23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab and bevacizumab for age-related macular degeneration: 2-year findings from the IVAN randomised trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To assess the incremental cost and cost-effectiveness of continuous and discontinuous regimens of bevacizumab (Avastin) and ranibizumab (Lucentis) for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.

          Design

          A within-trial cost-utility analysis with a 2-year time horizon, based on a multicentre factorial, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial.

          Setting

          23 hospital ophthalmology clinics.

          Participants

          610 patients aged ≥50 years with untreated nAMD in the study eye.

          Interventions

          0.5 mg ranibizumab or 1.25 mg bevacizumab given continuously (monthly) or discontinuously (as-needed) for 2 years.

          Main outcome measures

          Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

          Results

          Total 2-year costs ranged from £3002/patient ($4700; 95% CI £2601 to £3403) for discontinuous bevacizumab to £18 590/patient ($29 106; 95% CI £18 258 to £18 922) for continuous ranibizumab. Ranibizumab was significantly more costly than bevacizumab for both continuous (+£14 989/patient ($23 468); 95% CI £14 522 to £15 456; p<0.001) and discontinuous treatment (+£8498 ($13 305); 95% CI £7700 to £9295; p<0.001), with negligible difference in QALYs. Continuous ranibizumab would only be cost-effective compared with continuous bevacizumab if the NHS were willing to pay £3.5 million ($5.5 million) per additional QALY gained. Patients receiving continuous bevacizumab accrued higher total costs (+£599 ($938); 95% CI £91 to £1107; p=0.021) than those receiving discontinuous bevacizumab, but also accrued non-significantly more QALYs (+0.020; 95% CI −0.032 to 0.071; p=0.452). Continuous bevacizumab therefore cost £30 220 ($47 316) per QALY gained versus discontinuous bevacizumab. However, bootstrapping demonstrated that if the NHS is willing to pay £20 000/QALY gained, there is a 37% chance that continuous bevacizumab is cost-effective versus discontinuous bevacizumab.

          Conclusions

          Ranibizumab is not cost-effective compared with bevacizumab, being substantially more costly and producing little or no QALY gain. Discontinuous bevacizumab is likely to be the most cost-effective of the four treatment strategies evaluated in this UK trial, although there is a 37% chance that continuous bevacizumab is cost-effective.

          Trial registration number

          ISRCTN92166560.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Ranibizumab and bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

          Clinical trials have established the efficacy of ranibizumab for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). In addition, bevacizumab is used off-label to treat AMD, despite the absence of similar supporting data. In a multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned 1208 patients with neovascular AMD to receive intravitreal injections of ranibizumab or bevacizumab on either a monthly schedule or as needed with monthly evaluation. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity at 1 year, with a noninferiority limit of 5 letters on the eye chart. Bevacizumab administered monthly was equivalent to ranibizumab administered monthly, with 8.0 and 8.5 letters gained, respectively. Bevacizumab administered as needed was equivalent to ranibizumab as needed, with 5.9 and 6.8 letters gained, respectively. Ranibizumab as needed was equivalent to monthly ranibizumab, although the comparison between bevacizumab as needed and monthly bevacizumab was inconclusive. The mean decrease in central retinal thickness was greater in the ranibizumab-monthly group (196 μm) than in the other groups (152 to 168 μm, P=0.03 by analysis of variance). Rates of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke were similar for patients receiving either bevacizumab or ranibizumab (P>0.20). The proportion of patients with serious systemic adverse events (primarily hospitalizations) was higher with bevacizumab than with ranibizumab (24.1% vs. 19.0%; risk ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.66), with excess events broadly distributed in disease categories not identified in previous studies as areas of concern. At 1 year, bevacizumab and ranibizumab had equivalent effects on visual acuity when administered according to the same schedule. Ranibizumab given as needed with monthly evaluation had effects on vision that were equivalent to those of ranibizumab administered monthly. Differences in rates of serious adverse events require further study. (Funded by the National Eye Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00593450.).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration: one-year findings from the IVAN randomized trial.

            To compare the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab and bevacizumab intravitreal injections to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Multicenter, noninferiority factorial trial with equal allocation to groups. The noninferiority limit was 3.5 letters. This trial is registered (ISRCTN92166560). People >50 years of age with untreated nAMD in the study eye who read ≥ 25 letters on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart. We randomized participants to 4 groups: ranibizumab or bevacizumab, given either every month (continuous) or as needed (discontinuous), with monthly review. The primary outcome is at 2 years; this paper reports a prespecified interim analysis at 1 year. The primary efficacy and safety outcome measures are distance visual acuity and arteriothrombotic events or heart failure. Other outcome measures are health-related quality of life, contrast sensitivity, near visual acuity, reading index, lesion morphology, serum vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels, and costs. Between March 27, 2008 and October 15, 2010, we randomized and treated 610 participants. One year after randomization, the comparison between bevacizumab and ranibizumab was inconclusive (bevacizumab minus ranibizumab -1.99 letters, 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.04 to 0.06). Discontinuous treatment was equivalent to continuous treatment (discontinuous minus continuous -0.35 letters; 95% CI, -2.40 to 1.70). Foveal total thickness did not differ by drug, but was 9% less with continuous treatment (geometric mean ratio [GMR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.97; P = 0.005). Fewer participants receiving bevacizumab had an arteriothrombotic event or heart failure (odds ratio [OR], 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05 to 1.07; P = 0.03). There was no difference between drugs in the proportion experiencing a serious systemic adverse event (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.80 to 2.27; P = 0.25). Serum VEGF was lower with bevacizumab (GMR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.54; P<0.0001) and higher with discontinuous treatment (GMR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.42; P = 0.004). Continuous and discontinuous treatment costs were £9656 and £6398 per patient per year for ranibizumab and £1654 and £1509 for bevacizumab; bevacizumab was less costly for both treatment regimens (P<0.0001). The comparison of visual acuity at 1 year between bevacizumab and ranibizumab was inconclusive. Visual acuities with continuous and discontinuous treatment were equivalent. Other outcomes are consistent with the drugs and treatment regimens having similar efficacy and safety. Proprietary or commercial disclosures may be found after the references. Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Risks of mortality, myocardial infarction, bleeding, and stroke associated with therapies for age-related macular degeneration.

              To examine associations between therapies for age-related macular degeneration and risks of all-cause mortality, incident myocardial infarction, bleeding, and incident stroke. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 146,942 Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older with a claim for age-related macular degeneration between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006. On the basis of claims for the initial treatment, we assigned beneficiaries to 1 of 4 groups. The active control group included patients who received photodynamic therapy. The other groups included patients who received intravitreous pegaptanib octasodium, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab. We censored data from patients when they received a therapy different from the initial therapy. The main outcome measures were associations between photodynamic, pegaptanib, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab therapies and the risks of all-cause mortality, incident myocardial infarction, bleeding, and incident stroke. After adjustment for baseline characteristics and comorbid conditions, we found significant differences in the rates of mortality and myocardial infarction by treatment group. Specifically, the hazard of mortality was significantly lower with ranibizumab therapy than with photodynamic therapy (hazard ratio, 0.85; 99% confidence interval, 0.75-0.95) or pegaptanib use (0.84; 0.74-0.95), and the hazard of myocardial infarction was significantly lower with ranibizumab use than with photodynamic therapy (0.73; 0.58-0.92). There were no significant differences in the hazard of mortality or myocardial infarction between bevacizumab use and the other therapies. We found no statistically significant relationship between treatment group and bleeding events or stroke. Bevacizumab and ranibizumab use was not associated with increased risks of mortality, myocardial infarction, bleeding, or stroke compared with photodynamic therapy or pegaptanib use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2014
                29 July 2014
                : 4
                : 7
                : e005094
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Nuffield Department of Population Health, Health Economics Research Centre, University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [2 ]Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol , Bristol, UK
                [3 ]Swiss Re Services Ltd, Research and Development , London, UK
                [4 ]Primary Care & Population Sciences, University of Southampton , Southampton, UK
                [5 ]Department of Eye and Vision Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool , Liverpool, UK
                [6 ]Academic Unit of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton , Southampton, UK
                [7 ]Oxford Eye Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust , Oxford, UK
                [8 ]Centre for Experimental Medicine, The Queen's University of Belfast , Belfast, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Helen A Dakin; helen.dakin@ 123456dph.ox.ac.uk

                UC and BCR contributed equally.

                Article
                bmjopen-2014-005094
                10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005094
                4120317
                25079928
                59a70eb7-3b69-4de5-9c67-1c6ed4c16ca5
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

                History
                : 19 February 2014
                : 19 June 2014
                : 23 June 2014
                Categories
                Health Economics
                Research
                1506
                1701
                1718

                Medicine
                neovascular age-related macular degeneration (amd),vascular endothelial growth factor (vegf) inhibitors,trial-based economic evaluation,cost-utility analysis,cost-minimisation analysis,cost-effectiveness

                Comments

                Comment on this article