IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Utility Analysis of Dapagliflozin Versus Saxagliptin Treatment as Monotherapy or Combination Therapy as Add-on to Metformin for Treating Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus


  • Shanshan Hu

    (Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University)

  • Xun Deng

    (Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University
    Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University)

  • Yanjiao Ma

    (Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University)

  • Zhilei Li

    (Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University)

  • Yuhang Wang

    (Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University)

  • Yong Wang

    (Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University
    Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University)


Objective To assess the long-term cost effectiveness of dapagliflozin (DAPA) and saxagliptin (SAXA) separately or together in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled by metformin (MET). Methods Five head-to-head randomised controlled trials of the efficacy of DAPA and SAXA in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients were found by searching PubMed, Embase and Cochrane from inception to October 2019. The lifetime disease progression and long-term effectiveness of therapy in patients were projected by the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcome Model 2 (UKPDS OM2) in three T2DM therapeutic groups: DAPA + SAXA, DAPA and SAXA. Each group used DAPA and/or SAXA as an add-on therapy to MET. The study took the perspective of Chinese healthcare service providers. Univariate, scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results The quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) value of the DAPA + SAXA, SAXA and DAPA groups were 11.28, 11.26 and 11.45 years, respectively. The total costs were US$27,954.84, US$23,254.46 and US$25,608.49, respectively. DAPA was dominant over DAPA + SAXA. The DAPA + SAXA group presented an estimated QALY gain of 0.02 and a total cost increase of US$4700.39 over the SAXA group, with an incremental cost of US$217,530.10 per QALY. Compared with the SAXA group, the DAPA group had a QALY gain of 0.19 years and a total cost increase of US$2354.04, for an incremental cost of US$12,191.97 per QALY. The pharmacoeconomic results were robust to univariate, scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Compared with DAPA + SAXA or SAXA, DAPA appears to be a cost-effective therapy as add-on to MET for Chinese patients whose T2DM is insufficiently controlled by MET.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanshan Hu & Xun Deng & Yanjiao Ma & Zhilei Li & Yuhang Wang & Yong Wang, 2021. "Cost-Utility Analysis of Dapagliflozin Versus Saxagliptin Treatment as Monotherapy or Combination Therapy as Add-on to Metformin for Treating Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 69-79, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-020-00603-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-020-00603-7

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL:
    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

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.


    Blog mentions

    As found by, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 1st February 2021
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2021-02-01 12:00:03

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-020-00603-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.