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.

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

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

Cost-Effectiveness of the FreeStyle Libre® System Versus Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes on Insulin Treatment in Sweden

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

Cost-Effectiveness of Flash Glucose Monitoring for the Management of Patients with Type 1 and Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in China

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

A European Cost-Utility Analysis of the MiniMed™ 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Versus Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring with Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in People Living with Type 1 Diabetes

Cost–utility analysis of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus FreeStyle Libre 1 intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium

Budget Impact Analysis of the FreeStyle Libre Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring System® in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in Argentina

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.

Flash glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes managed with basal insulin in the USA: a retrospective real-world chart review study and meta-analysis

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)

Effectiveness of the flash glucose monitoring system in preventing severe hypoglycemic episodes and in improving glucose metrics and quality of life in subjects with type 1 diabetes at high risk of acute diabetes complications

Flash Glucose-Sensing Technology as a Replacement for Blood Glucose Monitoring for the Management of Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: a Multicenter, Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial

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

Impact in real-world of intermittent-scanned continuous glucose monitoring with alarms on hypoglycemia and its recognition in type 1 diabetes

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

Quality of Life and Glucose Control After 1 Year of Nationwide Reimbursement of Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults Living With Type 1 Diabetes (FUTURE): A Prospective Observational Real-World Cohort Study

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

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