Journal of medical economics · 2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of bispecific antibody faricimab for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema in Japan.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yanagi Yasuo, Tsujimura Jun, Ohno Shinya, Higashi Kentaro, Sakashita Naotaka, Shoji Ayako, Igarashi Ataru
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of faricimab vs. other anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) drugs for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME) in Japan, while considering societal burden associated with treatment.
METHODS: A Markov model for cost-effectiveness analysis of anti-VEGF treatment in patients with nAMD and DME was applied based on cost and utility value data from Japan. Faricimab administered through a treat-and-extend (T&E) regimen was compared with ranibizumab administered pro re nata (PRN) and T&E, aflibercept T&E, brolucizumab T&E, and best supportive care (BSC). Further to treatment costs (public payer perspective), the societal burden (societal perspective), including costs of travel, informal care, and productivity, was assessed.
RESULTS: In treatment of nAMD, lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained were highest with faricimab (faricimab T&E: 6.92, ranibizumab PRN: 6.88, ranibizumab T&E: 6.91, aflibercept T&E: 6.89, brolucizumab T&E: 6.89, BSC: 5.99). From the public payer perspective, the lifetime total cost for faricimab T&E was lower than those for ranibizumab (PRN, T&E) and brolucizumab (T&E), comparable to aflibercept T&E, and higher than BSC (incremental costs: 158,385 and 6,475,511 JPY, respectively). As a result, faricimab was cost-effective or dominant in the treatment of nAMD, excluding BSC. From the societal perspective, faricimab was dominant against all comparators in nAMD. In treatment of DME, QALYs gained were highest with faricimab (faricimab T&E: 8.51, ranibizumab PRN: 8.17, aflibercept PRN: 8.36, ranibizumab T&E: 8.13, BSC: 5.16). From both the public payer and societal perspectives, faricimab was dominant against all comparators in DME.
CONCLUSIONS: When societal burdens were considered, faricimab was dominant in both nAMD and DME against all comparators, suggesting that the extended dosing interval associated with faricimab treatment may alleviate societal burdens and consequently improve patient outcomes.
METHODS: A Markov model for cost-effectiveness analysis of anti-VEGF treatment in patients with nAMD and DME was applied based on cost and utility value data from Japan. Faricimab administered through a treat-and-extend (T&E) regimen was compared with ranibizumab administered pro re nata (PRN) and T&E, aflibercept T&E, brolucizumab T&E, and best supportive care (BSC). Further to treatment costs (public payer perspective), the societal burden (societal perspective), including costs of travel, informal care, and productivity, was assessed.
RESULTS: In treatment of nAMD, lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained were highest with faricimab (faricimab T&E: 6.92, ranibizumab PRN: 6.88, ranibizumab T&E: 6.91, aflibercept T&E: 6.89, brolucizumab T&E: 6.89, BSC: 5.99). From the public payer perspective, the lifetime total cost for faricimab T&E was lower than those for ranibizumab (PRN, T&E) and brolucizumab (T&E), comparable to aflibercept T&E, and higher than BSC (incremental costs: 158,385 and 6,475,511 JPY, respectively). As a result, faricimab was cost-effective or dominant in the treatment of nAMD, excluding BSC. From the societal perspective, faricimab was dominant against all comparators in nAMD. In treatment of DME, QALYs gained were highest with faricimab (faricimab T&E: 8.51, ranibizumab PRN: 8.17, aflibercept PRN: 8.36, ranibizumab T&E: 8.13, BSC: 5.16). From both the public payer and societal perspectives, faricimab was dominant against all comparators in DME.
CONCLUSIONS: When societal burdens were considered, faricimab was dominant in both nAMD and DME against all comparators, suggesting that the extended dosing interval associated with faricimab treatment may alleviate societal burdens and consequently improve patient outcomes.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
HumansCost-Benefit AnalysisMarkov ChainsJapanQuality-Adjusted Life YearsMacular EdemaRanibizumabRecombinant Fusion ProteinsAngiogenesis InhibitorsDiabetic RetinopathyAntibodies, BispecificMacular DegenerationAgedReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedMaleFemaleCost-Effectiveness Analysis