The cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy for fellow eyes with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration
S. Sharma et al., The cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy for fellow eyes with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration, OPHTHALMOL, 108(11), 2001, pp. 2051-2059
Purpose: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has recently been demonstrated to be be
neficial for the treatment of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization second
ary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Herein, we determine the cos
t-effectiveness of PDT for the treatment of subfoveal choroidal neovascular
ization (CNV) in patients with disciform degeneration in one eye and whose
second and better-seeing eye develops visual loss secondary to predominantl
y classic subfoveal CNV. The analysis was performed from the perspective of
a for-profit third-party insurer.
Design: Cost-utility Markov models were created to determine the cost-effec
tiveness of PDT under two different scenarios, by using efficacy data deriv
ed from the Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic
Therapy (TAP) Study and patient-based utilities.
Methods: Decision analyses were performed by incorporating data from the TA
P Study, expected longevity data, and patient-based utilities. Cost-effecti
ve models were then created by incorporating incremental medical costs. Var
ious sensitivity analyses were carried out to determine the robustness of o
ur models. A Monte Carlo simulation was also used to determine whether ther
e was a significant difference in quality-of-life adjusted years (QALYs) ga
ined between PDT therapy and the placebo.
Results: For the hypothetical patient whose second and better-seeing eye be
comes affected and who has 20/40 vision at baseline in this affected eye (b
ase case 1), PDT was associated with a 10.7% relative increase in their qua
lity-of-life (treatment conferred an additional undiscounted 0.1342 QALYs o
ver a 2-year period). For the hypothetical patient whose second and better-
seeing eye becomes affected and who has 20/200 vision at baseline in this a
ffected eye (base case 2), PDT was associated with a 7.8% relative increase
in their quality-of-life (treatment conferred an additional undiscounted 0
.0669 QALYs over a 2-year period). Sensitivity analysis showed our models w
ere robust and that PDT was usually the dominant treatment choice. Our cost
-effective model demonstrated that the cost for a QALY was $86,721 (US doll
ars discounted at 3%) for base case 1, assuming 5.5 treatments; and $173,98
4 (USD discounted at 3%) for base case 2.
Conclusions: PDT will cost a third-party insurer $86,721 for an AMD patient
with 20/40 vision in the better-seeing eye to obtain one QALY and $173,984
for an AMD patient with 20/200 vision in the better-seeing eye to obtain o
ne QALY. PDT can be considered to be a treatment that is of only minimal co
st-effectiveness for AMD patients who have subfoveal CNV in their second an
d better-seeing eyes and who have good presenting visual acuity at baseline
. It is a cost-ineffective treatment for AMD patients who have poor visual
acuities in their affected better-seeing eyes. Ophthalmology 2001;108:2051-
2059 (C) 2001 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.