[Cost Comparison of Licensed Intravitreal Therapies for Insufficiently Anti-VEGF Responding Fovea Involving Diabetic Macular Edema in Germany].

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of center-involving diabetic macular edema, despite initial therapy with an anti-VEGF compound, an insufficient response may occur. Further therapy options include a switch of anti-VEGF products or to corticosteroid implants, such as Fluocinolone acetonide or Dexamethasone.

OBJECTIVES

Firstly, to investigate systematically which evidence-based study data are available describing the efficacy of in-label treatments after primary anti-VEGF treatment, secondly, to investigate which costs go along for the healthcare provider.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) for randomized controlled trials (RCT) was performed in Medline and Embase. A short-term cost-cost model was built in MS Excel with a 3 year time horizon to compare in-label intravitreal options Ranibizumab (Lucentis), Aflibercept (Eylea), Fluocinolone acetonide implant (Iluvien), and Dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex). Cost components comprised of drug and injection costs, optical coherence tomography (OCT) procedures, and adverse events such as endophthalmitis, IOP-lowering drugs and surgery and cataract surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 42 publications of 20 RCTs were identified. No study had a clearly defined population after first line anti-VEGF treatment, thus no direct efficacy comparison was possible. In the short-term cost-cost model total costs were 17,542 € for Ranibizumab, 15,896 € for Aflibercept, 10,826 € for Fluocinolone acetonide implant and 12,365 € for Dexamethasone implant. For all treatment regimens, drug costs were the predominant cost component, followed by injection costs (with variations dependent on the specific drug) and OCT costs. In the uni- and multivariate sensitivity analyses, the results obtained were robust to changes of model inputs.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, the short-term cost-cost comparison demonstrates that steroid implants can provide significant cost savings versus in-label anti-VEGF treatment for center-involving diabetic macular edema. Single application of the long-lasting Fluocinolone acetonide implant is the most cost-efficient in-label treatment option.