Skip to content

Study · Not a test of the peptide alone · 2018

3 results

Ideglira is Associated With Improved Short-Term Clinical Outcomes and Cost Savings Compared with Insulin Glargine U100 Plus Insulin Aspart in the U.S.

Dempsey M, Mocarski M, Langer J, Hunt B

Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists1 Sept 2018Cited by 6 (Europe PMC)

PMID30308134 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.4158/ep-2018-0134 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-30308134
Source linkPubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 3 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 study3

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

Studies that did not test the peptide alone3

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 1-year model of US adults with type 2 diabetes not at target on basal insulin, IDegLira gave 0.12 more quality-adjusted life years than insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart.

    In plain wordsIn a computer cost model, IDegLira (insulin degludec with liraglutide) gave a quality-of-life gain compared with insulin glargine plus insulin aspart.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseQuality-adjusted life years
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Cost-utility model, 1-year horizon
    Comparator
    Insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Whole body

    Measurements

    QALY difference
    0.12 QALY
    IDegLira vs glargine plus aspart

    Source sentences

    Summary
    IDegLira was associated with improved quality of life by 0.12 quality-adjusted life years compared with insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    A cost-utility model was developed to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes associated with the 2 treatments over a 1-year time horizon, capturing the impact on quality of life of hypoglycemic events, body mass index, and injection frequency.

    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 the 1-year model, IDegLira increased annual drug costs, but reduced needle and glucose-monitoring costs offset this entirely.

    In plain wordsIn a computer cost model, IDegLira cost more for drugs, but savings on needles and glucose tests covered the difference.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseAnnual drug costs
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Cost-utility model, 1-year horizon
    Comparator
    Insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    IDegLira was associated with increased annual drug costs, but this was entirely offset by reduced needle costs and reduced costs of self-monitoring of blood glucose testing.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    A cost-utility model was developed to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes associated with the 2 treatments over a 1-year time horizon, capturing the impact on quality of life of hypoglycemic events, body mass index, and injection frequency.

    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 silicoOther

    In the 1-year model, IDegLira was associated with total annual cost savings of $743 per patient compared with insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart.

    In plain wordsIn a computer cost model, IDegLira saved about $743 per year for each modelled case compared with insulin glargine plus insulin aspart.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    DecreaseTotal annual cost per patient
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Cost-utility model, 1-year horizon
    Comparator
    Insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Whole body

    Measurements

    Annual cost saving
    743 $
    per patient

    Source sentences

    Summary
    IDegLira was associated with total annual cost savings of $743 per patient.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    A cost-utility model was developed to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes associated with the 2 treatments over a 1-year time horizon, capturing the impact on quality of life of hypoglycemic events, body mass index, and injection frequency.

    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 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.