ArticleEuropean journal of ophthalmology2026
Cost-effectiveness analysis of Brolucizumab compared to Aflibercept and Ranibizumab in nAMD with persistent retinal fluid.
Article in European journal of ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose of the researchThis study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Brolucizumab in patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and persistent retinal fluid unresponsive to previous therapies, within the context of a real-world clinical practice setting in a Spanish referral hospital. Furthermore, the study examined the probabilities of transitioning between therapies.Major findingsA 6-month treatment projection demonstrated that Brolucizumab was not cost-effective compared to Ranibizumab (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]: -12.98) and Aflibercept (ICER: -47.64). Conversely, when assessing only drug and administration visit costs, Brolucizumab appeared cost-effective (ICER of 9.14 versus Aflibercept and 35.01 versus Ranibizumab). The increased burden of follow-up costs, which were €348.96 higher than those for Ranibizumab and €174.48 higher than Aflibercept, likely drove the trend towards non-cost-effectiveness. Additionally, the analysis indicated a 43% probability of transitioning to Faricimab within the studied population.ConclusionsBrolucizumab was determined to be not cost-effective compared to Ranibizumab and Aflibercept in patients with exudative AMD and persistent retinal fluid, primarily due to a higher number of follow-up visits necessitated by its safety profile. Furthermore, newly observed vitreous opacities and a tendency towards the use of Faricimab were noted.
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.