Skip to main content

  • Cost-Effectiveness of Ranibizumab or PRP for Proliferative DR

    By Lynda Seminara and selected by Neil M. Bressler, MD, and Deputy Editors
    Add to My Bookmarks

    Journal Highlights

    JAMA Ophthalmology, June 2017

    Download PDF

    Hutton et al. conducted a preplanned cost analysis of data from a random­ized clinical trial in which ranibizumab had noninferior visual acuity (VA) outcomes at 2 years when compared to panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) for treating proliferative diabetic retinopa­thy (PDR). The authors noted that ra­nibizumab appears more cost-effective than PRP if the PDR is accompanied by vision-impairing diabetic macular edema (DME) for which anti-VEGF treatment would be given for the DME. That is, ranibizumab given for both the PDR and DME appears more cost-effective than giving ranibizumab for the DME and PRP for the PDR.

    In a secondary analysis of the Di­abetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR.net) Protocol S trial, data were evaluated for 213 adults with PDR who had undergone unilateral therapy in the initial study. Study par­ticipants had been randomly assigned to receive intravitreal ranibizumab (ad­ministered monthly or less frequently) or PRP (performed at baseline and, if needed, at follow-up). Any participant with concomitant vision-impairing DME received ranibizumab, regardless of initial treatment assignment.

    In the original study, ranibizumab was deemed noninferior to PRP for the primary outcome of mean change in VA from baseline to 2 years. Fur­thermore, there were advantages to the anti-VEGF arm, including better VA over 2 years, fewer vitrectomies, less pe­ripheral field loss, and decreased chance of developing DME with vision loss among eyes without vision-impairing DME at baseline. However, 1 injection of ranibizumab costs nearly 6 times more than a session of PRP. In the cost analysis, 2-year data of costs of treatment and complications (in dollars) and effectiveness (in quality-adjusted life-year, or QALY, based on VA outcomes) for ranibizumab and PRP were com­pared for the patients with (n = 46) and without (n = 167) vision-impairing DME at baseline.

    The results, expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of ranibizumab versus PRP during the 2-year period, were $55,568 per QALY for patients with DME and $662,978 per QALY for those without DME. (In the United States, $50,000 to $150,000 per QALY typically is considered cost-effective.)

    The authors cautioned that cost-effectiveness beyond 2 years of follow-up is not known, nor is the effectiveness of other anti-VEGF agents, such as aflibercept or compounded bevacizumab. The authors recommended weigh­ing the pros and cons of ranibizumab and PRP on a case-by-case basis. (Also see related commentary by Steven M. Kymes, PhD, in the same issue.)

    The original article can be found here.