pawaskar MD, Camacho FT, Anderson RT, Cobden D, Joshi AV, Balkrishnan R: Health care costs and medication adherence associated with initiation of insulin pen therapy in Medicaid-enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective database analysis. Clin Ther 2007;29:1294–1305.

14.Asche CV, Shane-McWhorter L, Raparla S: Health economics and compliance of vials/syringes versus pen devices: a review of the evidence. Diabetes Technol Ther 2010;12(Suppl 1):S-101–S-108.

15.Davis SN, Wei W, Garg S: Clinical impact of initiating insulin glargine therapy with disposable pen versus vial in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a managed care setting. Endocr Pract 2011;17:845–852.

16.Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, Gold J: Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47: 1245–1251.

17.Xie L, Wei W, Pan C, Du J, Baser O: A real-world study of patients with type 2 diabetes initiating basal insulins via disposable pens. Adv Ther 2011;28:1000–1011.

18.Baser O, Wei W, Baser E, Xie L: Clinical and economic outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin glargine disposable pen versus exenatide BID. J Med Econ 2011;14:673–680.

19.Levin P, Wei W, Wang L, Pan C, Douglas D, Baser O: Combination therapy with insulin glargine and exenatide: real-world outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin 2012;28:439–446.

20.Baser O, Bouchard J, DeLuzio T, Henk H, Aagren M: Assessment of adherence and healthcare costs of insulin device (FlexPen) versus conventional vial/syringe. Adv Ther 2010;27:94–104.

21.Zhao Y, Campbell CR, Fonseca V, Shi L: Impact of hypoglycemia associated with antihyperglycemic medications on vascular risks in veterans with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2012;35:1126–1132.

22.Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB: The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983;70:41–55.

23.Hancu N, Czupryniak L, Genestin E, Sourij H: A Pan-European and Canadian prospective survey to evaluate patient satisfaction with the SoloSTAR insulin injection device in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2011;5:1224–1234.

24.Buysman E, Conner C, Aagren M, Bouchard J, Liu F: Adherence and persistence to a regimen of basal insulin in a pre-filled pen compared to vial/syringe in insulin-naı¨ve patients with type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin 2011;27:1709–1717.

25.Clarke A, Dain MP: Dose accuracy of a reusable insulin pen using a cartridge system with an integrated plunger mechanism. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2006;3:677–683.

26.Marcus A: Diabetes care—insulin delivery in a changing world. Medscape J Med 2008;10:120.

27.Shaghouly AA, Shah BR: The prescription of insulin pen devices versus syringes for older people with diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2009;11:439–442.