Skip to content

Study · Not a test of the peptide alone · 2017

2 results

Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira versus liraglutide added to basal insulin for patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control on basal insulin in the USA.

Hunt B, Mocarski M, Valentine WJ, Langer J

Journal of medical economics15 Mar 2017Cited by 19 (Europe PMC)

PMID28294641 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.1080/13696998.2017.1301943 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-28294641
Publisher pagePubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 2 results

Summary

The text of this summary is not shown here, because the article license does not allow reuse. Read it at the source (opens in a new tab)

Text rights: Publisher copyright. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study2

No result from this study comes from a test of the peptide.

Studies that did not test the peptide alone2

In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. These results are not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  1. 01Computer modelNot a test of Liraglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In a model of adults with type 2 diabetes failing on basal insulin, IDegLira gave small gains in quality-adjusted life expectancy versus liraglutide added to basal insulin (8.94 vs 8.91 QALYs).

    In plain wordsIn a computer model, the insulin degludec and liraglutide combination gave slightly more quality-adjusted life years than liraglutide added to basal insulin.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseQuality-adjusted life expectancy
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Liraglutide added to basal insulin
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Metabolic and weight

    Measurements

    Discounted QALYs
    8.94 QALYs
    IDegLira
    Discounted QALYs
    8.91 QALYs
    liraglutide added to basal insulin

    Source sentences

    Summary
    IDegLira was associated with small improvements in quality-adjusted life expectancy compared with liraglutide added to basal insulin (8.94 vs 8.91 discounted quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]).
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    Projections of lifetime costs and clinical outcomes were made using the IMS CORE Diabetes Model.
    Summary · context
    Treatment effect data for patients receiving IDegLira and liraglutide added to basal insulin were modeled based on the outcomes of a published indirect comparison, as no head-to-head clinical trial data is currently available.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  2. 02Computer modelNot a test of Liraglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In a model of adults with type 2 diabetes failing on basal insulin, IDegLira was associated with mean lifetime cost savings of $17,687 versus liraglutide added to basal insulin.

    In plain wordsIn a computer model, the insulin degludec and liraglutide combination cost less over a lifetime than liraglutide added to basal insulin.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    DecreaseLifetime cost savings
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Liraglutide added to basal insulin
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Metabolic and weight

    Measurements

    Mean lifetime cost savings
    17,687 US dollars
    IDegLira vs liraglutide added to basal insulin

    Source sentences

    Summary
    IDegLira was associated with mean costs savings of $17,687 over patient lifetimes vs liraglutide added to basal insulin, resulting from lower treatment costs and cost savings as a result of complications avoided.
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    Projections of lifetime costs and clinical outcomes were made using the IMS CORE Diabetes Model.
    Summary · context
    Treatment effect data for patients receiving IDegLira and liraglutide added to basal insulin were modeled based on the outcomes of a published indirect comparison, as no head-to-head clinical trial data is currently available.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Registered trials1

Trials this study reports on, or that list this study as a reference. Registry data from ClinicalTrials.gov.

1 trial · 1 completed · 1 with posted results · source ClinicalTrials.gov (opens in a new tab)

CompletedPhase 3Results postedNCT01952145

A Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec/Liraglutide Versus Insulin Glargine in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Novo Nordisk A/Sn = 55720 Sept 2013 to 4 Nov 2014

Diabetes · Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2

Trial pageClinicalTrials.govUpdated 3 Jan 2019

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

  1. Version 2Current

    12 Oct 2026, 12:10 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 1

    9 Oct 2026, 03:05 UTC

    First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.