Yamina Rajput

The Cost-Effectiveness of Ranibizumab for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema

PURPOSE To assess the incremental, comparative effectiveness (patient value gain) and cost effectiveness (financial value gain) associated with 0.3-mg intravitreal ranibizumab injection therapy versus sham therapy for diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN Value-Based Medicine (Center for Value-Based Medicine, Flourtown, PA) 14-year, cost-utility analysis using patient preferences and 2012 United States real dollars. PARTICIPANTS Published data from the identical Ranibizumab Injection in Subjects with Clinically Significant Macular Edema with Center Involvement Secondary to Diabetes Mellitus (RISE and RIDE) clinical trials. METHODS An incremental cost-utility analysis was performed using societal and third-party insurer cost perspectives. Costs and outcomes were discounted with net present value analysis at 3% per annum. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The incremental comparative effectiveness was measured in: (1) quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain and (2) percent patient value (quality-of-life) gain. Cost effectiveness was quantified with the cost-utility ratio (CUR) measured as

Adherence to the American Diabetes Association retinal screening guidelines for population with diabetes in the United States

/QALY. RESULTS The 14-year, incremental patient value gain conferred by intravitreal ranibizumab therapy for diabetic maculopathy was 0.9981 QALY, equating to an 11.6% improvement in quality of life. The direct, ophthalmic medical cost for ranibizumab therapy in 1 eye was

Validity and responsiveness of the Urticaria Activity and Impact Measure: A new patient-reported tool

30 116, whereas for 2 eyes it was

Longitudinal Commercial Claims-Based Cost Analysis of Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Patterns.

56 336. The direct, nonophthalmic, medical costs saved from decreased depression, injury, skilled nursing facility admissions, nursing home admissions, and other vision-associated costs totaled

The comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab for neovascular macular degeneration revisited

51 758, resulting in an overall direct medical cost of

Real-world treatment patterns in injection cost and frequency for ranibizumab versus aflibercept in patients with wet age-related macular degeneration: A 2-year US claims analysis

4578. The net mean societal cost for bilateral ranibizumab therapy was -

Difference in intraocular pressure following involuntary switch from bimatoprost 0.03% to bimatoprost 0.01% in glaucoma patients

30 807. Of this total, decreased caregiver costs accrued a

Patient and provider perspectives: Why are patients with diabetes mellitus noncompliant with dilated eye exams?

31 406 savings against the direct medical costs, whereas decreased wage losses accrued a

The Burden of Retinal Venous Occlusion: An Assessment of Fellow Eyes in 1000 Cases

3978 savings. The third-party insurer CUR for bilateral ranibizumab therapy was

Cost-effectiveness of FDA-approved anti-VEGF treatments, ranibizumab and aflibercept, for diabetic macular edema from a US perspective: analysis of 2-Year Protocol T comparative effectiveness results

4587/QALY. The societal cost perspective for bilateral therapy was -