Skip to content

Study · Not a test of the peptide alone · 2017

7 results

Long-term Cost-effectiveness of Two GLP-1 Receptor Agonists for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the Italian Setting: Liraglutide Versus Lixisenatide.

Hunt B, Kragh N, McConnachie CC, Valentine WJ, Rossi MC, Montagnoli R

Clinical therapeutics16 Jun 2017Cited by 17 (Europe PMC)

PMID28625506 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.05.354 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-28625506
Publisher pagePubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 7 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 study7

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

Studies that did not test the peptide alone7

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 silicoEfficacy outcome

    In a model of adults with type 2 diabetes in Italy, liraglutide 1.8 mg was projected to give longer discounted life expectancy than lixisenatide 20 µg (14.07 vs 13.96 years).

    In plain wordsA computer model projected slightly longer life expectancy with liraglutide than with lixisenatide in type 2 diabetes in Italy.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseProjected life expectancy
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Lixisenatide 20 µg
    Outcome group
    Mortality · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Liraglutide 1.8 mg was associated with improved discounted life expectancy (14.07 vs 13.96 years)
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    The aim of the present analysis was to compare the long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 GLP-1 receptor agonists, liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both administered once daily), in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy in the Italian setting.

    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 silicoEfficacy outcome

    In a model of adults with type 2 diabetes in Italy, liraglutide 1.8 mg was projected to give longer quality-adjusted life expectancy than lixisenatide 20 µg (9.18 vs 9.06 QALYs).

    In plain wordsA computer model projected slightly more healthy life years with liraglutide than with lixisenatide in type 2 diabetes in Italy.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseProjected quality-adjusted life expectancy
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Lixisenatide 20 µg
    Outcome group
    Mortality · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Liraglutide 1.8 mg was associated with improved discounted life expectancy (14.07 vs 13.96 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (9.18 vs 9.06 quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) compared with lixisenatide 20 μg.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    The aim of the present analysis was to compare the long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 GLP-1 receptor agonists, liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both administered once daily), in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy in the Italian setting.

    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.

  3. 03Computer modelNot a test of Liraglutide aloneIn silicoEfficacy outcome

    In the model, the projected gains came mostly from a greater HbA1c reduction with liraglutide 1.8 mg than with lixisenatide 20 µg, giving fewer and later diabetes complications.

    In plain wordsThe model credited most of liraglutide's projected advantage over lixisenatide to a larger HbA1c reduction and fewer, later complications.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    DecreaseProjected HbA1c reduction (model input)
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Lixisenatide 20 µg
    Outcome group
    Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight

    Source sentences

    Summary
    These improvements were mostly attributable to a greater reduction in glycated hemoglobin level with liraglutide 1.8 mg versus lixisenatide 20 μg, leading to reduced incidence and increased time to onset of diabetes-related complications.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    The aim of the present analysis was to compare the long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 GLP-1 receptor agonists, liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both administered once daily), in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy in the Italian setting.

    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.

  4. 04Computer modelNot a test of Liraglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In the model, total lifetime costs were higher with liraglutide 1.8 mg than with lixisenatide 20 µg (EUR 41,623 vs EUR 41,380).

    In plain wordsIn the model, liraglutide cost slightly more over a lifetime than lixisenatide.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseProjected total lifetime costs
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Lixisenatide 20 µg
    Outcome group
    Healthcare costs and utilization · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Compared with lixisenatide 20 μg, liraglutide 1.8 mg was associated with increased total costs over patient lifetimes (€41,623 vs €41,380)
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    The aim of the present analysis was to compare the long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 GLP-1 receptor agonists, liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both administered once daily), in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy in the Italian setting.

    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.

  5. 05Computer modelNot a test of Liraglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In the model, costs of treating diabetes-related complications were lower with liraglutide 1.8 mg than with lixisenatide 20 µg (EUR 26,682 vs EUR 27,476).

    In plain wordsIn the model, liraglutide lowered the cost of treating diabetes complications compared with lixisenatide.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    DecreaseProjected cost of treating complications
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Lixisenatide 20 µg
    Outcome group
    Healthcare costs and utilization · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Compared with lixisenatide 20 μg, liraglutide 1.8 mg was associated with increased total costs over patient lifetimes (€41,623 vs €41,380), but this was offset by lower costs of treating diabetes-related complications (€26,682 vs €27,476).
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    The aim of the present analysis was to compare the long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 GLP-1 receptor agonists, liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both administered once daily), in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy in the Italian setting.

    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.

  6. 06Computer modelNot a test of Liraglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In the model, liraglutide 1.8 mg had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR 2001 per QALY gained versus lixisenatide 20 µg.

    In plain wordsIn the model, liraglutide cost about EUR 2001 for each extra healthy life year gained compared with lixisenatide.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    Not applicableIncremental cost-effectiveness ratio
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Lixisenatide 20 µg
    Outcome group
    Healthcare costs and utilization · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Liraglutide 1.8 mg was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2001 per QALY gained versus lixisenatide 20 μg.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    The aim of the present analysis was to compare the long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 GLP-1 receptor agonists, liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both administered once daily), in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy in the Italian setting.

    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.

  7. 07Computer modelNot a test of Liraglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    At a willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 30,000 per QALY, liraglutide 1.8 mg had a 77.2% probability of being cost-effective versus lixisenatide 20 µg.

    In plain wordsIn the model, liraglutide had a 77.2% chance of being cost-effective compared with lixisenatide.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    Not applicableProbability of cost-effectiveness
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IMS CORE Diabetes Model
    Comparator
    Lixisenatide 20 µg
    Outcome group
    Healthcare costs and utilization · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    At a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained, liraglutide 1.8 mg had a probability of 77.2% of being cost-effective.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    The aim of the present analysis was to compare the long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 GLP-1 receptor agonists, liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both administered once daily), in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy in the Italian setting.

    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.

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 3Current

    27 Oct 2026, 16:36 UTC

    Study data updated · source update from Europe PMC

  2. Version 2

    12 Oct 2026, 12:10 UTC

    Study results updated

  3. 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.