Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32943041›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2020

Cost-consequence analysis of extended loading dose of anti-VEGF treatment in diabetic macular edema patients.

J M Ruiz-Moreno, F de Andrés-Nogales, I Oyagüez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Early-switch versus late-switch in patients with diabetic macular edema: a cost-effectiveness study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Middle East African journal of ophthalmology
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J M Ruiz-MorenoUniversidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete, Spain.
F de Andrés-NogalesHealth Economics Department, Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia, Paseo Joaquín Rodrigo 4 I, 28224, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain. fdeandres@porib.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9124-7150
I OyagüezHealth Economics Department, Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia, Paseo Joaquín Rodrigo 4 I, 28224, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3047-6152
Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes Research Iberia (Spain) · ESHospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe DRCR.net Protocol T clinical trial assessed the comparative efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF treatments including aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab in diabetic macular edema (DME). Post -hoc analyses showed that after a 12-week induction period, there was still DME resolution in an increasing number of patients through week 24. PURPOSE: To assess clinical and cost consequences of extending the anti-VEGF loading dose from 3 to 6 monthly injections in patients with persistent DME in Spain.

methodsFrom a hospital pharmacy perspective, a cost-consequence analysis model was developed to estimate the incremental cost needed to obtain an additional response at month 6. To estimate drug treatment costs, ex-factory prices (€, 2019) were considered for aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab. Response/nonresponse rates at 3/6 months were obtained from the Protocol T 24-week post hoc analysis (n = 546). Persistent DME was present in 50.8 and 31.6% of the 190 aflibercept-treated patients at month 3 and month 6, respectively. Of the 176 ranibizumab- and 180 bevacizumab-treated patients, 53.2 and 72.9%, respectively, had persistent DME at month 3, and 41.5 and 65.6%, respectively, had persistent DME at month 6. Sensitivity analysis considered the split of bevacizumab vials.

resultsExtending the loading dose in nonresponder patients would cost €214,862.57, €208,488.98 and €134,483.16 to obtain 37, 21 and 13 additional aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab responder patients, respectively. The total number of extended injections (months 3-6) used in patients with persistent DME at month 6 was 180, 219 and 354 for aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab, respectively.

conclusionsTo extend the anti-VEGF loading dose from 3 to 6 injections necessitates investing €5882.77 (8 injections), €10,091.03 (14 injections) and €10,198.59 (30 injections) per additional responder patient (3-month nonresponders and 6-month responders) to aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab, respectively. For the total of patients treated, on average €7927.02 (14 injections) per additional responder patient would be needed.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyMacular EdemaAngiogenesis InhibitorsBevacizumabHumansIntravitreal InjectionsRanibizumabReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorRecombinant Fusion ProteinsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AVisual AcuityAngiogenesis InhibitorsBevacizumabRanibizumabReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorRecombinant Fusion ProteinsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAflibercept, Ranibizumab, BevacizumabCost and cost analysisDiabetic retinopathyMacular edema

Identifiers

PMID32943041
PMCPMC7500029
OpenAlexW3087090367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.