Trial reportOphthalmology. Retina2021
Cost-Utility of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion.
Trial report in Ophthalmology. Retina, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-physician delivered intravitreal injection service: A systematic review of safety, implementation, training and patient experience.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Pooled it
- Towards a Multi-sectoral Approach to Population Health: A Scoping Review of Cross-sectoral Evaluations of Health Interventions.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant Switch after Anti-VEGF Treatment in Patients Affected by Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Focal Photocoagulation as an Adjunctive Therapy to Reduce the Burden of Intravitreal Injections in Macula Edema Patients, the LyoMAC2 Study.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Intravitreal Ziv-Aflibercept versus Bevacizumab for Naïve Central Retinal Vein Occlusion with Macular Edema: An Interim Analysis of a Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Quality-adjusted life years in macular oedema due to age-related macular degeneration, diabetes and central retinal vein occlusion: the impact of anti-VEGF agents in a tertiary centre in Greece.International ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Five-year outcomes after intravitreal bevacizumab of treatment-naive eyes with macular edema secondary to CRVO in routine clinical practice: Results of the Pan-American Collaborative Retina Study (PACORES) group.International ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Anti-VEGF reduces inflammatory features in macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion.International journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Case series of retinal vein occlusions showing early recovery using oral l-methylfolate.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyArticle
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 the cost-utility of treatment for macular edema in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) using intravitreal injections of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept.
designDecision analysis model of cost-utility.
participantsData from study participants in the Lucentis, Eylea, Avastin in Vein Occlusion (LEAVO) study.
methodsA decision analysis of a disease simulation model was used to calculate comparative cost-utility of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB), intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR), and intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) for the treatment of macular edema associated with CRVO based on data from the LEAVO study. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services data were used to calculate associated modeled costs in a hospital- or facility-based and nonfacility setting from a third-party payer perspective, and societal costs also were calculated. Cost utility was calculated based on the preserved visual utility during the 2 years of the study and also by estimating utility for the expected lifetime.
main outcome measuresCost of treatment, cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
resultsFrom the third-party payer perspective, the estimated lifetime costs per QALY in the facility and nonfacility settings were $39 325 and $17 944, respectively, for IVB; $114 095 and $92 653, respectively, for IVR; and $78 935 and $63 270, respectively, for IVA. From the societal perspective, the estimated lifetime costs per QALY in the facility setting were $52 754 for IVB, $128 242 for IVR, and $86 262 for IVA. The ICER of IVA compared with that of IVB was $153 633/QALY from the third-party facility setting and $152 992/QALY from the societal perspective. The use of IVB compared with IVR and IVA compared with IVR were cost-saving interventions (ICER, <0) regardless of the perspective or setting.
conclusionsIn the treatment of macular edema in CRVO, IVB yields the best cost utility among the 3 anti-VEGF agents modeled. Intravitreal aflibercept maintains acceptable lifetime cost per QALY while having a favorable cost utility compared with IVR.
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.