ABSTRACT
The complement system is involved in the pathogenesis of several ocular diseases, providing a rationale for the investigation of complement-targeting therapeutics for these conditions. Dry age-related macular degeneration, as characterised by geographic atrophy (GA), is currently the most active area of research for complement-targeting therapeutics, with a complement C3 inhibitor approved in the United States earlier this year marking the first approved therapy for GA. This review discusses the role of complement in ocular disease, provides an overview of the complement-targeting agents currently under development for ocular conditions, and reflects on the lessons that can be learned from the preclinical investigations and clinical trials conducted in this field to date.
Subject(s)
Geographic Atrophy , Macular Degeneration , Humans , Macular Degeneration/drug therapy , Eye , Geographic Atrophy/drug therapy , Geographic Atrophy/etiology , Geographic Atrophy/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab as either monotherapy or combined with laser therapy, compared with laser monotherapy, in the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DME) causing visual impairment from a UK healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: A Markov model simulated long-term outcomes and costs of treating DME in one eye (BCVA ≤75 letters) based on data from the RESTORE Phase III trial. Outcomes measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were simulated for a 15-year time horizon based on 12-month follow-up from RESTORE and published long-term data. Costs included treatment, disease monitoring, visual impairment and blindness (at 2010 price levels). RESULTS: Ranibizumab monotherapy resulted in a 0.17 QALY gain at an incremental cost of £4191 relative to laser monotherapy, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £24â028. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed a 64% probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £30â000 per QALY. Combined ranibizumab and laser therapy resulted in a 0.13 QALY gain at an incremental cost of £4695 relative to laser monotherapy (ICER £36â106; 42% probability of ICER <£30â000). CONCLUSIONS: Based on RESTORE 1-year follow-up data, ranibizumab monotherapy appears to be cost-effective relative to laser monotherapy, the current standard of care. Cost-effectiveness of combination therapy is less certain. Ongoing studies will further inform on disease progression and the need for additional ranibizumab treatment.
