ArticleOphthalmology2016
Cost Evaluation of Panretinal Photocoagulation versus Intravitreal Ranibizumab for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.
Article in Ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-VEGF drugs compared with laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and economic analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for proliferative diabetic retinopathy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Literature Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Visual Field Changes in Diabetic Retinopathy: Natural History and after Pan-Retinal Photocoagulation in the Diabetic Retinopathy Study and the ETDRS.Ophthalmology. Retina · 2025Trial
- Cost-Utility of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion.Ophthalmology. Retina · 2021Trial
- Cost Evaluation of Early Vitrectomy versus Panretinal Photocoagulation and Intravitreal Ranibizumab for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.Ophthalmology · 2018Trial
- Trial
- 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
- Integrative Management of High-Risk Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: Precision Diagnostics via Ultra-Widefield Imaging and Therapeutic Strategies.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2025Review
- Panretinal photocoagulation plus intravitreal conbercept for diabetic retinopathy in real world: a retrospective study.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Article
- Photo-mediated ultrasound therapy for the treatment of retinal neovascularization in rabbit eyes.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2022Article
- Review
- Comparison of retinal layer thickness and microvasculature changes in patients with diabetic retinopathy treated with intravitreous bevacizumab vs panretinal photocoagulation.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Outcomes of combined treatments in patients with retinal arterial macroaneurysm.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Temporal Trends in the Treatment of Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: An AAO IRIS® Registry Analysis.Ophthalmology science · 2021Article
- Gene-Based Therapeutics for Acquired Retinal Disease: Opportunities and Progress.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Review
- Long-Term Visual Function Effects of Pan-Retinal Photocoagulation in Diabetic Retinopathy and Its Impact in Real Life.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2021Article
- American Society of Retina Specialists Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Nonproliferative and Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy without Diabetic Macular Edema.Journal of vitreoretinal diseases · 2020Article
- Causes and Clinical Impact of Loss to Follow-Up in Patients with Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.Journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate costs of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) vs. intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).
designA Markov-style model of cost-effectiveness and cost utility.
participantsThere were no participants.
methodsBased on results from Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research (DRCR) Network Protocol S, we performed a Markov-style analysis to generate the total 2-year costs for each treatment arm. The cost per line-year saved and cost utility were calculated based on the estimated life years remaining. Both treatment arms were assumed to result in 9 lines of vision saved in 20% of patients. Medicare reimbursement data were acquired to determine costs, which were then separately calculated for practice settings of a hospital-based facility as the highest end of the cost range and a nonfacility in the same geographic area as the lowest end. Cost parameters for a prototypical patient's life expectancy also were modeled and calculated.
main outcome measuresInputed cost of therapy, cost per line saved, cost per line-year saved, and cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALY).
resultsWhen PRP was the primary treatment, the 2-year cost in the facility setting was $13 053, with cost per line saved $7252, cost per line-year $240, and cost per QALY $7988. In the nonfacility setting costs were approximately 21% lower. When IVR was the primary treatment, the 2-year cost in the facility setting was $30 328, cost per line saved was $16 849, cost per line-year $575, and cost per QALY $19 150. In the nonfacility setting costs were approximately 15% lower. Extrapolation to lifetime therapy yielded the cost per QALY with PRP treatment of $14 219 to $24 005 and with IVR of $138 852 to $164 360. Cost utility for PRP would be 85% lower than IVR in the facility setting and 90% lower than IVR in the nonfacility setting.
conclusionsPRP compared with IVR as primary treatment for PDR is less expensive over 2 years, but both fall well below the accepted cost per QALY upper limit. However, over an average lifetime, the cost differential between PRP and IVR increases, and IVR therapy may exceed the typical accepted limit of cost per QALY.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.