Value of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Gene Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

PURPOSE

To use discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis to estimate the value creation associated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) genetic therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

DESIGN

Economic analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults undergoing serial intravitreal anti-VEGF injections in 1 eye for nAMD.

METHODS

Discounted cash flow modeling with scenario analysis was used to derive a present value for a 1-time alternative treatment to lifelong anti-VEGF treatment for nAMD. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed on the basis of patient age at time of first injection and frequency interval of intravitreal injection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Present values of DCF and scenario analyses.

RESULTS

Discounted cash flow analysis of intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment for nAMD resulted in a base-case valuation of $208 420.61, $219 093.31, and $17 379.41 for a 1-time alternative treatment to aflibercept, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab, respectively. This figure covaried significantly with anti-VEGF agent according to the patient age at first injection ($78 323.19-$292 449.87) and frequency of injections ($148 422.91-$388 096.81). In addition, for bevacizumab, variability was driven by the hypothetical degree of clinical superiority of 1-time therapy to repeated intravitreal injections due to reduction in adverse events ($17 379.41-$18 250.79) or reduction in direct or indirect costs associated with age-related macular degeneration ($17 379.41-$657 406.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-VEGF gene therapy approaches can create significantly different value propositions based on the agent modeled, patient age at first injection, frequency of injections, and clinical profile of the medication. Although the use of aflibercept or ranibizumab as a comparative cost metric is logical from a bioequivalence perspective, the disparity in medication costs should not be the primary value driver in applied models. Instead, bevacizumab should be the base case ($17 379.41), with additional value driven from an improvement in quality of life through clinical superiority. A reduction in direct and indirect costs can be used to approximate the value from maintained visual acuity, which is elaborated in the DCF analysis approach described in this article. This model can serve as a basis for assessing the price ceiling of myriad gene therapy approaches. Given the high present values for these therapeutics, innovative costing and reimbursement mechanisms should be further explored, with contingencies for sustained efficacy.