Evidence mapPaperPMID 25999748Full record

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.

Stephane A Régnier, William Malcolm, Jennifer Haig, Weiguang Xue

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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 · 2016
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephane A RégnierNovartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
William MalcolmNovartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd, Frimley Business Park, UK.
Jennifer HaigOptum, Burlington, ON, Canada.
Weiguang XueOptum, Uxbridge, UK.
Novartis (Switzerland) · CHNovartis (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

cost-utilityhealth statesmaculaMarkov modelretina

Identifiers

PMID25999748
PMCPMC4427067
OpenAlexW1499805048

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.