Literature DB >> 27280850

Cost-effectiveness of Aflibercept, Bevacizumab, and Ranibizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema Treatment: Analysis From the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

Eric L Ross1, David W Hutton2, Joshua D Stein3, Neil M Bressler4, Lee M Jampol5, Adam R Glassman6.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) medicines have revolutionized diabetic macular edema (DME) treatment. A recent randomized clinical trial comparing anti-VEGF agents for patients with decreased vision from DME found that at 1 year aflibercept (2.0 mg) achieved better visual outcomes than repackaged (compounded) bevacizumab (1.25 mg) or ranibizumab (0.3 mg); the worse the starting vision, the greater the treatment benefit with aflibercept. However, aflibercept and ranibizumab, respectively, are approximately 31 and 20 times more expensive than bevacizumab.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab for the treatment of DME. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Post hoc analysis of efficacy, safety, and resource utilization data at 1-year follow-up from the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network Comparative Effectiveness Trial. Patients were enrolled from August 22, 2012, through August 28, 2013, and analysis was performed from August 21, 2014, through November 7, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The ICERs for all trial participants and subgroups with baseline vision of approximate Snellen equivalent 20/32 to 20/40 (better vision) and baseline vision of approximate Snellen equivalent 20/50 or worse (worse vision). One-year trial data were used to calculate cost-effectiveness for 1 year for the 3 anti-VEGF agents; mathematical modeling was then used to project 10-year cost-effectiveness results.
RESULTS: The study included 624 participants (mean [SD] age, 60.6 [10.5] years; 45.7% female; 65.5% white), 209 in the aflibercept group, 207 in the bevacizumab group, and 208 in the ranibizumab group. For all participants, during 1 year, the ICERs of aflibercept and ranibizumab compared with bevacizumab were $1 110 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and $1 730 000 per QALY, respectively. During 10 years, they were $349 000 per QALY and $603 000 per QALY, respectively. Compared with ranibizumab, aflibercept's ICER was $648 000 per QALY at 1 year and $203 000 per QALY at 10 years. For the subgroup with worse baseline vision, the 10-year ICERs of aflibercept and ranibizumab compared with bevacizumab were $287 000 per QALY and $817 000 per QALY, respectively. In eyes with decreased vision from DME, treatment costs of aflibercept and ranibizumab would need to decrease by 69% and 80%, respectively, to reach a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000 per QALY compared with bevacizumab during a 10-year horizon; for the subgroup with worse baseline vision, the costs would need to decrease by 62% and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Aflibercept (2.0 mg) and ranibizumab (0.3 mg) are not cost-effective relative to bevacizumab for treatment of DME unless their prices decrease substantially. These results highlight the challenges that physicians, patients, and policymakers face when safety and efficacy results are at odds with cost-effectiveness results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27280850      PMCID: PMC6648661          DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.1669

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2168-6165            Impact factor:   7.389


  45 in total

1.  Aflibercept in diabetic macular edema refractory to previous bevacizumab: outcomes and predictors of success.

Authors:  Rita Laiginhas; Marta Inês Silva; Vitor Rosas; Susana Penas; Vitor Adriano Fernandes; Amândio Rocha-Sousa; Ângela Carneiro; Fernando Falcão-Reis; Manuel Sousa Falcão
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-10-29       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Rationale and Application of the Protocol S Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Algorithm for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.

Authors:  Jennifer K Sun; Adam R Glassman; Wesley T Beaulieu; Cynthia R Stockdale; Neil M Bressler; Christina Flaxel; Jeffrey G Gross; Michel Shami; Lee M Jampol
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 12.079

3.  Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Nikolaos Maniadakis; Evgenia Konstantakopoulou
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Five-Year Cost-Effectiveness Modeling of Primary Care-Based, Nonmydriatic Automated Retinal Image Analysis Screening Among Low-Income Patients With Diabetes.

Authors:  Spencer D Fuller; Jenny Hu; James C Liu; Ella Gibson; Martin Gregory; Jessica Kuo; Rithwick Rajagopal
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-10-30

5.  A New Approach for Diabetic Macular Edema Treatment: review of clinical practice results with 0.19 mg fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant including vitrectomized eyes.

Authors:  Raquel Estebainha; Raquel Goldhardt; Manuel Falcão
Journal:  Curr Ophthalmol Rep       Date:  2020-01-14

6.  The efficacy and safety of combined methotrexate with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in treatment of diabetic macular edema: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yuzhi Bao; Xiaolei Lu; Yuwei Zhou
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  Differences in the characteristics of subjects achieving complete, partial, or no resolution of macular edema in the READ-3 study.

Authors:  Muhammad Sohail Halim; Rubbia Afridi; Murat Hasanreisoglu; Muhammad Hassan; Mohamed Ibrahim-Ahmed; Diana V Do; Yasir Jamal Sepah
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 3.535

8.  Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Diabetic Macular Edema: Additional Efficacy Post Hoc Analyses of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Lee M Jampol; Adam R Glassman; Neil M Bressler; John A Wells; Allison R Ayala
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 7.389

9.  Exploring the angiographic-biologic phenotype in the IMAGINE study: quantitative UWFA and cytokine expression.

Authors:  Joseph R Abraham; Charles C Wykoff; Sruthi Arepalli; Leina Lunasco; Hannah J Yu; Alison Martin; Christopher Mugnaini; Ming Hu; Jamie Reese; Sunil K Srivastava; David M Brown; Justis P Ehlers
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 5.908

10.  Cost-Utility of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion.

Authors:  James Lin; Allister Gibbons; William E Smiddy
Journal:  Ophthalmol Retina       Date:  2020-09-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.