A Value-Based Medicine cost-utility analysis of genetic testing for neovascular macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of patient, preference-based cost-effectiveness analyses evaluating genetic testing for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD). METHODS: A Value-Based Medicine, 12-year, combined-eye model, cost-utility analysis evaluated genetic testing of Category 3 AMD patients at age 65 for progression to NVAMD. The benefit of genetic testing was predicated upon the fact that early-treatment ranibizumab therapy (baseline vision 20/40-20/80) for NVAMD confers greater patient value than late-treatment (baseline vision ≤20/160). Published genetic data and MARINA Study ranibizumab therapy data were utilized in the analysis. Patient value (quality-of-life gain) and financial value (2012 US real dollar) outcomes were discounted at 3 % annually. RESULTS: Genetic testing-enabled, early-treatment ranibizumab therapy per patient conferred mean 20/40-1 vision, a 0.845 QALY gain and 14.1 % quality-of-life gain over sham therapy. Late-treatment ranibizumab therapy conferred mean 20/160+2 vision, a 0.250 QALY gain and 4.2 % quality-of-life gain over sham therapy. The gain from early-treatment over late-treatment was 0.595 QALY (10.0 % quality-of-life gain). The per-patient cost for genetic testing/closer monitoring was $2205 per screened person, $2.082 billion for the 944,000 estimated new Category 3 AMD patients annually. Genetic testing/monitoring costs per early-treatment patient totaled $66,180. Costs per early-treatment patient included: genetic testing costs: $66,180 + direct non-ophthalmic medical costs: -$40,914 + caregiver costs: -$172,443 + employment costs: -$14,098 = a net societal cost saving of $160,582 per early treatment patient. When genetic screening facilitated an incremental 12,965 (8.0 %) of the 161,754, new annual NVAMD patients aged ≥65 in the US to undergo early-treatment ranibizumab therapy, each additional patient treated accrued an overall, net financial gain for society of $160,582. Genetic screening was cost-effective, using World Health Organization criteria, when it enabled an incremental 4.1 % (6634) of 161,754 annual NVAMD patients ≥65 years to receive early-treatment ranibizumab therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic screening-enabled, early-treatment ranibizumab therapy for NVAMD is cost-effective if it enables an incremental 4.1 % of the annual US cohort of new-onset NVAMD patients ≥65 to undergo early-treatment with ranibizumab.

Cataract surgery cost utility revisited in 2012: a new economic paradigm.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the 2012 cost utility of cataract surgery in the United States and to compare 2012 cost-utility data with those from 2000. DESIGN: Value-Based Medicine (Flourtown, PA), patient preference-based, comparative effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis using 2012 real United States dollars. PARTICIPANTS: Previously published Patient Outcomes Research Team Study data and time tradeoff utilities obtained from patients with vision loss. Visual acuity measurements from patients wtih untreated cataract were used as controls. INTERVENTION: Thirteen-year, average, first-eye and second-eye cataract surgery cost-utility analysis using the societal and third-party insurer cost perspectives. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient value gain in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and percent gain in quality of life as well as the cost-utility ratio using the dollars expended per QALY gained. Patient and financial value outcomes were discounted at 3% annually with net present value analysis. RESULTS: First-eye cataract surgery conferred 1.6212 QALYs over the 13-year model, a 20.8% quality-of-life gain. Bilateral cataract surgery conferred 2.8152 QALYs over 13 years, a 36.2% improvement in quality of life. The direct ophthalmic medical cost for unilateral cataract surgery in 2012 United States nominal dollars was $2653, an inflation-adjusted 34.2% less than in 2000 and 85% less than in 1985. The 2012 inflation-adjusted physician fee was 10.1% of that in 1985. The 13-year societal cost perspective, financial return on investment (ROI) for first-eye cataract surgery was $121,198, a 4567% gain. The third-party insurer cost perspective average cost-utility ratio was $2653/1.6212 = $1636/QALY for unilateral cataract surgery, whereas the societal cost perspective average cost-utility ratio was -$121,198/1.6212 = -$74,759/QALY. The net 13-year $123.4-billion financial ROI from a 1-year cohort of cataract surgery patients was accrued: Medicare, $36.4 billion; Medicaid, $3.3 billion; other insurers, $9.6 billion; patients, $48.6 billion; and increased United States national productivity, $25.4 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Cataract surgery in 2012 greatly improved quality of life and was highly cost effective. It was 34.4% less expensive than in 2000 and 85% less expensive than in 1985. Initial cataract surgery yielded an extraordinary 4567% financial ROI to society over the 13-year model.

Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the implantable miniature telescope.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the preference-based comparative effectiveness (human value gain) and the cost-utility (cost-effectiveness) of a telescope prosthesis (implantable miniature telescope) for the treatment of end-stage, age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: A value-based medicine, second-eye model, cost-utility analysis was performed to quantify the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of therapy with the telescope prosthesis. PARTICIPANTS: Published, evidence-based data from the IMT002 Study Group clinical trial. Ophthalmic utilities were obtained from a validated cohort of >1000 patients with ocular diseases. METHODS: Comparative effectiveness data were converted from visual acuity to utility (value-based) format. The incremental costs (Medicare) of therapy versus no therapy were integrated with the value gain conferred by the telescope prosthesis to assess its average cost-utility. The incremental value gains and incremental costs of therapy referent to (1) a fellow eye cohort and (2) a fellow eye cohort of those who underwent intra-study cataract surgery were integrated in incremental cost-utility analyses. All value outcomes and costs were discounted at a 3% annual rate, as per the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparative effectiveness was quantified using the (1) quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain and (2) percent human value gain (improvement in quality of life). The QALY gain was integrated with incremental costs into the cost-utility ratio ($/QALY, or US dollars expended per QALY gained). RESULTS: The mean, discounted QALY gain associated with use of the telescope prosthesis over 12 years was 0.7577. When the QALY loss of 0.0004 attributable to the adverse events was factored into the model, the final QALY gain was 0.7573. This resulted in a 12.5% quality of life gain for the average patient during the 12 years of the model. The average cost-utility versus no therapy for use of the telescope prosthesis was $14389/QALY. The incremental cost-utility referent to control fellow eyes was $14063/QALY, whereas the incremental cost-utility referent to fellow eyes that underwent intra-study cataract surgery was $11805/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Therapy with the telescope prosthesis considerably improves quality of life and at the same time is cost-effective by conventional standards.