Home / Resources / Videos / ADA 2017 / Thomas Seck Part 5, The Cost of Empagliflozin for Patients

Thomas Seck Part 5, The Cost of Empagliflozin for Patients

In part 5 of this Exclusive Interview, Dr. Thomas Seck talks with Diabetes in Control Publisher Steve Freed during the ADA 2017 Scientific Sessions in San Diego, CA about costs and benefits of Empagliflozin for patients as well as insurance companies.

Thomas Seck, MD, is VP of Clinical Development and Medical Affairs at Boehringer Ingelheim.

Transcript of this video segment:

Steve: So I know that drug is not inexpensive; its fairly expensive. Have there been studies to show the insurance companies, third party payers, that if we can prevent hospital stay, if we can prevent a heart attack, if we can prevent funeral expenses, there’s a benefit. Any studies been done to show…?

Dr. Seck: Yeah. The value piece is really critically important to Boehringer Ingelheim as well as for Eli Lilly. And pricing and cost for a medication needs to be off set by the value. We believe, in the case of Jardiance, this is a very straightforward value for position because the expense of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes are enormous in this country. We are spending more than 20 billion dollar every year to treat cardiovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Changes in outcomes we have seen in empiric outcomes, this is a very clear value proposition even for payors and you might have heard that we are also engaging in what we call value base contracting around Jadiance because it’s a win/win situation for payors as well as for patients.

Steve: Have you been able to put a number on the cost savings? Percentage or anything?

Dr. Seck: i cannot give you a specific number in cost. AS you know the pricing system in US, is complex. There are lot of things involved so I cannot give you a hard number.

Steve: But you have found significant cost savings?

Dr. Seck: If you have a patient population that has high cardiovascular risk, has established cardiovascular disease, there clearly is a value. I think we have to distinguish clinical value for patient because I think that there is benefit for a patient to be around, be with grandchildren. I think that its something difficult to put a dollar value on it. But there is also value for payors because you do reduce healthcare utilization.

Return to the main page.