Semaglutide Can Have Lifetime Cost and Health Benefits for Non-Diabetic Overweight or Obese Individuals with Heart Disease

For overweight or obese individuals without diabetes, but with pre-existing cardiovascular disease, semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy) is not cost-effective at current pricing, new research shows. However, with price reductions or rebates up to 50%, it could meet the benchmark for value in healthcare. An article 打開新的分頁／視窗 in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology 打開新的分頁／視窗, published by Elsevier, details a statistical model analyzing the cost-effectiveness of semaglutide. It provides evidence for policymakers considering the benefits of funding semaglutide for individuals without diabetes and the budgetary impact for long-term health gains.

Obesity is a global epidemic. By 2035, more than half of the world is expected to be overweight or obese. Being overweight or obese is associated with increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events even after considering metabolic risk factors, and more than two thirds of deaths related to elevated body mass index (BMI) are caused by cardiovascular diseases.

The demand for semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) commonly known under the brand names Ozempic and Wegovy, has surged in recent years, especially for weight loss. It not only regulates blood sugar, but also reduces appetite and slows digestion. In Canada, it is currently only funded for individuals with diabetes. Researchers from the University of Calgary undertook a statistical analysis to estimate the lifetime benefit and costs of semaglutide use compared to no semaglutide use in overweight or obese individuals without diabetes, but with pre-existing cardiovascular disease.

Lead investigator Derek Chew, MD, MSc, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, explains, "Our economic model compared the difference in lifetime costs (including drug costs, hospitalizations, and other significant health events) and difference in life expectancy adjusted for patient quality of life between those treated with semaglutide and those who did not receive semaglutide. The main finding is that at current pricing, semaglutide is not cost-effective. However, with price reductions or rebates of up to 50%, semaglutide could meet the benchmark for value in healthcare."

The study's decision analysis entailed utilizing an analytical framework, tracking probabilities of different disease states, and data from the SELECT trial (Semaglutide Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes in People with Overweight or Obesity, which showed the cardiac benefits for non-diabetic individuals in the studied cohort using weekly semaglutide injections) to identify the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained from semaglutide therapy for the treatment of obesity versus usual care.

Using the conventional benchmark of CAN$50,000/QALY gained (i.e., CAN$50,000 or less to increase a person’s quality of life and/or life expectancy by one year is considered acceptable healthcare value for money), the base case analysis demonstrated that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for semaglutide compared to standard care was CAN$72,962/QALY gained with a 14% probability of meeting the CAN$50,000/QALY benchmark. Factors with the greatest impact on estimated cost-effectiveness were medication impact on mortality and medication cost. When the price of semaglutide was reduced by 50%, it was economically attractive at CAN$37,190/QALY gained with an 80% likelihood of cost-effectiveness at a CAN$50,000/QALY threshold.

Co-lead investigator Elissa Rennert-May, MD, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, notes, "Our study's results are important because public drug plans are considering whether to fund GLP1 RAs for use in individuals without diabetes."

In an accompanying editorial "Spending Money, Saving Money We Don't Got: The Cost of Obesity," James A. Stone, MD, PhD, FRCPC, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, says, "Cardiovascular specialists, and practically speaking, most clinicians and healthcare decision makers, have a limited knowledge of health economics. The nuances and the finer details of health economics with respect to cost-effectiveness, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, cost-utility, quality-adjusted life years, cost-benefit analysis, productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness are mostly a black hole to be safely skirted around. Spending money on disease prevention is an investment in the long-term value of a population’s health, in contradistinction to the rather short-term value of an individual’s disease care."

Ana P. Johnson, PhD, Professor, Department of Health Sciences, Queen’s University, and co-author of the editorial, adds, "It can be exceedingly difficult to change the healthcare payer’s perspective with regard to investing in disease prevention, rather than disease treatment, when the return on the dollars invested, through adverse event reductions, may not accrue for decades."

Dr. Chew concludes, "Now that there is emerging high-quality evidence for semaglutide and its positive impact on weight loss and associated cardiovascular outcomes in individuals without diabetes, its cost-effectiveness and potential funding by healthcare insurance should be reconsidered. Our model is generalizable across Canada, and while healthcare-associated costs vary in different countries, our model and assumptions could be broadly applied to many jurisdictions."

Notes for editors

The article is “Cost-Effectiveness of Semaglutide in Patients With Obesity and Cardiovascular Disease,” by Elissa Rennert-May, MD, MSc, Braden Manns, MD, MSc, Fiona Clement, PhD, Eldon Spackman, PhD, David Collister, MD, PhD, Glen Sumner, MD, MSc, Jenine Leal, PhD, Robert J.H. Miller, MD, Derek S. Chew, MD, MSc (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2024.09.025 打開新的分頁／視窗).

The article is freely available at https://onlinecjc.ca/article/S0828-282X(24)01005-5/fulltext 打開新的分頁／視窗.

Journalists wishing to speak to the authors should contact Kelly Johnston at [email protected] 打開新的分頁／視窗.

The editorial is "Spending Money, Saving Money We Don't Got: The Cost of Obesity," by James A. Stone, MD, PhD, FRCPC, and Ana P. Johnson, PhD (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2024.11.016 打開新的分頁／視窗).

The editorial is available for 30 days at https://onlinecjc.ca/article/S0828-282X(24)01144-9/fulltext 打開新的分頁／視窗.

Both articles appear online in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology, volume 41, issue 1 (January 2025), published by Elsevier.

Full text of the articles is also available to credentialed journalists upon request. Contact Astrid Engelen at +31 6 14395474or [email protected] 打開新的分頁／視窗 for a copy of the PDFs or more information.

About the Canadian Journal of Cardiology

The Canadian Journal of Cardiology 打開新的分頁／視窗 is the official journal of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society 打開新的分頁／視窗. It is a vehicle for the international dissemination of new knowledge in cardiology and cardiovascular science, particularly serving as a major venue for the results of Canadian cardiovascular research and Society guidelines. The journal publishes original reports of clinical and basic research relevant to cardiovascular medicine as well as editorials, review articles, case reports, and papers on health outcomes, policy research, ethics, medical history, and political issues affecting practice. www.onlinecjc.ca 打開新的分頁／視窗

About the Editor-in-Chief

Editor-in-Chief Stanley Nattel, MD, is Paul-David Chair in Cardiovascular Electrophysiology and Professor of Medicine at the University of Montreal and Director of the Electrophysiology Research Program at the Montreal Heart Institute Research Center.

About the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS)

The CCS 打開新的分頁／視窗 is the national voice for cardiovascular clinicians and scientists, representing more than 2,300 cardiologists, cardiac surgeons and other heart health specialists across Canada. We advance heart health for all by setting standards for excellence in heart health and care, building the knowledge and expertise of the heart team, and influencing policy and advocating for the heart health of all Canadians. For further information on the CCS visit www.ccs.ca/en 打開新的分頁／視窗.

關於 Elsevier

身為科學資訊與分析的全球領導者，Elsevier 協助研究人員與醫療照護專業人員推動科學發展，改善醫療成果，造福社會。我們以可信賴、以實證為基礎的內容和先進的 AI 數位技術為基礎，透過創新的解決方案促進洞察力和關鍵決策。

140 多年來，我們一直為研究和醫療保健界的工作提供支援。我們全球 9,500 名員工，包括 2,500 名技術人員，致力於支援研究人員、圖書館館長、學術領袖、資金提供者、政府、研發密集型公司、醫生、護士、未來醫療保健專業人員和教育工作者的重要工作。我們的 2,900 種科學期刊和經典參考工具書包括其領域中最重要的書籍，包括 Cell Press、The Lancet 和 Gray's Anatomy。 我們與愛思唯爾基金會 (Elsevier Foundation 打開新的分頁／視窗) 合作，與我們服務的社群攜手合作，在發展中國家和世界各地的科學、研究和醫療保健領域推動包容性和多樣性。 Elsevier 是 RELX 打開新的分頁／視窗 的一部分，RELX 打開新的分頁／視窗 是一家為專業和商業客戶提供以資訊為基礎的分析和決策工具的全球供應商。有關我們的工作、數位解決方案和內容的更多資訊，請造訪 www.elsevier.com 。