Cost-effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment of early gestational diabetes mellitus: economic evaluation of the TOBOGM study, an international multicenter randomized controlled trial
Mohammad M Haque,W Kathy Tannous,William H Herman,Jincy Immanuel,William M Hague,Helena Teede,Joanne Enticott,N Wah Cheung,Emily Hibbert,Christopher J Nolan,Michael J Peek,Vincent W Wong,Jeff R Flack,Mark Mclean,Arianne Sweeting,Emily Gianatti,Alexandra Kautzky-Willer,Jürgen Harreiter,Viswanathan Mohan,Helena Backman,David Simmons,TOBOGM Consortium
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102610
IF: 15.1
2024-04-24
EClinicalMedicine
Abstract:Background: A recently undertaken multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) "Treatment Of BOoking Gestational diabetes Mellitus" (TOBOGM: 2017-2022) found that the diagnosis and treatment of pregnant women with early gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) improved pregnancy outcomes. Based on data from the trial, this study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment of early GDM (from <20 weeks') among women with risk factors for hyperglycemia in pregnancy compared with usual care (no treatment until 24-28 weeks') from a healthcare perspective. Methods: Participants' healthcare resource utilization data were collected from their self-reported questionnaires and hospital records, and valued using the unit costs obtained from standard Australian national sources. Costs were reported in US dollars ($) using the purchasing power parity (PPP) estimates to facilitate comparison of costs across countries. Intention-to-treat (ITT) principle was followed. Missing cost data were replaced using multiple imputations. Bootstrapping method was used to estimate the uncertainty around mean cost difference and cost-effectiveness results. Bootstrapped cost-effect pairs were used to plot the cost-effectiveness (CE) plane and cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC). Findings: Diagnosis and treatment of early GDM was more effective and tended to be less costly, i.e., dominant (cost-saving) [-5.6% composite adverse pregnancy outcome (95% CI: -10.1%, -1.2%), -$1373 (95% CI: -$3,749, $642)] compared with usual care. Our findings were confirmed by both the CE plane (88% of the bootstrapped cost-effect pairs fall in the south-west quadrant), and CEAC (the probability of the intervention being cost-effective ranged from 84% at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold value of $10,000-99% at a WTP threshold value of $100,000 per composite adverse pregnancy outcome prevented). Sub-group analyses demonstrated that diagnosis and treatment of early GDM among women in the higher glycemic range (fasting blood glucose 95-109 mg/dl [5.3-6.0 mmol/L], 1-h blood glucose ≥191 mg/dl [10.6 mmol/L] and/or 2-h blood glucose 162-199 mg/dl [9.0-11.0 mmol/L]) was more effective and less costly (dominant) [-7.8% composite adverse pregnancy outcome (95% CI: -14.6%, -0.9%), -$2795 (95% CI: -$6,638, -$533)]; the intervention was more effective and tended to be less costly [-8.9% composite adverse pregnancy outcome (95% CI: -15.1%, -2.6%), -$5548 (95% CI: -$16,740, $1547)] among women diagnosed before 14 weeks' gestation as well. Interpretation: Our findings highlight the potential health and economic benefits from the diagnosis and treatment of early GDM among women with risk factors for hyperglycemia in pregnancy and supports its implementation. Long-term follow-up studies are recommended as a key future area of research to assess the potential long-term health benefits and economic consequences of the intervention. Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council (grants 1104231 and 2009326), Region O¨rebro Research Committee (grants Dnr OLL-970566 and OLL-942177), Medical Scientific Fund of the Mayor of Vienna (project 15,205 and project 23,026), South Western Sydney Local Health District Academic Unit (grant 2016), and Western Sydney University Ainsworth Trust Grant (2019).