Cost Effectiveness of Once-Weekly Semaglutide Versus Once-Weekly Dulaglutide in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Canada.

Johansen P, Håkan-Bloch J, Liu AR, Bech PG, Persson S, Leiter LA

PharmacoEconomics - open1 Dec 2019Cited by 27 (Europe PMC)

PMID30927241PMCIDPMC6861407DOI10.1007/s41669-019-0131-6PepBankPUB-30927241

Read at source PubMedAsk about this study

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. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study6

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

Studies that did not test the peptide alone6

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.

01Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther
In a Canadian T2D model, semaglutide was economically dominant versus dulaglutide in the base case.
In plain wordsComputer projections for Canadian T2D favored semaglutide over dulaglutide for outcomes and costs in the base case.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
Not applicableEconomic dominance in base case
Study
n: not reported in source
Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Outcome group
Cost-effectiveness · Whole body
Source sentences
Summary
The base-case analysis indicated that semaglutide is a dominant treatment option, compared with dulaglutide.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide, as an add-on to metformin monotherapy, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), from a Canadian societal perspective.
Summary · context
The Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D was used to assess the cost effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) versus once-weekly dulaglutide (0.75 or 1.5 mg) over a 40-year time horizon.
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.
Report a problemFND-3092724101
02Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther
In a Canadian T2D model, semaglutide 0.5 mg lowered projected total costs versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg.
In plain wordsComputer projections for Canadian T2D predicted lower total costs with semaglutide 0.5 mg than dulaglutide 0.75 mg.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseProjected total costs, low-dose comparison
Study
n: not reported in source
Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D
Comparator
Dulaglutide 0.75 mg
Outcome group
Cost-effectiveness · Whole body
Measurements
Cost saving
403 CAN$
low-dose comparison
Source sentences
Summary
Semaglutide was associated with lower total costs (Canadian dollars [CAN$]) versus dulaglutide for both low-dose (CAN$113,287 vs. CAN$113,690; cost-saving: CAN$403) and high-dose (CAN$112,983 vs. CAN$113,695; cost-saving: CAN$711) comparisons.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide, as an add-on to metformin monotherapy, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), from a Canadian societal perspective.
Summary · context
The Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D was used to assess the cost effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) versus once-weekly dulaglutide (0.75 or 1.5 mg) over a 40-year time horizon.
In this study, Semaglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Semaglutide.
Report a problemFND-3092724102
03Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther
In a Canadian T2D model, semaglutide 1.0 mg lowered projected total costs versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg.
In plain wordsComputer projections for Canadian T2D predicted lower total costs with semaglutide 1.0 mg than dulaglutide 1.5 mg.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
DecreaseProjected total costs, high-dose comparison
Study
n: not reported in source
Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D
Comparator
Dulaglutide 1.5 mg
Outcome group
Cost-effectiveness · Whole body
Measurements
Cost saving
711 CAN$
high-dose comparison
Source sentences
Summary
Semaglutide was associated with lower total costs (Canadian dollars [CAN$]) versus dulaglutide for both low-dose (CAN$113,287 vs. CAN$113,690; cost-saving: CAN$403) and high-dose (CAN$112,983 vs. CAN$113,695; cost-saving: CAN$711) comparisons.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide, as an add-on to metformin monotherapy, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), from a Canadian societal perspective.
Summary · context
The Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D was used to assess the cost effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) versus once-weekly dulaglutide (0.75 or 1.5 mg) over a 40-year time horizon.
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.
Report a problemFND-3092724103
04Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther
In a Canadian T2D model, semaglutide 0.5 mg increased projected QALYs versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg.
In plain wordsComputer projections for Canadian T2D predicted more quality-adjusted life years with semaglutide 0.5 mg than dulaglutide 0.75 mg.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
IncreaseProjected QALYs, low-dose comparison
Study
n: not reported in source
Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D
Comparator
Dulaglutide 0.75 mg
Outcome group
Quality of life · Whole body
Measurements
QALY gain
0.04 QALYs
low-dose comparison
Source sentences
Summary
Semaglutide resulted in increased quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and QALY gains, compared with dulaglutide, for both low-dose (11.10 vs. 11.07 QALYs; + 0.04 QALYs) and high-dose (11.12 vs. 11.07 QALYs; + 0.05 QALYs) comparisons.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide, as an add-on to metformin monotherapy, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), from a Canadian societal perspective.
Summary · context
The Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D was used to assess the cost effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) versus once-weekly dulaglutide (0.75 or 1.5 mg) over a 40-year time horizon.
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.
Report a problemFND-3092724104
05Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther
In a Canadian T2D model, semaglutide 1.0 mg increased projected QALYs versus dulaglutide 1.5 mg.
In plain wordsComputer projections for Canadian T2D predicted more quality-adjusted life years with semaglutide 1.0 mg than dulaglutide 1.5 mg.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
IncreaseProjected QALYs, high-dose comparison
Study
n: not reported in source
Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D
Comparator
Dulaglutide 1.5 mg
Outcome group
Quality of life · Whole body
Measurements
QALY gain
0.05 QALYs
high-dose comparison
Source sentences
Summary
Semaglutide resulted in increased quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and QALY gains, compared with dulaglutide, for both low-dose (11.10 vs. 11.07 QALYs; + 0.04 QALYs) and high-dose (11.12 vs. 11.07 QALYs; + 0.05 QALYs) comparisons.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide, as an add-on to metformin monotherapy, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), from a Canadian societal perspective.
Summary · context
The Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D was used to assess the cost effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) versus once-weekly dulaglutide (0.75 or 1.5 mg) over a 40-year time horizon.
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.
Report a problemFND-3092724105
06Computer modelNot a test of Semaglutide aloneIn silicoOther
In a Canadian T2D model, semaglutide was dominant or cost effective in 66-73% of iterations at CAN$50,000 willingness to pay.
In plain wordsComputer projections for Canadian T2D favored semaglutide over dulaglutide in 66-73% of iterations at a CAN$50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold.
Peptide
Semaglutide
Outcome
Not applicableProbabilistic cost-effectiveness
Study
n: not reported in source
Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D
Comparator
Dulaglutide
Outcome group
Cost-effectiveness · Whole body
Measurements
Dominant or cost-effective iterations
66 to 73%
CAN$50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold
Source sentences
Summary
The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that for 66-73% of iterations, semaglutide was either dominant or was considered cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAN$50,000.
2 context sentences(design, population, supporting numbers)
Summary · context
The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide, as an add-on to metformin monotherapy, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), from a Canadian societal perspective.
Summary · context
The Swedish Institute for Health Economics Cohort Model of T2D was used to assess the cost effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) versus once-weekly dulaglutide (0.75 or 1.5 mg) over a 40-year time horizon.
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.
Report a problemFND-3092724106

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 page ClinicalTrials.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.

Version 3Current
22 Oct 2026, 02:26 UTC
Study results updated
Version 2
21 Oct 2026, 18:59 UTC
Study data updated · source update from Europe PMC
Version 1
9 Oct 2026, 03:06 UTC
First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

Publication types

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