RANIBIZUMAB FOR THE TREATMENT OF VISUAL IMPAIRMENT DUE TO MYOPIC CHOROIDAL NEOVASCULARIZATION- COST-EFFECTIVENESS VERSUS AFLIBERCEPT
Author(s)
Leteneux C1, Haig J2, Xue W3, Bhattacharyya S4
1Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland, 2Optum, Burlington, ON, Canada, 3Optum, Uxbridge, UK, 4Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad, India
OBJECTIVES Ranibizumab has demonstrated efficacy in patients with myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV) and is the first anti-VEGF licensed in this indication. Aflibercept is being evaluated for use in mCNV. An existing model demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab versus verteporfin photodynamic therapy was adapted to provide an initial evaluation of ranibizumab versus aflibercept. METHODS A Markov model in mCNV with a lifetime horizon and visual acuity health states was adapted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab and aflibercept from a UK healthcare perspective. Baseline characteristics, injection frequency and ranibizumab efficacy were based on the disease activity treatment arm from the RADIANCE study (n=116, Caucasian, Indian and East Asian patients). Data for aflibercept were derived from initial results for the aflibercept treatment arm from the MYRROR study (n=90, East Asian patients only). Relative efficacy was assessed by indirect comparison. An evaluation using the East Asian subgroup of the ranibizumab disease activity treatment arm in RADIANCE (n=35) was also conducted. RESULTS Ranibizumab dominated aflibercept in both evaluations. Based on the disease activity arm from RADIANCE, ranibizumab was associated with a lower lifetime cost (incremental cost -£1770) and higher lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (incremental gain 0.02) than aflibercept. Results were similar for the evaluation based on the East Asian subgroup. Ranibizumab was associated with a lower lifetime cost (incremental cost -£2856) and higher lifetime QALYs (incremental gain 0.06) than aflibercept. These results were driven by the greater number of injections, higher treatment and recurrence costs, and smaller proportion of patients gaining ≥20 letters visual acuity for aflibercept compared with ranibizumab. CONCLUSIONS This initial analysis suggests that ranibizumab is less costly and is associated with a gain in QALYs relative to aflibercept based on the disease activity arm and the East Asian subgroup from RADIANCE, as well as initial data from MYRROR.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2014-11, ISPOR Europe 2014, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Value in Health, Vol. 17, No. 7 (November 2014)
Code
PSS25
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Sensory System Disorders