Maguire Maureen G
Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (LDI), University of Pennsylvania, USA.
LDI Issue Brief. 2012 Jun;17(8):1-4.
Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has received widespread attention and federal funding because of its potential to inform and improve treatment decisions. Since 2005, patients and their ophthalmologists have faced a dilemma in treating age-related macular degeneration (AMD)--the leading cause of blindness in the United States. Two closely related drugs have produced dramatic improvements in vision; one has been rigorously tested for use in AMD patients, while the other has been rigorously tested for use in cancer patients, but is now widely used to treat AMD. One drug costs 40 times as much as the other. This Issue Brief summarizes a CER study comparing these drugs head-to-head, and provides the most definitive evidence to date about the safety and effectiveness of the two alternatives.
比较效果研究(CER)因其在为治疗决策提供信息和改善治疗决策方面的潜力而受到广泛关注并获得联邦资金。自2005年以来,患者及其眼科医生在治疗年龄相关性黄斑变性(AMD)(美国失明的主要原因)时面临两难境地。两种密切相关的药物在视力改善方面取得了显著成效;一种已在AMD患者中进行了严格测试,另一种则在癌症患者中进行了严格测试,但现在广泛用于治疗AMD。一种药物的成本是另一种的40倍。本问题简报总结了一项将这两种药物进行直接比较的CER研究,并提供了迄今为止关于这两种替代药物安全性和有效性的最确凿证据。