Abstract:Background: Reducing the risks of complications is a primary goal of diabetes management, with effective glycemic control a key factor. Glucose monitoring using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology is an important part of diabetes self-management, helping patients reach and maintain targeted glucose and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. Although clinical guidelines recommended CGM use, coverage by Medicaid is limited, likely because of cost concerns. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of FreeStyle Libre CGM systems, compared with capillary-based self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), in US individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus using basal insulin. Methods: A patient-level microsimulation model was used to compare CGM with SMBG for a population of 10,000 patients. A 10-year horizon was used, with an annual discount rate of 3.0% for costs and utilities. Model population characteristics were based on US national epidemiology data. Patient outcomes were based on published clinical trials and real-world studies. Annual costs, reflective of 2023 values, included CGM and SMBG acquisition costs and the costs of treating diabetic ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycemia, and diabetes complications. The effect of CGM was modeled as a persistent 1.1% reduction in HbA1c relative to SMBG based on US real-world evidence. Disutilities were based on published clinical trials and other relevant literature. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the validity of the model results when accounting for a plausible variation of inputs. Results: In the base case analysis, CGM was dominant to SMBG, providing more QALYs (6.18 vs 5.97) at a lower cost ($70,137 vs $71,809) over the 10-year time horizon. A $10,456 increase in glucose monitoring costs was offset by a $12,127 reduction in treatment costs. Cost savings reflected avoidance of acute diabetic events (savings owing to reductions in severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis were $271 and $2,159, respectively) and a reduced cumulative incidence of diabetes complications, particularly renal failure (saving $5,292), myocardial infarction (saving $1,996), and congestive heart failure (saving $1,061). Scenario analyses were consistent with the base case results, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CGM vs SMBG ranged from dominant to cost-effective. In probabilistic analysis, CGM was 100% likely to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. Conclusions: CGM is cost-effective compared with SMBG for US patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving basal insulin therapy. This suggests that state Medicaid programs could benefit from broader coverage of CGM.

Budget impact analysis of continuous glucose monitoring in individuals with type 2 diabetes on insulin treatment in England

Personal Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Clinical Efficacy and Economic Impacts

Impact of continuous glucose monitoring on hospitalizations and glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes: real‐world analysis

Cost-effectiveness of Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Compared With Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose: The DIAMOND Randomized Trial

Continuous glucose monitoring for self-management of diabetes in people living with type 2 diabetes mellitus on basal insulin therapy: A microsimulation model and cost-effectiveness analysis from a US perspective with relevance to Medicaid

Efficacy and Safety of Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Interventional Evidence

Impact of continuous glucose monitoring on emergency department visits and all-cause hospitalization rates among Medicaid beneficiaries with type 2 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin or basal insulin therapy

Cost-utility of real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose in people with insulin-treated Type II diabetes in France

Clinical and economic benefits of professional CGM among people with type 2 diabetes in the United States: analysis of claims and lab data

Long-term Cost-Effectiveness of Dexcom G6 Real-time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes in the U.K.

Health Care Costs, Hospital Admissions, and Glycemic Control Using a Standalone, Real-Time, Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Commercially Insured Patients With Type 1 Diabetes

Real-time continuous glucose monitoring vs. self-monitoring of blood glucose: cost-utility in South Korean type 2 diabetes patients on intensive insulin

Cost–utility analysis of a flash continuous glucose monitoring system in the management of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus on basal insulin therapy—An Italian healthcare system perspective

141-LB: Cost-Effectiveness of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring (rt-CGM) vs. Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring (is-CGM) from a U.S. Payer Perspective in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes on Multiple Daily Injections of Insulin (PwT2D on MDI)

Continuous and Intermittent Glucose Monitoring in 2023

Effectiveness and acceptability of continuous glucose monitoring for type 2 diabetes management: A narrative review

Continuous glucose monitoring vs. self-monitoring in pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes: an economic analysis

Perspective of Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Based Interventions at the Various Stages of Type 2 Diabetes

Continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluating the Cost-Utility of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Individuals with Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of the Methods and Quality of Studies Using Decision Models or Empirical Data

Dynamics of HbA1c, BMI and rates of severe hypoglycemia in 4,434 adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes after initiation of continuous glucose monitoring.