ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2015
Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab versus aflibercept in the treatment of visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema: a UK healthcare perspective.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of intraocular pressure elevation associated with triamcinolone acetonide administration via different routes in macular edema: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Pooled it
- Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Literature Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Three versus five intravitreal aflibercept injections as the initial loading phase in the treatment of diabetic macular edema: one-year results.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologiaTrial
- Cost-effectiveness of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and macular laser treatments for people with centre-involving diabetic macular oedema and central retinal thickness of at least 400 micrometres.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- A Markov model assessing the cost-effectiveness of various anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs and panretinal photocoagulation for the treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- Healthcare expenditure of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors compared with dexamethasone implant for diabetic macular oedema.Acta ophthalmologica · 2022Article
- Brolucizumab vs aflibercept and ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2021Observational
- Cost-effectiveness of fluocinolone acetonide implant (ILUVIEN®) in UK patients with chronic diabetic macular oedema considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Intravitreal Aflibercept Versus Ranibizumab for Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2018Article
- Safety of high-dose intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide as low-cost alternative to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents in lower-middle-income countries.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Article
- Aflibercept in diabetic macular edema: evaluating efficacy as a primary and secondary therapeutic option.Eye (London, England) · 2016Review
- Ranibizumab: A Review of Its Use in the Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2016Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Ranibizumab Versus Aflibercept for Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion: A UK Healthcare Perspective.Advances in therapy · 2016Article
- Cost-utility of ranibizumab versus aflibercept for treating Greek patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRanibizumab and aflibercept are alternative anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents approved for the treatment of visual impairment (VI) due to diabetic macular edema (DME).
objectiveTo estimate, from a UK healthcare perspective, the cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata (PRN) and ranibizumab 0.5 mg treat and extend (T&E) compared with aflibercept 2 mg every 8 weeks after five initial monthly doses (2q8) in the treatment of VI due to DME.
methodsA Markov model previously reviewed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence was used to simulate the long-term outcomes and costs of treating DME. Health states were defined by increments of ten letters in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), with a 3-month cycle length. Patients could gain (or lose) a maximum of two health states between cycles. A 3-year treatment time frame and a lifetime horizon were used. Future costs and health outcomes were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Patient baseline characteristics and the efficacy of ranibizumab PRN were derived using data from the RESTORE study. The relative efficacies of ranibizumab PRN, ranibizumab T&E, and aflibercept were assessed with a network meta-analysis. Different utilities were assigned based on BCVA and whether the treated eye was the better- or the worse-seeing eye. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the model.
resultsLifetime costs per patient of treating DME were £20,019 for ranibizumab PRN, £22,930 for ranibizumab T&E, and £25,859 for aflibercept 2q8. Ranibizumab was dominant over aflibercept, with an incremental gain of 0.05 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost savings of £5,841 (PRN) and £2,930 (T&E) compared with aflibercept. Ranibizumab PRN and ranibizumab T&E had 79% and 67% probability, respectively, of being cost-effective relative to aflibercept at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY. When assuming the higher end of PRN injection frequency (15.9 over 3 years), the cost savings associated with ranibizumab were £3,969.
conclusionFrom a UK healthcare perspective, ranibizumab provides greater health gains with lower overall costs than aflibercept in patients with VI due to DME.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.