scholarly journals Selective laser trabeculoplasty versus drops for newly diagnosed ocular hypertension and glaucoma: the LiGHT RCT

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (31) ◽  
pp. 1-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gus Gazzard ◽  
Evgenia Konstantakopoulou ◽  
David Garway-Heath ◽  
Anurag Garg ◽  
Victoria Vickerstaff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ocular Surgery ◽  
Laser Trabeculoplasty ◽  
First Line Treatment

Background Newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) are habitually treated with intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering eyedrops. Selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) is a safe alternative to drops and is rarely used as first-line treatment. Objectives To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients with OAG or OHT, treated with two treatment pathways: topical IOP-lowering medication from the outset (Medicine-1st) or primary SLT followed by topical medications as required (Laser-1st). We also compared the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the two pathways. Design A 36-month pragmatic, unmasked, multicentre randomised controlled trial. Settings Six collaborating specialist glaucoma clinics across the UK. Participants Newly diagnosed patients with OAG or OHT in one or both eyes who were aged ≥ 18 years and able to provide informed consent and read and understand English. Patients needed to qualify for treatment, be able to perform a reliable visual field (VF) test and have visual acuity of at least 6 out of 36 in the study eye. Patients with VF loss mean deviation worse than –12 dB in the better eye or –15 dB in the worse eye were excluded. Patients were also excluded if they had congenital, early childhood or secondary glaucoma or ocular comorbidities; if they had any previous ocular surgery except phacoemulsification, at least 1 year prior to recruitment or any active treatment for ophthalmic conditions; if they were pregnant; or if they were unable to use topical medical therapy or had contraindications to SLT. Interventions SLT according to a predefined protocol compared with IOP-lowering eyedrops, as per national guidelines. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was HRQoL at 3 years [as measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire]. Secondary outcomes were cost and cost-effectiveness, disease-specific HRQoL, clinical effectiveness and safety. Results Of the 718 patients enrolled, 356 were randomised to Laser-1st (initial SLT followed by routine medical treatment) and 362 to Medicine-1st (routine medical treatment only). A total of 652 (91%) patients returned the primary outcome questionnaire at 36 months. The EQ-5D-5L score was not significantly different between the two arms [adjusted mean difference (Laser-1st – Medicine-1st) 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.01 to 0.03; p = 0.23] at 36 months. Over 36 months, the proportion of visits at which IOP was within the target range was higher in the Laser-1st arm (93.0%, 95% CI 91.9% to 94.0%) than in the Medicine-1st arm (91.3%, 95% CI 89.9% to 92.5%), with IOP-lowering glaucoma surgery required in 0 and 11 patients, respectively. There was a 97% probability of Laser-1st being more cost-effective than Medicine-1st for the NHS, at a willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year of £20,000, with a reduction in ophthalmology costs of £458 per patient (95% of bootstrap iterations between –£585 and –£345). Limitation An unmasked design, although a limitation, was essential to capture any treatment effects on patients’ perception. The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire is a generic tool used in multiple settings and may not have been the most sensitive tool to investigate HRQoL. Conclusions Compared with medication, SLT provided a stable, drop-free IOP control to 74.2% of patients for at least 3 years, with a reduced need for surgery, lower cost and comparable HRQoL. Based on the evidence, SLT seems to be the most cost-effective first-line treatment option for OAG and OHT, also providing better clinical outcomes. Future work Longitudinal research into the clinical efficacy of SLT as a first-line treatment will specify the long-term differences of disease progression, treatment intensity and ocular surgery rates between the two pathways. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN32038223. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 31. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Selective laser trabeculoplasty in enhancing glaucoma care

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
Sohaib R Rufai ◽  
Mohammed R Kamal ◽  
Riddhi D Thaker ◽  
Subhanjan Mukherji
Keyword(s):  
Ocular Hypertension ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Eye Drops ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty ◽  
First Line ◽  
Topical Medication ◽  
Laser Trabeculoplasty ◽  
First Line Treatment

Background/Aim There is increasing evidence for using selective laser trabeculoplasty as a first line treatment for chronic open angle glaucoma. The current first-line treatment is pharmacological therapy using eye drops. This study aims to assess the outcomes of selective laser trabeculoplasty in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension at a district general hospital and consider its role in reducing cost and treatment burden when treating patients with these conditions. Methods A single centre, retrospective case-note audit involving 58 eyes from 31 patients with a minimum follow-up of 4 months. Results Post selective laser trabeculoplasty, 62% had intraocular pressure <20 mmHg on latest follow up (36/58 eyes). Post selective laser trabeculoplasty, 10 patients (32%) were prescribed one fewer topical medication, while 20 patients (65%) were prescribed the same number of topical medications. Only 1 patient (3%) was prescribed one additional topical medication. Conclusion Selective laser trabeculoplasty is a safe and effective option for managing glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Selective laser trabeculoplasty may represent a cost-effective solution for healthcare providers as compared to pharmacological treatment.

The cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab in first-line for metastatic triple negative breast cancer is heavily linked to PD-L1 level

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110194
Author(s):  
Jacopo Giuliani ◽  
Beatrice Mantoan ◽  
Andrea Bonetti
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Pivotal Phase ◽  
First Line Treatment

The present analysis was conducted to assess the pharmacological costs of atezolizumab as first-line treatment in triple negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Pivotal phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT) was considered. Nine hundred and two patients were included. Differences in costs between the 2 arms (atezolizumab plus nabpaclitaxel versus placebo plus nab-paclitaxel) was 17 398 €, with a cost of 7564 €per month of OS-gain in the overall population and 2485 €per month of OS-gain in PD-L1-positive (≥1) population. Combining pharmacological costs of drugs with the measure of efficacy represented by the OS, atezolizumab could be considered cost-effective in first-line treatment for triple-negative mBC only in PD-L1-positive population, but a reduction of costs is mandatory.

scholarly journals Decitabine as a First-Line Treatment for Older Adults Newly Diagnosed with Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2017 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyunsung Park ◽  
Haerim Chung ◽  
Jungyeon Lee ◽  
Jieun Jang ◽  
Yundeok Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment ◽  
Acute Myeloid

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of cetuximab combined with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer based on the TAILOR trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e030738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huijuan Wang ◽  
Lingfei Huang ◽  
Peng Gao ◽  
Zhengyi Zhu ◽  
Weifeng Ye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

ObjectivesCetuximab plus leucovorin, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-4) is superior to FOLFOX-4 alone as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with RAS wild-type (RAS wt mCRC), with significantly improved survival benefit by TAILOR, an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase III trial. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of these two regimens remains uncertain. The following study aims to determine whether cetuximab combined with FOLFOX-4 is a cost-effective regimen for patients with specific RAS wt mCRC in China.DesignA cost-effectiveness model combined decision tree and Markov model was built to simulate pateints with RAS wt mCRC based on health states of dead, progressive and stable. The health outcomes from the TAILOR trial and utilities from published data were used respectively. Costs were calculated with reference to the Chinese societal perspective. The robustness of the results was evaluated by univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ParticipantsThe included patients were newly diagnosed Chinese patients with fully RAS wt mCRC.InterventionsFirst-line treatment with either cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 or FOLFOX-4.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcomes are costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).ResultsBaseline analysis disclosed that the QALYs was increased by 0.383 caused by additional cetuximab, while an increase of US$62 947 was observed in relation to FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy. The ICER was US$164 044 per QALY, which exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of US$28 106 per QALY.ConclusionsDespite the survival benefit, cetuximab combined with FOLFOX-4 is not a cost-effective treatment for the first-line regime of patients with RAS wt mCRC in China.Trial registration numberTAILOR trial (NCT01228734); Post-results.

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase for first-line treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a UK-based cost-utility analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xingdi Hu ◽  
Kingsley P. Wildman ◽  
Subham Basu ◽  
Peggy L. Lin ◽  
Clare Rowntree ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
First Line ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Search Trial ◽  
Erwinia Asparaginase ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background L-asparaginase is a key component of treatment for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) in the UK. Commonly used forms of asparaginase are native E. coli-derived asparaginase (native asparaginase) and pegaspargase in first-line combination therapy, and native Erwinia chrysanthemi-derived asparaginase (Erwinia asparaginase) as second-line treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase in first-line combination therapy for patients with newly diagnosed ALL. A combined decision tree and health-state transition Markov cost-effectiveness model was developed to assess the relative costs and health outcomes of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase in the UK setting. Results In base case analyses, first-line pegaspargase (followed by Erwinia asparaginase in cases of hypersensitivity) dominated first-line native asparaginase followed by Erwinia asparaginase; i.e. resulted in lower costs and more quality-adjusted life year gain. The favourable hypersensitivity rates and administration profile of pegaspargase led to lifetime cost savings of £4741 versus native asparaginase. Pegaspargase remained cost-effective versus all treatment strategies in all scenario analyses, including use of the 2500 IU/m2 dose, recommended for patients ≤21 years of age. Conclusions Pegaspargase, as part of multi-drug chemotherapy, is a cost-effective option for the treatment of newly diagnosed ALL. Based on this study, The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Technology Appraisal Committee concluded that it could recommend pegaspargase as a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources in England & Wales for treating ALL in children, young people and adults with untreated, newly diagnosed disease. Trial registration UKALL 2011, EudraCT number 2010-020924-22; UKALL 2003, EudraCT number 2007-004013-34; UKALL14, EudraCT number 2009-012717-22.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document