抗vegf药物与激光光凝治疗糖尿病视网膜病变的比较:系统综述和经济分析。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Mark Simmonds, Matthew Walton, Rob Hodgson, Alexis Llewellyn, Ruth Walker, Helen Fulbright, Laura Bojke, Lesley Stewart, Sofia Dias, Thomas Rush, John Lawrenson, Tunde Peto, David Steel
{"title":"抗vegf药物与激光光凝治疗糖尿病视网膜病变的比较:系统综述和经济分析。","authors":"Mark Simmonds, Matthew Walton, Rob Hodgson, Alexis Llewellyn, Ruth Walker, Helen Fulbright, Laura Bojke, Lesley Stewart, Sofia Dias, Thomas Rush, John Lawrenson, Tunde Peto, David Steel","doi":"10.3310/KRWP1264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diabetic retinopathy is a major cause of sight loss in people with diabetes, with a high risk of macular oedema, vitreous haemorrhage or other complications. Panretinal photocoagulation is the primary treatment for proliferative retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs are used to treat various eye conditions and may be beneficial for people with proliferative or non-proliferative retinopathy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Anti-VEGF In Diabetes project sought to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of using anti-vascular endothelial growth factor to prevent retinopathy progression when compared to panretinal photocoagulation or no treatment. A systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (alone or in combination with panretinal photocoagulation) to treat retinopathy was conducted. The database searches were updated in May 2023. Individual participant data from larger trials were sought. A systematic review of non-randomised studies was performed. Existing cost-effectiveness analyses were reviewed, and a new economic model was developed, informed by the individual participant data meta-analysis. The model also estimated the value of undertaking further research to resolve decision uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review found that anti-vascular endothelial growth factors produced a slight, and not clinically meaningful, benefit over panretinal photocoagulation in best corrected visual acuity, after 1 year of follow-up in people with proliferative retinopathy (mean difference of 4.5 ETDRS letters; 95% credible interval -0.7 to 8.2). There was no evidence of a difference in effectiveness among the different anti-vascular endothelial growth factors. The benefit of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor appears to decline over time. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy may be more effective in people with poorer initial visual acuity. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor had no impact on vision in people with non-proliferative retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor reduces rates of macular oedema and vitreous haemorrhage and may slow down the progression of retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors were predicted to be more costly but similarly effective to panretinal photocoagulation, with a net health benefit of -0.214 quality-adjusted life-years at a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Only under very select conditions might anti-vascular endothelial growth factors have the potential for cost-effectiveness to treat proliferative retinopathy. There is potentially significant value in reducing uncertainty through further primary research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor has no clinically meaningful benefit over panretinal photocoagulation for preserving visual acuity, but it may delay or prevent progression to macular oedema and vitreous haemorrhage. The long-term effectiveness and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment are unclear, particularly as additional panretinal photocoagulation and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment will be required over time. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors are therefore unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment for early proliferative retinopathy compared to panretinal photocoagulation. They are generally associated with higher costs and similar health outcomes across various scenarios. The long-term cost-effectiveness of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor is uncertain due to the lack of long-term clinical evidence.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Further, robust studies with more than 2 years follow-up are required to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor use, and the effect of additional anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and panretinal photocoagulation therapy over time. Clinical trials or observational studies focusing on the use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor in people with poorer vision at time of treatment may also be useful.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number NIHR132948.</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anti-VEGF drugs compared with laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and economic analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Mark Simmonds, Matthew Walton, Rob Hodgson, Alexis Llewellyn, Ruth Walker, Helen Fulbright, Laura Bojke, Lesley Stewart, Sofia Dias, Thomas Rush, John Lawrenson, Tunde Peto, David Steel\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/KRWP1264\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diabetic retinopathy is a major cause of sight loss in people with diabetes, with a high risk of macular oedema, vitreous haemorrhage or other complications. Panretinal photocoagulation is the primary treatment for proliferative retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs are used to treat various eye conditions and may be beneficial for people with proliferative or non-proliferative retinopathy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Anti-VEGF In Diabetes project sought to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of using anti-vascular endothelial growth factor to prevent retinopathy progression when compared to panretinal photocoagulation or no treatment. A systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (alone or in combination with panretinal photocoagulation) to treat retinopathy was conducted. The database searches were updated in May 2023. Individual participant data from larger trials were sought. A systematic review of non-randomised studies was performed. Existing cost-effectiveness analyses were reviewed, and a new economic model was developed, informed by the individual participant data meta-analysis. The model also estimated the value of undertaking further research to resolve decision uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review found that anti-vascular endothelial growth factors produced a slight, and not clinically meaningful, benefit over panretinal photocoagulation in best corrected visual acuity, after 1 year of follow-up in people with proliferative retinopathy (mean difference of 4.5 ETDRS letters; 95% credible interval -0.7 to 8.2). There was no evidence of a difference in effectiveness among the different anti-vascular endothelial growth factors. The benefit of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor appears to decline over time. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy may be more effective in people with poorer initial visual acuity. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor had no impact on vision in people with non-proliferative retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor reduces rates of macular oedema and vitreous haemorrhage and may slow down the progression of retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors were predicted to be more costly but similarly effective to panretinal photocoagulation, with a net health benefit of -0.214 quality-adjusted life-years at a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Only under very select conditions might anti-vascular endothelial growth factors have the potential for cost-effectiveness to treat proliferative retinopathy. There is potentially significant value in reducing uncertainty through further primary research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor has no clinically meaningful benefit over panretinal photocoagulation for preserving visual acuity, but it may delay or prevent progression to macular oedema and vitreous haemorrhage. The long-term effectiveness and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment are unclear, particularly as additional panretinal photocoagulation and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment will be required over time. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors are therefore unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment for early proliferative retinopathy compared to panretinal photocoagulation. They are generally associated with higher costs and similar health outcomes across various scenarios. The long-term cost-effectiveness of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor is uncertain due to the lack of long-term clinical evidence.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Further, robust studies with more than 2 years follow-up are required to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor use, and the effect of additional anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and panretinal photocoagulation therapy over time. Clinical trials or observational studies focusing on the use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor in people with poorer vision at time of treatment may also be useful.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number NIHR132948.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/KRWP1264\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/KRWP1264","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:糖尿病视网膜病变是糖尿病患者视力丧失的主要原因,伴有黄斑水肿、玻璃体出血或其他并发症的高风险。全视网膜光凝是增殖性视网膜病变的主要治疗方法。抗血管内皮生长因子药物用于治疗各种眼病,可能对患有增殖性或非增殖性视网膜病变的人有益。方法:糖尿病抗血管内皮生长因子项目旨在研究与全视网膜光凝或不治疗相比,使用抗血管内皮生长因子预防视网膜病变进展的临床和成本效益。通过网络荟萃分析对抗血管内皮生长因子(单独或联合全视网膜光凝)治疗视网膜病变的随机对照试验进行了系统回顾。数据库搜索于2023年5月更新。从大型试验中寻找个体参与者的数据。对非随机研究进行系统回顾。对现有的成本效益分析进行了回顾,并在个体参与者数据荟萃分析的基础上建立了一个新的经济模型。该模型还估计了进一步研究解决决策不确定性的价值。结果:该综述发现,在对增生性视网膜病变患者进行1年随访后,抗血管内皮生长因子在最佳矫正视力方面比全视网膜光凝治疗产生轻微的、无临床意义的益处(ETDRS字母平均值为4.5;95%可信区间为-0.7 ~ 8.2)。没有证据表明不同的抗血管内皮生长因子在有效性上存在差异。抗血管内皮生长因子的益处似乎随着时间的推移而下降。抗血管内皮生长因子治疗可能对初始视力较差的人更有效。抗血管内皮生长因子对非增殖性视网膜病变患者的视力没有影响。抗血管内皮生长因子可降低黄斑水肿和玻璃体出血的发生率,并可减缓视网膜病变的进展。据预测,抗血管内皮生长因子的成本更高,但对全视网膜光凝治疗同样有效,以2万英镑的愿意支付门槛计算,其净健康效益为-0.214质量调整生命年。只有在非常特定的条件下,抗血管内皮生长因子才有可能具有治疗增殖性视网膜病变的成本效益。通过进一步的初步研究减少不确定性具有潜在的重要价值。结论:与全视网膜光凝相比,抗血管内皮生长因子在保持视力方面没有临床意义的益处,但它可能延缓或预防黄斑水肿和玻璃体出血的进展。抗血管内皮生长因子治疗的长期有效性和安全性尚不清楚,特别是随着时间的推移,需要额外的全视网膜光凝和抗血管内皮生长因子治疗。因此,与全视网膜光凝相比,抗血管内皮生长因子不太可能是早期增殖性视网膜病变的一种经济有效的治疗方法。在各种情况下,它们通常与较高的成本和类似的健康结果相关。由于缺乏长期临床证据,抗血管内皮生长因子的长期成本效益尚不确定。未来的工作:进一步,需要超过2年的随访研究来评估抗血管内皮生长因子使用的长期疗效和安全性,以及额外的抗血管内皮生长因子和全视网膜光凝治疗随时间的影响。临床试验或观察性研究关注在治疗时视力较差的人使用抗血管内皮生长因子也可能是有用的。资助:本摘要介绍了由国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估计划资助的独立研究,奖励号为NIHR132948。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Anti-VEGF drugs compared with laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and economic analysis.

Background: Diabetic retinopathy is a major cause of sight loss in people with diabetes, with a high risk of macular oedema, vitreous haemorrhage or other complications. Panretinal photocoagulation is the primary treatment for proliferative retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs are used to treat various eye conditions and may be beneficial for people with proliferative or non-proliferative retinopathy.

Methods: The Anti-VEGF In Diabetes project sought to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of using anti-vascular endothelial growth factor to prevent retinopathy progression when compared to panretinal photocoagulation or no treatment. A systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (alone or in combination with panretinal photocoagulation) to treat retinopathy was conducted. The database searches were updated in May 2023. Individual participant data from larger trials were sought. A systematic review of non-randomised studies was performed. Existing cost-effectiveness analyses were reviewed, and a new economic model was developed, informed by the individual participant data meta-analysis. The model also estimated the value of undertaking further research to resolve decision uncertainty.

Results: The review found that anti-vascular endothelial growth factors produced a slight, and not clinically meaningful, benefit over panretinal photocoagulation in best corrected visual acuity, after 1 year of follow-up in people with proliferative retinopathy (mean difference of 4.5 ETDRS letters; 95% credible interval -0.7 to 8.2). There was no evidence of a difference in effectiveness among the different anti-vascular endothelial growth factors. The benefit of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor appears to decline over time. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy may be more effective in people with poorer initial visual acuity. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor had no impact on vision in people with non-proliferative retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor reduces rates of macular oedema and vitreous haemorrhage and may slow down the progression of retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors were predicted to be more costly but similarly effective to panretinal photocoagulation, with a net health benefit of -0.214 quality-adjusted life-years at a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Only under very select conditions might anti-vascular endothelial growth factors have the potential for cost-effectiveness to treat proliferative retinopathy. There is potentially significant value in reducing uncertainty through further primary research.

Conclusions: Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor has no clinically meaningful benefit over panretinal photocoagulation for preserving visual acuity, but it may delay or prevent progression to macular oedema and vitreous haemorrhage. The long-term effectiveness and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment are unclear, particularly as additional panretinal photocoagulation and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment will be required over time. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors are therefore unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment for early proliferative retinopathy compared to panretinal photocoagulation. They are generally associated with higher costs and similar health outcomes across various scenarios. The long-term cost-effectiveness of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor is uncertain due to the lack of long-term clinical evidence.

Future work: Further, robust studies with more than 2 years follow-up are required to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor use, and the effect of additional anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and panretinal photocoagulation therapy over time. Clinical trials or observational studies focusing on the use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor in people with poorer vision at time of treatment may also be useful.

Funding: This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number NIHR132948.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信