Cargando…

Cost-utility of ranibizumab versus aflibercept for treating Greek patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema

BACKGROUND: To conduct a cost-utility analysis of ranibizumab versus aflibercept for the treatment of patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema (DME) in the Greek setting. METHODS: A Markov model was adapted to compare the use of ranibizumab 0.5 mg (pro re nata-PRN and treat and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kourlaba, Georgia, Relakis, John, Mahon, Ronan, Kalogeropoulou, Maria, Pantelopoulou, Georgia, Kousidou, Olga, Maniadakis, Nikos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4831170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27081372
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-016-0056-1
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To conduct a cost-utility analysis of ranibizumab versus aflibercept for the treatment of patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema (DME) in the Greek setting. METHODS: A Markov model was adapted to compare the use of ranibizumab 0.5 mg (pro re nata-PRN and treat and extend-T&E) to aflibercept 2 mg (every 8 weeks after five initial doses) in DME. Patients transitioned at a 3-month cycle among nine specified health states (including death) over a lifetime horizon. Transition probabilities, utilities, as well as DME-related mortality were extracted from relevant clinical trials, a network meta-analysis and other published studies. The analysis was conducted from payer perspective and as such only costs reimbursed by the payer were considered (year 2014). The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and the net monetary benefit was the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Τhe use of PRN and T&E ranibizumab regimens were shown to be cost saving comparing to aflibercept (by €2824 and €22, respectively), and more beneficial in terms of QALYs gained (+0.05) and time without visual impairment (0.031 and 0.034 years), thereby dominating aflibercept. Moreover, ranibizumab used as PRN or T&E resulted in a net monetary benefit of €3984 and €1278, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both PRN and T&E ranibizumab regimens were more beneficial and less costly compared to aflibercept for the management of DME. Hence, ranibizumab seems to be a dominant option for the treatment of visual impairment due to DME in the Greek setting. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12962-016-0056-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.