Economic evaluation of insulin glargine compared with human insulin for youth with type 1 diabetes in Tanzania and Bangladesh

Margaret L Prust, Christina M Lalama, Sylvia Kehlenbrink, Olatubosun Akinnola Akinola, Renatus Nyarubamba, Ajmina Hasan Flabe, Abigail Foulds, Graham D Ogle, Edna Majaliwa, Bedowra Zabeen, Kaushik Ramaiya, Alana Garvin and Jing Luo

PLOS ONE, 2026, vol. 21, issue 1, 1-14

Abstract: Background: Long-acting insulin analogues are the standard of care for Type 1 diabetes (T1D) in high-income countries but remain inaccessible in many low-resource settings. Cost-effectiveness is a key consideration for their adoption. This analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of biosimilar insulin glargine (IGlar) versus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in youth with T1D in Tanzania and Bangladesh. Methods: Data from the HumAn-1 trial informed a short-term economic model comparing NPH and IGlar over 12 months. The analysis, conducted from a health systems perspective, incorporated micro-costing data for insulin, injection supplies, blood glucose monitoring, and estimated hospitalization costs for complications. Effectiveness was based on a reduction in nocturnal hypoglycemia. In both countries, we calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in scenarios that compared IGlar against NPH across delivery devices (i.e., vials, cartridges, single-use pens). Results: IGlar was cost-effective compared to NPH when provided in cartridges in Bangladesh at a threshold of three times gross domestic product per capita. Other delivery devices in Bangladesh and all options in Tanzania were not cost-effective at current prices. If offered, IGlar vials would be cost-effective in Tanzania and Bangladesh if the price introduced was no more than 32% or 134% higher, respectively, than the current prices of NPH vials. Annual per patient costs and other cost-effectiveness thresholds were explored. Conclusion: In low-resource settings, IGlar can be a cost-effective alternative to NPH, largely due to reduced nocturnal hypoglycemia, but the delivery device for the insulin has a major impact on the costs and cost-effectiveness comparisons.

Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0333652 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 33652&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0333652

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0333652

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().