Bevacizumab First in DRCR Protocol AC vs Real-World Physician Treatment Choice for Diabetic Macular Edema: Two-Year Cost Analysis.

IF 0.8 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases Pub Date : 2024-09-14 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1177/24741264241275283
Dilraj S Grewal, Ella Leung, Miguel Busquets, Philip Niles, Dan A Gong, Anton M Kolomeyer, Nitika Aggarwal, Nick Boucher, Jill Blim, Judy E Kim, Reginald Sanders, Paul Hahn
{"title":"Bevacizumab First in DRCR Protocol AC vs Real-World Physician Treatment Choice for Diabetic Macular Edema: Two-Year Cost Analysis.","authors":"Dilraj S Grewal, Ella Leung, Miguel Busquets, Philip Niles, Dan A Gong, Anton M Kolomeyer, Nitika Aggarwal, Nick Boucher, Jill Blim, Judy E Kim, Reginald Sanders, Paul Hahn","doi":"10.1177/24741264241275283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To compare the modeled costs of the Protocol AC bevacizumab-first treatment protocol (with a switch to aflibercept for sub-responders) with real-world costs for treatment-naïve patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) over a 2-year period. <b>Methods:</b> Published data from the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR) Protocol AC bevacizumab-first arm (154 eyes) were used to model 2-year treatment costs. Real-world costs were modeled using data from the Vestrum Health electronic medical records database from a 2016 to 2018 cohort of treatment-naïve eyes with DME (n = 1062) treated with antivascular endothelial growth factor monotherapy. The visual acuity (VA) before treatment in the real-world cohort was matched to Protocol AC. A secondary cost analysis further matched VA gains after treatment in the real-world cohort (n = 346) to Protocol AC. <b>Results</b>: In Protocol AC, the modeled 2-year DME treatment cost in the bevacizumab-first arm was $18,952, with a mean of 16.1 injections over 22.5 visits and 70% of eyes being switched to aflibercept by year 2. (Within 2 years, 57% of injections were bevacizumab and 43% were aflibercept.) Over the same period, the modeled 2-year real-world cost ($11,459) was 40% lower, with a mean of 8.6 injections over 13.8 visits (42% bevacizumab, 45% aflibercept, 13% ranibizumab). Even when matched for baseline VA and a 14-letter VA gain over 2 years, the real-world cost ($15,394) was still 19% lower than the modeled cost in the Protocol AC bevacizumab-first arm. <b>Conclusions:</b> The real-world cost of treating DME over 2 years was significantly lower than the DRCR Protocol AC bevacizumab-first cost. Application of Protocol AC findings into real-world utilization, as with step therapy mandates, should only be considered if the same intensive protocol could be followed. These data suggest that existing real-world costs that reflect physician choice are already significantly lower than protocol-mandated step therapy, even when controlling for similar VA outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":17919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"658-663"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11556346/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24741264241275283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the modeled costs of the Protocol AC bevacizumab-first treatment protocol (with a switch to aflibercept for sub-responders) with real-world costs for treatment-naïve patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) over a 2-year period. Methods: Published data from the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR) Protocol AC bevacizumab-first arm (154 eyes) were used to model 2-year treatment costs. Real-world costs were modeled using data from the Vestrum Health electronic medical records database from a 2016 to 2018 cohort of treatment-naïve eyes with DME (n = 1062) treated with antivascular endothelial growth factor monotherapy. The visual acuity (VA) before treatment in the real-world cohort was matched to Protocol AC. A secondary cost analysis further matched VA gains after treatment in the real-world cohort (n = 346) to Protocol AC. Results: In Protocol AC, the modeled 2-year DME treatment cost in the bevacizumab-first arm was $18,952, with a mean of 16.1 injections over 22.5 visits and 70% of eyes being switched to aflibercept by year 2. (Within 2 years, 57% of injections were bevacizumab and 43% were aflibercept.) Over the same period, the modeled 2-year real-world cost ($11,459) was 40% lower, with a mean of 8.6 injections over 13.8 visits (42% bevacizumab, 45% aflibercept, 13% ranibizumab). Even when matched for baseline VA and a 14-letter VA gain over 2 years, the real-world cost ($15,394) was still 19% lower than the modeled cost in the Protocol AC bevacizumab-first arm. Conclusions: The real-world cost of treating DME over 2 years was significantly lower than the DRCR Protocol AC bevacizumab-first cost. Application of Protocol AC findings into real-world utilization, as with step therapy mandates, should only be considered if the same intensive protocol could be followed. These data suggest that existing real-world costs that reflect physician choice are already significantly lower than protocol-mandated step therapy, even when controlling for similar VA outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
贝伐珠单抗在糖尿病黄斑水肿 DRCR AC 方案中的首发与医生在真实世界中的治疗选择:两年成本分析。
目的:比较糖尿病黄斑水肿(DME)患者在两年内接受 AC 方案贝伐珠单抗先行治疗方案(反应不佳者改用阿夫利百普)的模型成本与实际成本。研究方法利用糖尿病视网膜病变临床研究网络(DRCR)AC方案贝伐珠单抗先行组(154只眼)已公布的数据建立2年治疗成本模型。使用Vestrum Health电子病历数据库中2016年至2018年队列中接受抗血管内皮生长因子单药治疗的DME(n = 1062)治疗无效眼的数据,对真实世界的成本进行建模。真实世界队列中治疗前的视力(VA)与协议 AC 匹配。次要成本分析进一步将真实世界队列(n = 346)治疗后的视力提高与 AC 方案进行匹配。结果显示在AC方案中,贝伐珠单抗先用组的模型2年DME治疗成本为18,952美元,22.5次就诊中平均注射16.1次,70%的眼睛在第2年转为阿弗利贝赛普(2年内,57%的注射为贝伐珠单抗,43%为阿弗利贝赛普)。同期,模拟的 2 年实际费用(11,459 美元)降低了 40%,在 13.8 次就诊中平均注射 8.6 次(42% 为贝伐珠单抗,45% 为阿弗利百普,13% 为雷尼珠单抗)。即使根据基线视力和2年内14个字母的视力增益进行匹配,实际成本(15,394美元)仍比AC方案贝伐珠单抗先用组的模型成本低19%。结论2年内治疗 DME 的实际成本明显低于先用贝伐珠单抗的 AC 方案成本。将 AC 方案的研究结果应用于真实世界的使用情况,就像阶梯疗法的规定一样,只有在可以遵循相同的强化方案时才应考虑。这些数据表明,即使控制了类似的退伍军人疗效,反映医生选择的现有真实世界成本已经明显低于方案规定的阶梯疗法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Biomarkers of Diabetic Macular Edema on Optical Coherence Tomography After Cataract Surgery. Morphologic Changes of Macular Choroidal Neovascularization on OCT Angiography Following Faricimab Therapy in Patients With AMD. Progressive Intramembranous Cystic Changes in Macular Hole-Associated Epiretinal Proliferation Over 3 Years. No Optic Pit Retinoschisis (NOPIR): A Risk Factor for Glaucoma. An Altmetric and Bibliometric Comparative Analysis from 2014 to 2023 of the 100 Most-Mentioned and 100 Most-Cited Articles About Diabetic Retinopathy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1