Cost-effectiveness of weight-management pharmacotherapies in Canada: a societal perspective
Authors' conclusion
Semaglutide 2.4 mg was the most cost-effective treatment alternative compared with D&E or orlistat alone, and extendedly dominated other pharmacotherapies such as NB-32 or liraglutide 3.0 mg. Results were sensitive to the inclusion of the combined benefits of mortality, cancer, CVD, and knee osteoarthritis.
Study context
- Population
- Modelled cohort: mean starting age 50 years, body mass index (BMI) 37.5 kg/m², 27.6% with T2D; Canadamodelled cohort
- Comparison
- Orlistat, NB-32, liraglutide 3.0 mg and semaglutide 2.4 mg vs standard of care (SoC)
- Outcome
- Cost-effectiveness (ICUR) at WTP CAD 50 000 per QALY, societal perspective
- Follow-up
- Lifetime
Methodological detailssocietal perspective, lifetime horizon, cohort model, network meta-analysis
- Societal perspective
- Lifetime horizon
- Cohort model
- Network meta-analysis
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR)
CAD 31 243 per QALY gained
Semaglutide 2.4 mg vs Orlistat · orlistat = next best alternative
ICUR
CAD 29 014 per QALY gained
Semaglutide 2.4 mg vs SoC
Further pooled results
| Outcome | ICUR (per QALY gained) |
|---|---|
| Scenario: benefits on cancer, mortality, CVD and osteoarthritis surgeries removed simultaneouslyOrlistat vs SoC · orlistat best value for money | CAD 35 723 |
Payer perspectives
- Semaglutide 2.4 mg remained cost-effective under public and private payer perspectives
Probabilistic sensitivity analysis
- Likelihood semaglutide 2.4 mg preferred at willingness-to-pay (WTP) CAD 50 000 per QALY gained
- 70%
- Results robust to varying post-treatment catch-up rates, longer treatment durations and real-world cohort characteristics
Original publication
Cost-effectiveness of weight-management pharmacotherapies in Canada: a societal perspective. Int J Obes (Lond). Published 31 January 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →