Cost-effectiveness of fenofibrate versus standard care for reducing the progression of diabetic retinopathy: An economic evaluation based on data from the LENS trial.

IF 3.4
Graham Scotland, Mekazin Tsehaye, Caroline Styles, Jennifer Logue, Emily Sammons, Mohammed Zayed, Jonathan Emberson, Rachel Wade, Karl Wallendszus, Will Stevens, Rosanna Cretney, Simon Harding, Graham Leese, Gemma Currie, Jane Armitage, David Preiss
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of fenofibrate versus standard care for reducing the progression of diabetic retinopathy: An economic evaluation based on data from the LENS trial.","authors":"Graham Scotland, Mekazin Tsehaye, Caroline Styles, Jennifer Logue, Emily Sammons, Mohammed Zayed, Jonathan Emberson, Rachel Wade, Karl Wallendszus, Will Stevens, Rosanna Cretney, Simon Harding, Graham Leese, Gemma Currie, Jane Armitage, David Preiss","doi":"10.1111/dme.70098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The LENS trial demonstrated that fenofibrate slowed the progression of diabetic retinopathy compared to placebo in participants with early diabetic eye disease. We assessed its cost-effectiveness for reducing the progression of diabetic retinopathy versus standard care from a UK National Health Service perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Resource use and outcome data were collected over follow-up for participants enrolled in LENS. Mean costs were compared at 2 years and per 6-month follow-up (median 4.0 years). Within the trial, cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of the incremental cost per case of referable disease averted. A microsimulation model, with inputs derived primarily from LENS trial data, was used to assess the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fenofibrate resulted in a mean (95% confidence interval) reduction in health service costs of -£254 (-1062 to 624) at 2 years and -£101 (-243 to 42) per 6-month follow-up. This was accompanied by a 4.4% (1.3% to 8.0%) absolute reduction in any referable diabetic retinopathy or treatment thereof at 2 years, and a 27% (9%-42%) relative reduction over follow-up. Modelled over 10 years, fenofibrate use cost an additional £6 per patient for an expected QALY gain of 0.02, costing £406 per QALY versus standard care under base case assumptions. The probability of cost-effectiveness varied from 70% to 79% at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY, depending on the price discount applied to anti-VEGF drugs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Fenofibrate is likely to offer a cost-effective treatment for slowing the progression of diabetic retinopathy in people with early to moderate diabetic retinopathy or maculopathy.</p>","PeriodicalId":520603,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","volume":" ","pages":"e70098"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7617897/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.70098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: The LENS trial demonstrated that fenofibrate slowed the progression of diabetic retinopathy compared to placebo in participants with early diabetic eye disease. We assessed its cost-effectiveness for reducing the progression of diabetic retinopathy versus standard care from a UK National Health Service perspective.

Methods: Resource use and outcome data were collected over follow-up for participants enrolled in LENS. Mean costs were compared at 2 years and per 6-month follow-up (median 4.0 years). Within the trial, cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of the incremental cost per case of referable disease averted. A microsimulation model, with inputs derived primarily from LENS trial data, was used to assess the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

Results: Fenofibrate resulted in a mean (95% confidence interval) reduction in health service costs of -£254 (-1062 to 624) at 2 years and -£101 (-243 to 42) per 6-month follow-up. This was accompanied by a 4.4% (1.3% to 8.0%) absolute reduction in any referable diabetic retinopathy or treatment thereof at 2 years, and a 27% (9%-42%) relative reduction over follow-up. Modelled over 10 years, fenofibrate use cost an additional £6 per patient for an expected QALY gain of 0.02, costing £406 per QALY versus standard care under base case assumptions. The probability of cost-effectiveness varied from 70% to 79% at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY, depending on the price discount applied to anti-VEGF drugs.

Conclusions: Fenofibrate is likely to offer a cost-effective treatment for slowing the progression of diabetic retinopathy in people with early to moderate diabetic retinopathy or maculopathy.

非诺贝特与标准治疗减少糖尿病视网膜病变进展的成本效益:基于LENS试验数据的经济评估。
目的:LENS试验表明,与安慰剂相比,非诺贝特减缓了早期糖尿病眼病患者糖尿病视网膜病变的进展。我们从英国国民健康服务的角度评估了其与标准治疗相比减少糖尿病视网膜病变进展的成本效益。方法:通过随访收集LENS参与者的资源使用和结果数据。在随访2年和每6个月(中位4.0年)时比较平均成本。在试验中,成本效益是根据避免转诊疾病的每个病例的增量成本来评估的。微观模拟模型的输入主要来自LENS试验数据,用于评估每个质量调整生命年(QALY)的增量成本。结果:非诺贝特导致2年平均(95%置信区间)医疗服务成本降低- 254英镑(-1062至624),每6个月随访- 101英镑(-243至42)。与此同时,任何可参考的糖尿病视网膜病变或其治疗在2年内绝对减少4.4%(1.3%至8.0%),随访期间相对减少27%(9%至42%)。以10年为模型,非诺贝特的使用成本为每位患者额外6英镑,预期QALY收益为0.02,与基本情况假设下的标准护理相比,每个QALY成本为406英镑。在每个QALY 20,000英镑的门槛下,成本效益的概率从70%到79%不等,这取决于抗vegf药物的价格折扣。结论:非诺贝特可能为早期至中度糖尿病视网膜病变或黄斑病变患者提供一种经济有效的治疗方法,以减缓糖尿病视网膜病变的进展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信