Real-World Impact of Switching From Insulin Glargine (Lantus®) to Basaglar® and Potential Cost Saving in a Large Public Healthcare System in Saudi Arabia.

Background: The advent of Basaglar®, which is a biosimilar insulin glargine formulation for Lantus® has brought hope that it will result in similar outcomes and lower costs. However, some health practitioners raised some concerns about the therapeutic equivalence of this new biosimilar. Therefore, we aimed to examine the clinical and financial impact of switching from Lantus® to Basaglar®. Methods: This was a single-center retrospective chart review study of adult patients (e.g., ≥18 years) with diabetes mellitus (DM) who were treated with insulin glargine (Lantus®) for at least 12 months and then switched to Basaglar® for another 12 months. The potential cost savings for the years 2018 to 2021 and the cost avoidance for 2022 were estimated using different conversion ratios between the two insulin glargine products (Basaglar® and Lantus®) and acquisition prices. Results: One-hundred patients with DM who were previously treated with Lantus® and switched to Basaglar® were retrospectively recruited. About two-thirds of the patients (68%) had type 2 DM, and the male and female patients were equally represented. The mean glycated hemoglobin (A1C) at baseline was 9, and the mean difference in the A1C levels before and after switching to Basaglar® was not significant (0.18, p-value = 0.503, 95% CI [-0.36-0.72]). Although the difference in the total daily insulin units between Lantus® and Basaglar® was not significant, the difference was leaning toward statistical significance despite the small sample size (-1.88, P-value = 0.25, 95% CI [-5.15-1.38]). Switching from Lantus® to Basaglar® could have led to significant cost savings that would range from approximately 1.77 to 23.7 million United States Dollars (USD) for the years 2018 to 2021 assuming an equal conversion ratio. However, those cost savings might not be realized if the switching to Basaglar® required higher daily insulin units, and the difference in the public tender acquisition price between Lantus® and Basaglar® is less than 15%. Conclusion: Basaglar® and potentially other biosimilar insulin glargine products can lead to significant cost savings without compromising the quality of care. However, their acquisition prices should be discounted.

Demographic Characteristics and Status of Vaccinated Individuals with a History of COVID-19 Infection Pre- or Post-Vaccination: A Descriptive Study of a Nationally Representative Sample in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Saudi Arabia expedited the approval of some COVID-19 vaccines and launched mass vaccination campaigns. The aim of this study was to describe the demographics of vaccinated COVID-19 cases and compare the mortality rates of COVID-19 cases who were infected post-vaccination in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. We retrieved data for COVID-19 cases who were infected pre- or post-vaccination and had received at least one injection of the Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine from 4 December 2020 to 15 October 2021. RESULTS: The number of patients who were infected and had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine was 281,744. Approximately 45% of subjects were infected post-vaccination, and 75% of subjects had received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Only 0.342% of the patients who were infected post-vaccination died, and 447 patients were admitted to ICUs. Most of the patients who were infected with COVID-19 post-vaccination and were admitted to ICUs (69.84%) had received only one dose of the vaccine (p < 0.0001). The mean time to infection for patients who had received one and two doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine were 27 and 8 days longer than their counterparts who had received one and two doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, respectively. No difference in the odds of mortality between the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines was found (OR = 1.121, 95% CI = [0.907-1.386], p-value = 0.291). Patients who had received two doses of the vaccine had significantly lower odds of mortality compared to those who had received one dose (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccines are vital in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study show no difference between the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines in the rate of mortality. However, the number of vaccine doses was significantly associated with a lower risk of mortality. Future studies should examine the effectiveness of different COVID-19 vaccines using real-world data and more robust designs.