Cost–utility analysis and drug pricing of once‐weekly insulin icodec versus once‐daily insulin degludec for type 2 diabetes patients treated with basal insulin in China

Aim Insulin icodec is a first once‐weekly administration basal insulin analogue for type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to investigate the price range of icodec for type 2 diabetes in the Chinese market, taking insulin degludec as reference. Materials and Methods Long‐term health outcomes and costs for icodec and degludec were simulated using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model (version 2.1) over 40 years from the Chinese healthcare provider's perspective. The efficacy and safety data were obtained from the ONWARDS 2 trial (Switching to once‐weekly insulin icodec versus once‐daily insulin degludec in individuals with basal insulin‐treated type 2 diabetes (ONWARDS 2): a phase 3a, randomised, open label, multicentre, treat‐to‐target trial). Cost–utility analysis and a binary search were used to investigate the price range of icodec. Sensitivity analyses were performed to verify the robustness of the base‐case analysis results. Results After a 40‐year simulation, the quality‐adjusted life years (QALY) of icodec and degludec were 10.32 and 10.28 years, respectively. At the initial assumption of the same annual costs of icodec and degludec of $455.40, icodec was the dominant therapy compared with degludec, with higher QALYs and lower total cost. After the binary search, we observed that the annual cost range of icodec was $625.17–$855.25. This cost range was finally adjusted to be $597.66–$736.34 using one‐way sensitivity analysis and confirmed using probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis. The scenario analysis revealed that the annual cost range of icodec could be $506.70–$736.34 if the price of degludec decreased by 20% in the future. Conclusion Insulin icodec appears to be more cost effective than degludec if the annual cost of icodec ranges from $597.66 to $736.34 for patients with type 2 diabetes in China.