[Cost-effectiveness analysis of ocriplasmin in the treatment of vitreomacular traction in Italy]
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v16i4.1221
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vitreomacular traction (VMT) caused by vitreomacular adhesion (VMA), is a pathological condition when the vitreous humor has an abnormally strong attachment to the central part of the retina. Ocriplasmin recently approved for the treatment of VMT, including when associated with macular hole (MH) of diameter less than or equal to 400 microns, is a recombinant truncated form of the human serine protease plasmin with retained enzymatic activity, administered by intravitreal injection. We estimated long-term benefits and costs associated with the resolution of traction, following treatment with ocriplasmin versus Standard of Care (SoC), from National Health Service (NHS) perspective.
METHODS: A lifetime Markov model has been adopted for Italy in order to estimate costs and outcomes, gained for patients with VMT, with and without MH, treated with ocriplasmin. Health effects have been expressed as Life Years (LY) and Quality adjusted LY gained (QALY), and estimated based on time spent in Visual Acuity (VA) states, defined by best and worst seeing eye, disutility impact associated with surgical interventions, adverse events and metamorphopsia. Deterministic
and probabilistic analysis have also been conducted.
RESULTS: Over a lifetime ocriplasmin versus SoC generated incremental benefits in terms of QALYs and overall treatment costs in each patients subgroups. Patients with VMT and VMT+MH treated with ocriplasmin had an incremental survival benefits of 0.1123 and 0.0772 QALYs respectively. Therefore, it is expected to come at an incremental cost of 1,873 € and 2,185 € for VMT and VMT+MH patients respectively. The associated ICER is 16,683 € and 28,294 € per QALY gained. Both sensitivity analyses for each of the subgroups confirmed the robustness of the model results.
CONCLUSION: Compared to SoC, ocriplasmin is a cost effective therapy option in the treatment of VMT, including when
associated with MH.
[Article in Italian]
Keywords
Ocriplasmin; Vitreomacular traction; Macular hole
References
- Girach A, Pakola S. Vitreomacular Interface Diseases: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Future Treatment Options. Expert Rev Ophthalmol 2012; 7: 311-23; http://dx.doi.org/10.1586/eop.12.34
- Bandello F, Arpa P, Azzolini C, et al. Documento di consenso: Gestione diagnostica e clinica delle trazioni vitreomaculari. Disponibile on line su: http://www.fondazionebietti.it/sites/default/files/pdf/documento_consenso_trazioni_vitreomaculari.pdf
- Steel DHW, Lotery AJ. Idiopathic vitreomacular traction and macular hole: a comprehensive review of pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Eye (Lond) 2013; 27(Suppl 1): S1-S2; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/eye.2013.212
- García-Layana A, García-Arumí J, Ruiz-Moreno M, et al. A review of current management of vitreomacular traction and macular hole. J Ophthalmol 2015; 2015: 809640; http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/412903
- Duker JS, Kaiser PK, Binder S, et al. The international vitreomacular traction study group classification of vitreomacular adhesion, traction, and macular hole. Ophthalmology 2013; 120: 2611-9; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.042
- European Medicine Agency (EMA). European public assessment report: ocriplasmina. 2015, EMA/177035/2015
- Stalmans P, Benz MS, Gandorfer A, et al.; for the MIVI-TRUST Study Group. Enzymatic vitreolysis with ocriplasmin for vitreomacular traction and macular holes. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 606-15; http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1110823
- Singh RP, Li A, Bedi R, et al. Anatomical and visual outcomes following ocriplasmin treatment for symptomatic vitreomacular traction syndrome. Br J Ophthalmol 2014; 98: 356-60; http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304219
- Meyer JC, Shah GK, Blinder KJ, et al. Early Evolution of the Vitreomacular Interface and Clinical Efficacy After Ocriplasmin Injection for Symptomatic Vitreomacular Adhesion. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2015; 46: 209-16; http://dx.doi.org/10.3928/23258160-20150213-21
- Willekens K, Abegão Pinto L, et al. Improved efficacy of ocriplasmin for vitreomacular traction release and transient changes in optic disk morphology. Retina 2015; 35: 1135-43; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/iae.0000000000000507
- NICE technology appraisal guidance 297.Ocriplasmin for treating vitreomacular traction. Disponibile online su: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta297/resources/ocriplasmin-for-treating-vitreomacular-traction-82600738429381
- NICE Guidance. Ocriplasmin is not effective in patients with ERM. The use of ocriplasmin in people with vitreomacular traction with an epiretinal membrane, but without a stage II macular hole, is not a cost-effective use of NHS resources. Disponibile online su: https://www.nice.org.uk/donotdo/ocriplasmin-is-not-effective-in-patients-witherm-the-use-of-ocriplasmin-in-people-withvitreomacular-traction-with-an-epiretinal-membrane-but-without-a-stage-iimacular-hole-is-not-a-costeffective-use
- Payakachat N, Summers K, Pleil A, et al. Predicting EQ-5D utility scores from the 25-item National Eye Institute Vision Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ 25) in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Qual Life Res 2009; 18: 801-13; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9499-6
- Tosh J, Brazier J, Evans P, et al. A Review of Generic Preference-Based Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life in Visual Disorders. Value in Health 2012; 15: 118-27; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.002
- Czoski-Murray C, Carlton J, Brazier J, et al. Valuing condition-specific health states using simulation contact lenses. Value in Health 2009; 12: 793-9; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00527.x
- Remunerazione prestazioni di assistenza ospedaliera per acuti, assistenza ospedaliera di riabilitazione e di lungodegenza post acuzie e di assistenza specialistica ambulatoriale. GU Serie Generale n.23 del 28-1-2013 - Suppl. Ordinario n. 8
- Riclassificazione del medicinale per uso umano «Jetrea», ai sensi dell’articolo 8, comma 10, della legge 24 dicembre 1993, n. 537. Determina n. 578/2015. GU Serie Generale n.121 del 27-5-2015
- Fukuda S, Okamoto F, Yuasa M, et al. Vision-related quality of life and visual function in patients undergoing vitrectomy, gas tamponade and cataract surgery for macular hole. Br J Ophthalmol 2009; 93: 1595-9; http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2008.155440
- Brown G, Brown M, Brown H, et al. A value-based medicine comparison of interventions for subfoveal neovascular macular degeneration. Opthalmology 2007; 114: 1170-8; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.09.019
- Busbee B, Brown M, Brown G, et al. Incremental cost-effectiveness of initial cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 2002; 109: 606-12; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00971-X
- Brändle M, Azoulay M, Greiner RA. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of insulin glargine compared with NPH insulin based on a 10-year simulation of long-term complications with the Diabetes Mellitus Model in patients with type 2 diabetes in Switzerland. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2007; 45: 203-20; http://dx.doi.org/10.5414/CPP45203
- Mantovani LG. Health technology assessment. Principi, concetti, strumenti operative. Milano: Il Sole 24 Ore Sanità, 2011
- Fattore G. Proposte di linee guida per la valutazione economica degli interventi sanitari. PharmacoEconomics Italian Research Articles 2009; 11: 83-93
- Chang JS, Smiddy WE. Cost Evaluation of Surgical and Pharmaceutical Options in Treatment for Vitreomacular Adhesion and Macular Holes. Ophthalmology 2014; 12: 1720-6; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.03.029
- Lafuma A, Brezin A, Lopatriello S, et al. Evaluation of non medical costs associated with visual impairment in four European countries (France, Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom). Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24:193-205
Statistics
Abstract: 2792 viewsHTML: 1086 views
PDF: 1157 views
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Email this article 
