Cost-effectiveness of Semaglutide Compared With Other Glucose-Lowering Medications in Treating Type 2 Diabetes: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Authors' conclusion
Semaglutide is generally cost-effective compared with other glucose-lowering medications in evaluation against within-study willingness-to-pay thresholds; however, results varied by study sponsor type, region, and model assumptions, highlighting the need for transparent and context-sensitive economic evaluations.
Study context
- Population
- Cost-effectiveness studies of semaglutide in T2D from 2019 onward; Europe, North America, Asia (all China)articles, 119 comparisons · Europe 24 · North America 13 · Asia (all China) 8
- Participants
- 45 participants
- Comparison
- Semaglutide vs other T2D medications
- Outcome
- Proportion of comparisons in which semaglutide was dominant/cost-effective
Methodological detailssensitivity analysis with standard willingness-to-pay threshold
- Sensitivity analysis with standard willingness-to-pay threshold
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Semaglutide dominant/cost-effective
Semaglutide dominant/cost-effective, all comparisons
73.9%
Further pooled results
Semaglutide dominant/cost-effective by sponsor type
- Sponsored by Novo Nordisk
- all comparisons
- Funded by nonindustry sponsors
- 50.0%
- Funded by other industry sponsors
- none
Cost-effectiveness by region and model assumptions
- Semaglutide more cost-effective in high-income countries and in studies with broader perspective, longer horizon and lower discount rates
Sensitivity analysis
- Results consistent with common currency unit and willingness-to-pay threshold of US$50,000
Study characteristics
- Lifetime horizon
- 93.3%
- Health care perspective
- 84.4%
- Industry sponsored
- 68.9%
- High reporting quality
- 86.7%
Original publication
Cost-effectiveness of Semaglutide Compared With Other Glucose-Lowering Medications in Treating Type 2 Diabetes: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. Published 20 May 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →