Swedish
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Ophthalmology Retina 2020-Sep

Cost-Utility of Anti-VEGF Treatment for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

Endast registrerade användare kan översätta artiklar
Logga in Bli medlem
Länken sparas på Urklipp
James Lin
Allister Gibbons
William Smiddy

Nyckelord

Abstrakt

Objective: To evaluate the cost-utility of treatment for macular edema in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) using intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept.

Design: A decision analysis model of cost-utility PARTICIPANTS: Data from study participants in the Lucentis, Eylea, Avastin in Vein Occlusion (LEAVO) study.

Methods: A decision analysis of a disease simulation model was used to calculate comparative cost-utility of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB), ranibizumab (IVR), and aflibercept (IVA) for the treatment of macular edema associated with CRVO based on data from LEAVO study. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services data were used to calculate associated modeled costs in a hospital/facility based and non-facility setting from a third-party payer perspective, and societal costs were also calculated. Cost-utility was calculated based on the preserved visual utility during the 2 years of the study and also by estimating utility for the expected lifetime.

Main outcome measures: Cost of treatment, cost/QALY, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) RESULTS: From the third-party payer perspective, the estimated life-time cost/QALY in the facility (non-facility) setting was $39,325 ($17,944) for IVB, $114,095 ($92,653) for IVR, and $78,935 ($63,270) for IVA. From the societal perspective the estimated life-time cost/QALY in the facility setting was $52,754 for IVB, $128,242 for IVR, and $86,262 for IVA. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of IVA compared to IVB was $153,633/QALY from the third-party facility setting and ($152,992/QALY) from the societal perspective. The use of IVB compared to IVR and IVA compared to IVR were cost-saving interventions (ICER<0) irrespective of the perspective or setting.

Conclusions: In the treatment of macular edema in CRVO, IVB yields the best cost-utility among the three anti-VEGF agents modeled. IVA maintains acceptable lifetime cost/QALY, while having a favorable cost-utility compared to IVR.

Keywords: Cost-utility; aflibercept; bevacizumab; central retinal vein occlusion; intravitreal ranibizumab.

Gå med på vår
facebook-sida

Den mest kompletta databasen med medicinska örter som stöds av vetenskapen

  • Fungerar på 55 språk
  • Växtbaserade botemedel som stöds av vetenskap
  • Örter igenkänning av bild
  • Interaktiv GPS-karta - märka örter på plats (kommer snart)
  • Läs vetenskapliga publikationer relaterade till din sökning
  • Sök efter medicinska örter efter deras effekter
  • Organisera dina intressen och håll dig uppdaterad med nyheterna, kliniska prövningar och patent

Skriv ett symptom eller en sjukdom och läs om örter som kan hjälpa, skriv en ört och se sjukdomar och symtom den används mot.
* All information baseras på publicerad vetenskaplig forskning

Google Play badgeApp Store badge