Skip to content

Study · Not a test of the peptide alone · 2019

5 results

Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide versus dulaglutide for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the UK.

Viljoen A, Hoxer CS, Johansen P, Malkin S, Hunt B, Bain SC

Diabetes, obesity & metabolism28 Nov 2018Cited by 41 (Europe PMC)

PMID30362224 (opens in a new tab)PMCIDPMC6587509 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.1111/dom.13564 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-30362224
Read at sourcePubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 5 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: CC BY-NC-ND. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study5

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

Studies that did not test the peptide alone5

In this study, Semaglutide 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 Semaglutide.

  1. 01Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In a UK T2DM model, semaglutide 0.5 mg increased projected quality-adjusted life expectancy versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    In plain wordsComputer projections for UK T2DM predicted longer quality-adjusted life with semaglutide 0.5 mg than dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    Peptide
    Semaglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseProjected quality-adjusted life expectancy, lower dose
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0)
    Comparator
    Dulaglutide 1.5 mg
    Outcome group
    Quality of life · Whole body

    Measurements

    Quality-adjusted life expectancy gain
    0.04 QALYs
    semaglutide 0.5 mg versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg were associated with improvements in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.04 and 0.10 quality-adjusted life years, respectively, compared with dulaglutide 1.5 mg.
    3 context sentences
    Summary · context
    This analysis assessed the long-term cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg vs dulaglutide 1.5 mg (two once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists) from a UK healthcare payer perspective, based on the head-to-head SUSTAIN 7 trial, to inform healthcare decision making.
    Summary · context
    Long-term outcomes were projected using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0).
    Summary · context
    Baseline cohort characteristics, changes in physiological parameters and adverse event rates were derived from the 40-week SUSTAIN 7 trial.

    In this study, Semaglutide 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 Semaglutide.

  2. 02Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In a UK T2DM model, semaglutide 1 mg increased projected quality-adjusted life expectancy versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    In plain wordsComputer projections for UK T2DM predicted longer quality-adjusted life with semaglutide 1 mg than dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    Peptide
    Semaglutide
    Outcome
    IncreaseProjected quality-adjusted life expectancy, higher dose
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0)
    Comparator
    Dulaglutide 1.5 mg
    Outcome group
    Quality of life · Whole body

    Measurements

    Quality-adjusted life expectancy gain
    0.1 QALYs
    semaglutide 1 mg versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg were associated with improvements in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.04 and 0.10 quality-adjusted life years, respectively, compared with dulaglutide 1.5 mg.
    3 context sentences
    Summary · context
    This analysis assessed the long-term cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg vs dulaglutide 1.5 mg (two once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists) from a UK healthcare payer perspective, based on the head-to-head SUSTAIN 7 trial, to inform healthcare decision making.
    Summary · context
    Long-term outcomes were projected using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0).
    Summary · context
    Baseline cohort characteristics, changes in physiological parameters and adverse event rates were derived from the 40-week SUSTAIN 7 trial.

    In this study, Semaglutide 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 Semaglutide.

  3. 03Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In a UK T2DM model, semaglutide 0.5 mg reduced projected lifetime costs versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    In plain wordsComputer projections for UK T2DM predicted lower lifetime costs with semaglutide 0.5 mg than dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    Peptide
    Semaglutide
    Outcome
    DecreaseProjected lifetime cost, lower dose
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0)
    Comparator
    Dulaglutide 1.5 mg
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Whole body

    Measurements

    Lifetime cost saving
    35 GBP
    semaglutide 0.5 mg versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Clinical benefits were achieved at reduced costs, with lifetime cost savings of GBP 35 with once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and GBP 106 with the once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg, resulting from fewer diabetes-related complications due to better glycaemic control.
    3 context sentences
    Summary · context
    This analysis assessed the long-term cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg vs dulaglutide 1.5 mg (two once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists) from a UK healthcare payer perspective, based on the head-to-head SUSTAIN 7 trial, to inform healthcare decision making.
    Summary · context
    Long-term outcomes were projected using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0).
    Summary · context
    Baseline cohort characteristics, changes in physiological parameters and adverse event rates were derived from the 40-week SUSTAIN 7 trial.

    In this study, Semaglutide 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 Semaglutide.

  4. 04Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In a UK T2DM model, semaglutide 1 mg reduced projected lifetime costs versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    In plain wordsComputer projections for UK T2DM predicted lower lifetime costs with semaglutide 1 mg than dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    Peptide
    Semaglutide
    Outcome
    DecreaseProjected lifetime cost, higher dose
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0)
    Comparator
    Dulaglutide 1.5 mg
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Whole body

    Measurements

    Lifetime cost saving
    106 GBP
    semaglutide 1 mg versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Clinical benefits were achieved at reduced costs, with lifetime cost savings of GBP 35 with once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and GBP 106 with the once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg, resulting from fewer diabetes-related complications due to better glycaemic control.
    3 context sentences
    Summary · context
    This analysis assessed the long-term cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg vs dulaglutide 1.5 mg (two once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists) from a UK healthcare payer perspective, based on the head-to-head SUSTAIN 7 trial, to inform healthcare decision making.
    Summary · context
    Long-term outcomes were projected using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0).
    Summary · context
    Baseline cohort characteristics, changes in physiological parameters and adverse event rates were derived from the 40-week SUSTAIN 7 trial.

    In this study, Semaglutide 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 Semaglutide.

  5. 05Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther

    In a UK T2DM model, both semaglutide doses were economically dominant versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg.

    In plain wordsComputer projections for UK T2DM favored both semaglutide doses over dulaglutide 1.5 mg for outcomes and costs.

    Peptide
    Semaglutide
    Outcome
    Not applicableEconomic dominance
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0)
    Comparator
    Dulaglutide 1.5 mg
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Whole body

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Therefore, both doses of once-weekly semaglutide were considered dominant vs dulaglutide 1.5 mg (improving outcomes and reducing costs).
    3 context sentences
    Summary · context
    This analysis assessed the long-term cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg vs dulaglutide 1.5 mg (two once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists) from a UK healthcare payer perspective, based on the head-to-head SUSTAIN 7 trial, to inform healthcare decision making.
    Summary · context
    Long-term outcomes were projected using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0).
    Summary · context
    Baseline cohort characteristics, changes in physiological parameters and adverse event rates were derived from the 40-week SUSTAIN 7 trial.

    In this study, Semaglutide 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 Semaglutide.

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 postedNCT02648204

Efficacy and Safety of Semaglutide Versus Dulaglutide as add-on to Metformin in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes.

Novo Nordisk A/Sn = 1,2016 Jan 2016 to 19 May 2017

Diabetes · Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2

Trial pageClinicalTrials.govUpdated 15 Oct 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 3Current

    22 Oct 2026, 02:26 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 2

    21 Oct 2026, 18:59 UTC

    Study data updated · source update from Europe PMC

  3. Version 1

    9 Oct 2026, 03:06 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.