Literature DB >> 29201260

Retinal Prosthesis System for Advanced Retinitis Pigmentosa: A Health Technology Assessment Update.

.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Retinitis pigmentosa is a group of inherited disorders characterized by the degeneration of the photoreceptors in the retina, resulting in progressive vision loss. The Argus II system is designed to restore partial functional vision in patients with profound vision loss from advanced retinitis pigmentosa. At present, it is the only treatment option approved by Health Canada for this patient population. In June 2016, Health Quality Ontario published a health technology assessment of the Argus II retinal prosthesis system for patients with advanced retinitis pigmentosa. Based on that assessment, the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee recommended against publicly funding the Argus II system for this population. It also recommended that Health Quality Ontario re-evaluate the evidence in 1 year. The objective of this report was to examine new evidence published since the 2016 health technology assessment.
METHODS: We completed a health technology assessment, which included an evaluation of clinical benefits and harms, value for money, and patient preferences related to the Argus II system. We performed a systematic literature search for studies published since the 2016 Argus II health technology assessment. We developed a Markov decision-analytic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Argus II system compared with standard care, and we calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios over a 20-year time horizon. We also conducted a five-year budget impact analysis. Finally, we interviewed people with retinitis pigmentosa about their lived experience with vision loss, and with the Argus II system.
RESULTS: Four publications from one multicentre international study were included in the clinical review. Patients showed significant improvements in visual function and functional outcomes with the Argus II system, and these outcomes were sustained up to a 5-year follow-up (moderate quality of evidence). The safety profile was generally acceptable.In the base case economic analysis, the Argus II system was cost-effective compared with standard care if the willingness to pay was more than $97,429 per quality-adjusted life-year. We estimated that funding the Argus II system would cost the province $0.71 to $0.78 million per year over 5 years, assuming 4 implants per year.People with lived experience spoke about the challenges of retinitis pigmentosa, including the gradual but persistent progression of the disease; its impact on their quality of life and their families; and the accessibility challenges they faced. Those who used the Argus II system spoke about its positive impact on their quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence of moderate quality, the Argus II retinal prosthesis system improved visual function, real-life functional outcomes, and quality of life in patients with advanced retinitis pigmentosa. The Argus II system is expensive, but the cost to publicly fund it would be low, because of the small number of eligible patients. The Argus II system can only enable perception of light/dark and shapes/objects, but these advancements represent important gains for people with retinitis pigmentosa in terms of mobility and quality of life.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29201260      PMCID: PMC5692298     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser        ISSN: 1915-7398


  25 in total

1.  GRADE guidelines: a new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Holger J Schünemann; Peter Tugwell; Andre Knottnerus
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)--explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force.

Authors:  Don Husereau; Michael Drummond; Stavros Petrou; Chris Carswell; David Moher; Dan Greenberg; Federico Augustovski; Andrew H Briggs; Josephine Mauskopf; Elizabeth Loder
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  A pilot study to identify areas for further improvements in patient and public involvement in health technology assessments for medicines.

Authors:  Josie Messina; David L Grainger
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 4.  Public and patient involvement at the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.

Authors:  Leela Barham
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Visual acuity impairment in patients with retinitis pigmentosa at age 45 years or older.

Authors:  S Grover; G A Fishman; R J Anderson; M S Tozatti; J R Heckenlively; R G Weleber; A O Edwards; J Brown
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  Health services utilization and cost of retinitis pigmentosa.

Authors:  Kevin D Frick; M Christopher Roebuck; Joshua I Feldstein; Catherine A McCarty; Lori L Grover
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-05

Review 7.  Retinal Prosthesis System for Advanced Retinitis Pigmentosa: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2016-06-01

8.  Five-Year Safety and Performance Results from the Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Lyndon da Cruz; Jessy D Dorn; Mark S Humayun; Gislin Dagnelie; James Handa; Pierre-Olivier Barale; José-Alain Sahel; Paulo E Stanga; Farhad Hafezi; Avinoam B Safran; Joel Salzmann; Arturo Santos; David Birch; Rand Spencer; Artur V Cideciyan; Eugene de Juan; Jacque L Duncan; Dean Eliott; Amani Fawzi; Lisa C Olmos de Koo; Allen C Ho; Gary Brown; Julia Haller; Carl Regillo; Lucian V Del Priore; Aries Arditi; Robert J Greenberg
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Improvements in vision-related quality of life in blind patients implanted with the Argus II Epiretinal Prosthesis.

Authors:  Jacque L Duncan; Thomas P Richards; Aries Arditi; Lyndon da Cruz; Gislin Dagnelie; Jessy D Dorn; Allen C Ho; Lisa C Olmos de Koo; Pierre-Olivier Barale; Paulo E Stanga; Gabriele Thumann; Yizhong Wang; Robert J Greenberg
Journal:  Clin Exp Optom       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 2.742

10.  Vision and quality of life: development of methods for the VisQoL vision-related utility instrument.

Authors:  Stuart Peacock; Roseanne Misajon; Angelo Iezzi; Jeff Richardson; Graeme Hawthorne; Jill Keeffe
Journal:  Ophthalmic Epidemiol       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.648

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Challenges of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Novel Therapeutics for Inherited Retinal Diseases.

Authors:  K Thiran Jayasundera; Rebhi O Abuzaitoun; Gabrielle D Lacy; Maria Fernanda Abalem; Gregory M Saltzman; Thomas A Ciulla; Mark W Johnson
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-08-22       Impact factor: 5.258

2.  Morphologic and electrophysiologic findings of retinal degeneration after intravitreal sodium iodate injection following vitrectomy in canines.

Authors:  So Min Ahn; Jungryul Ahn; Seongkwang Cha; Cheolmin Yun; Tae Kwann Park; Young-Jin Kim; Yong Sook Goo; Seong-Woo Kim
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.