Aim: Published studies have challenged the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine versus neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH) insulins in Brazil with limited evidence of increased effectiveness despite considerably higher acquisition costs. However, still a controversy. Consequently, there is a need to address this.
Materials & methods: Retrospective cohort study of Type I diabetes patients receiving insulin glargine in Brazil following NPH insulin who met the criteria.
Results: 580 patients were enrolled. HbA1c varied from 8.80 ± 1.98% in NPH insulin users to 8.54 ± 1.88% after insulin glargine for 6 months, which is not clinically significant. Frequency of glycemic control varied from 22.6% with NPH insulin to 26.2% with insulin glargine. No statistically significant difference was observed between controlled and still uncontrolled groups for all analyzed factors including type and frequency of insulin use and carbohydrate counting.
Conclusion: Limited differences between NPH insulins and insulin analogs in routine clinical care do not justify an appreciable cost difference.
Keywords: Brazil; NPH insulin; Type I diabetes; comparative effectiveness research; insulin glargine; longitudinal studies.