Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab and aflibercept to treat diabetic macular edema from a US perspective: analysis of 2-year Protocol T data

J Med Econ. 2020 Mar;23(3):287-296. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1666855. Epub 2019 Nov 4.

Abstract

Aims: Protocol T (NCT01627249) was a head-to-head study conducted by the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network that compared intravitreal aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). A cost-effectiveness analysis accompanying the 1-year data of Protocol T revealed that aflibercept was not cost-effective vs ranibizumab for all patients, but could have been cost-effective in certain patient sub-groups if the 1-year results were extrapolated out to 10 years. The present study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents (ranibizumab, aflibercept) for treatment of DME using the 2-year data from Protocol T.Methods: Costs of aflibercept 2.0 mg or ranibizumab 0.3 mg, visual acuity (VA)-related medical costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were simulated for eight VA health states. Treatment, adverse event management, and VA-related healthcare resource costs (2016 US dollars) were based on Medicare reimbursement and published literature. VA-related health utilities were determined using a published algorithm. Patients were stratified by baseline VA: 20/40 or better; 20/50 or worse.Results: Total 2-year costs were higher, and QALYs similar, for aflibercept vs ranibizumab in the full cohort ($44,423 vs $34,529; 1.476 vs 1.466), 20/40 or better VA sub-group ($40,854 vs $31,897; 1.517 vs 1.519), and 20/50 or worse VA sub-group ($48,214 vs $37,246; 1.433 vs 1.412), respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in the full cohort and 20/50 or worse VA sub-group were $986,159/QALY and $523,377/QALY, respectively. These decreased to $711,301 and $246,978 when analyses were extrapolated to 10 years.Limitations: Key potential limitations include the fact that VA was the only QALY parameter analyzed and the uncertainty surrounding the role of better- and worse-seeing eye VA in overall functional impairment.Conclusions: This analysis suggests that aflibercept is not cost-effective vs ranibizumab for patients with DME, regardless of baseline vision.

Keywords: Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor; I11; I19; aflibercept; cost-effectiveness analysis; diabetic macular edema; health-related quality of life; ranibizumab.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Activities of Daily Living
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Angiogenesis Inhibitors / economics
  • Angiogenesis Inhibitors / therapeutic use*
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Diabetes Complications / drug therapy*
  • Female
  • Health Expenditures / statistics & numerical data
  • Health Resources / economics
  • Health Resources / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Macular Edema / drug therapy*
  • Male
  • Medicare / statistics & numerical data
  • Patient Acceptance of Health Care / statistics & numerical data
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Ranibizumab / economics
  • Ranibizumab / therapeutic use*
  • Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor / antagonists & inhibitors
  • Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor / therapeutic use*
  • Recombinant Fusion Proteins / economics
  • Recombinant Fusion Proteins / therapeutic use*
  • Severity of Illness Index
  • United States
  • Visual Acuity

Substances

  • Angiogenesis Inhibitors
  • Recombinant Fusion Proteins
  • aflibercept
  • Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
  • Ranibizumab