Suppr超能文献

贝伐单抗和雷珠单抗治疗新诊断的新生血管性黄斑变性的成本效益。

Cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab and ranibizumab for newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration.

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

出版信息

Ophthalmology. 2014 Apr;121(4):936-45. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.037. Epub 2014 Jan 7.

Abstract

PURPOSE

We sought to determine the most cost-effective treatment for patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration: monthly or as-needed bevacizumab injections, or monthly or as-needed ranibizumab injections.

DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Hypothetical cohort of 80-year-old patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration.

METHODS

Using a mathematical model with a 20-year time horizon, we compared the incremental cost-effectiveness of treating a hypothetical cohort of 80-year-old patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration using monthly bevacizumab, as-needed bevacizumab, monthly ranibizumab, or as-needed ranibizumab. Data came from the Comparison of Age-related macular degeneration Treatment Trial (CATT), the Medicare Fee Schedule, and the medical literature.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained.

RESULTS

Compared with as-needed bevacizumab, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of monthly bevacizumab is $24,2 357/QALY. Monthly ranibizumab gains an additional 0.02 QALYs versus monthly bevacizumab at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of >$10 million/QALY. As-needed ranibizumab was dominated by monthly bevacizumab, meaning it was more costly and less effective. In sensitivity analyses assuming a willingness to pay of $100,000/QALY, the annual risk of serious vascular events would have to be ≥2.5 times higher with bevacizumab than that observed in the CATT trial for as-needed ranibizumab to have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of <$100,000/QALY. In another sensitivity analysis, even if every patient receiving bevacizumab experienced declining vision by 1 category (e.g., from 20/25-20/40 to 20/50-20/80) after 2 years but every patient receiving ranibizumab retained their vision level, as-needed ranibizumab would have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $97,340/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Even after considering the potential for differences in risks of serious adverse events and therapeutic effectiveness, bevacizumab confers considerably greater value than ranibizumab for the treatment of neovascular macular degeneration.

摘要

目的

我们旨在确定治疗新发湿性年龄相关性黄斑变性患者的最具成本效益的治疗方法:每月或按需给予贝伐单抗注射,或每月或按需给予雷珠单抗注射。

设计

成本效益分析。

参与者

患有新发湿性年龄相关性黄斑变性的 80 岁假设队列患者。

方法

使用具有 20 年时间范围的数学模型,我们比较了每月给予贝伐单抗、按需给予贝伐单抗、每月给予雷珠单抗或按需给予雷珠单抗治疗假设 80 岁新发湿性年龄相关性黄斑变性队列患者的增量成本效益。数据来自年龄相关性黄斑变性治疗比较试验(CATT)、医疗保险费用表和医学文献。

主要观察指标

成本、质量调整生命年(QALY)和每获得一个 QALY 的增量成本。

结果

与按需给予贝伐单抗相比,每月给予贝伐单抗的增量成本效益比为 24,2357 美元/QALY。每月雷珠单抗与每月贝伐单抗相比,可额外增加 0.02 QALY,增量成本效益比大于 1000 万美元/QALY。按需给予雷珠单抗优于每月贝伐单抗,即成本更高,效果更差。在假设支付意愿为 10 万美元/QALY 的敏感性分析中,贝伐单抗的严重血管事件年风险必须比 CATT 试验中按需给予雷珠单抗高 2.5 倍以上,才能使按需给予雷珠单抗的增量成本效益比低于 10 万美元/QALY。在另一项敏感性分析中,即使每例接受贝伐单抗治疗的患者在 2 年后视力下降 1 个等级(例如,从 20/25-20/40 降至 20/50-20/80),但每例接受雷珠单抗治疗的患者保留其视力水平,按需给予雷珠单抗的增量成本效益比仍为 97340 美元/QALY。

结论

即使考虑到严重不良事件风险和治疗效果的潜在差异,贝伐单抗在治疗湿性年龄相关性黄斑变性方面也比雷珠单抗具有更大的价值。

相似文献

1
Cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab and ranibizumab for newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration.
Ophthalmology. 2014 Apr;121(4):936-45. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.037. Epub 2014 Jan 7.
3
Cost-Utility Analysis of VEGF Inhibitors for Treating Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.
Am J Ophthalmol. 2020 Oct;218:225-241. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.05.029. Epub 2020 Jun 19.
5
Cost-effectiveness of various interventions for newly diagnosed diabetic macular edema.
Ophthalmology. 2013 Sep;120(9):1835-42. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.02.002. Epub 2013 May 1.
6
7
Aflibercept vs. Ranibizumab: cost-effectiveness of treatment for wet age-related macular degeneration in Sweden.
Acta Ophthalmol. 2016 Aug;94(5):441-8. doi: 10.1111/aos.12964. Epub 2016 Apr 7.
8
Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration: one-year findings from the IVAN randomized trial.
Ophthalmology. 2012 Jul;119(7):1399-411. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.04.015. Epub 2012 May 11.
9
Intravitreal Aflibercept Versus Ranibizumab for Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2018 Jul;24(7):608-616. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2018.24.7.608.

引用本文的文献

1
VEGF in Diabetic Retinopathy and Age-Related Macular Degeneration.
Int J Mol Sci. 2025 May 22;26(11):4992. doi: 10.3390/ijms26114992.
2
Intravitreal therapy-success stories and challenges.
Wien Med Wochenschr. 2025 May;175(7-8):162-174. doi: 10.1007/s10354-024-01070-8. Epub 2025 Mar 3.
3
Facts, Dogmas, and Unknowns About Mitochondrial Reactive Oxygen Species in Cancer.
Antioxidants (Basel). 2024 Dec 19;13(12):1563. doi: 10.3390/antiox13121563.
6
Pricing Treatments Cost-Effectively when They Have Multiple Indications: Not Just a Simple Threshold Analysis.
Med Decis Making. 2023 Oct-Nov;43(7-8):914-929. doi: 10.1177/0272989X231197772. Epub 2023 Sep 12.
8
[Patient-reported outcomes in head and neck cancer treatment: relevance, challenges, and benefit].
HNO. 2023 Sep;71(9):592-598. doi: 10.1007/s00106-023-01325-7. Epub 2023 Jul 8.
9
Treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: insights into drug-switch real-world from the Berlin Macular Registry.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2023 Jun;261(6):1681-1690. doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05952-8. Epub 2023 Jan 12.

本文引用的文献

3
Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration: one-year findings from the IVAN randomized trial.
Ophthalmology. 2012 Jul;119(7):1399-411. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.04.015. Epub 2012 May 11.
4
Ranibizumab and bevacizumab for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: two-year results.
Ophthalmology. 2012 Jul;119(7):1388-98. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.03.053. Epub 2012 May 1.
6
Ranibizumab and bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
N Engl J Med. 2011 May 19;364(20):1897-908. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102673. Epub 2011 Apr 28.
7
Cost effectiveness of treatments for wet age-related macular degeneration.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Feb;29(2):107-31. doi: 10.2165/11585520-000000000-00000.
8
Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jan 4;154(1):1-11. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-1-201101040-00289. Epub 2010 Nov 1.
9
Cost-utility analysis of bevacizumab versus ranibizumab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration using a Markov model.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2012 Apr;18(2):247-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01546.x. Epub 2010 Sep 16.
10
Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab compared with pegaptanib in neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010 Apr;248(4):467-76. doi: 10.1007/s00417-009-1156-9. Epub 2009 Aug 11.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验