IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0351059.html

Cost-effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide for Type 2 Diabetes in China: A Markov Model analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Qiying Chen
  • Tianyu Chen
  • Weicheng Lin
  • Xi Chen

Abstract

Objective: From the perspective of China’s basic medical insurance, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in China, informing clinical and health policy decisions. Methods: This study employed a Markov model to simulate the disease progression of T2DM over a 25-year time horizon. Transition probabilities between health states were sourced from the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model (UKPDS 82) and the SUSTAIN 7 clinical trial, while health utility values were obtained from published literature using the Chinese EQ-5D-5L value set. Long-term cost-effectiveness was projected through cohort simulation, with both one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) conducted to evaluate the robustness of the model. Results: After 25 years of simulation, the total cost for dulaglutide was ¥193,353.07, with 11.628 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. The total cost for semaglutide was ¥240,925.08, yielding 11.900 QALYs. Compared with dulaglutide, semaglutide had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ¥174,904 per QALY gained, approximately twice China’s 2023 per capita GDP (¥89,358). According to the Chinese Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation (2020), this result falls within the economically acceptable range (1 × GDP

Suggested Citation

  • Qiying Chen & Tianyu Chen & Weicheng Lin & Xi Chen, 2026. "Cost-effectiveness of semaglutide versus dulaglutide for Type 2 Diabetes in China: A Markov Model analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(6), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0351059
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0351059
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0351059
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0351059&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0351059?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0351059. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.