These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Cost comparison of intravitreal aflibercept with bevacizumab and ranibizumab for the treatment of wet age-related macular degeneration.
    Author: Shaikh AH, Toussaint BW, Miller DM, Petersen MR, Foster RE, Riemann CD, Hutchins RK, Sisk RA.
    Journal: Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina; 2015 Jan; 46(1):62-6. PubMed ID: 25559511.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that although intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) is expected to be more expensive, the extra cost of treatment would not result in additional vision gain compared with intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) for the treatment of wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients receiving IVB or intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) who were subsequently changed to IVA for active wet AMD. RESULTS: Thirty-three eyes were included in the study. The mean number of IVB, IVR, and IVA injections per eye over a 6-month period was seven, six, and five, respectively. Visual outcomes were similar in all three groups at the end of the study period. The average drug cost of IVB, IVR, and IVA injections per eye over 6 months was $326, $11,400, and $9,720, respectively. CONCLUSION: Aflibercept may allow a modest extension of the treatment interval, but cost makes IVA an expensive alternative without a visual benefit compared with IVB in patients with active wet AMD.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]