观察和计划与PRN治疗湿性黄斑变性的临床和成本效益的正面比较

J. Wawrzynski, Ramiro Salom, A. Pouncey, M. Martin, M. Ozturk
{"title":"观察和计划与PRN治疗湿性黄斑变性的临床和成本效益的正面比较","authors":"J. Wawrzynski, Ramiro Salom, A. Pouncey, M. Martin, M. Ozturk","doi":"10.15761/NFO.1000243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: “Observe and Plan” (O&P) is a novel treatment regimen for neovascular AMD (nAMD). It aims to optimise the intravitreal anti-VEGF injection frequency whilst dramatically reducing the number of clinical reviews (compared to PRN/ treat and extend). However, there has been no head-to-head comparison of O&P versus the other regimens: We aim to establish whether O&P is non-inferior to PRN and whether there is an economic advantage. Methods: Prospective interventional cohort study: Patients undergoing treatment with PRN aflibercept for nAMD were enrolled. All were switched to O&P aflibercept for one year. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were recorded in addition to the number of clinic visits and intravitreal injections. Their results were compared in a paired analysis to their own data whilst on PRN treatment the preceding year. Results: 25 patients were enrolled. 17 completed one year of treatment, one of whom was subsequently excluded (confounding pathology). Analysis of area under the curve for BCVA and CMT found O&P to be non-inferior to PRN p=0.03, p<0.01. The mean number of clinical reviews was significantly reduced under O&P (1.80 (SD 0.68) vs. 8.66 (SD 0.72) visits per year; P=<0.01) with an improvement in injection to visit ratio (1.01 vs. 1.67 vists/injection), equating to an estimated saving of £1,228 per patient per year. Conclusion: The O&P regimen for treatment of nAMD was clinically non-inferior to PRN. The O&P regimen was superior to PRN in terms of reducing the health economic burden and treatment burden of nAMD.","PeriodicalId":91933,"journal":{"name":"New frontiers in ophthalmology (London)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Head to head comparison of the clinical and cost effectiveness of Observe and Plan versus PRN for the treatment of wet macular degeneration\",\"authors\":\"J. Wawrzynski, Ramiro Salom, A. Pouncey, M. Martin, M. Ozturk\",\"doi\":\"10.15761/NFO.1000243\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: “Observe and Plan” (O&P) is a novel treatment regimen for neovascular AMD (nAMD). It aims to optimise the intravitreal anti-VEGF injection frequency whilst dramatically reducing the number of clinical reviews (compared to PRN/ treat and extend). However, there has been no head-to-head comparison of O&P versus the other regimens: We aim to establish whether O&P is non-inferior to PRN and whether there is an economic advantage. Methods: Prospective interventional cohort study: Patients undergoing treatment with PRN aflibercept for nAMD were enrolled. All were switched to O&P aflibercept for one year. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were recorded in addition to the number of clinic visits and intravitreal injections. Their results were compared in a paired analysis to their own data whilst on PRN treatment the preceding year. Results: 25 patients were enrolled. 17 completed one year of treatment, one of whom was subsequently excluded (confounding pathology). Analysis of area under the curve for BCVA and CMT found O&P to be non-inferior to PRN p=0.03, p<0.01. The mean number of clinical reviews was significantly reduced under O&P (1.80 (SD 0.68) vs. 8.66 (SD 0.72) visits per year; P=<0.01) with an improvement in injection to visit ratio (1.01 vs. 1.67 vists/injection), equating to an estimated saving of £1,228 per patient per year. Conclusion: The O&P regimen for treatment of nAMD was clinically non-inferior to PRN. The O&P regimen was superior to PRN in terms of reducing the health economic burden and treatment burden of nAMD.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91933,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New frontiers in ophthalmology (London)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New frontiers in ophthalmology (London)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15761/NFO.1000243\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New frontiers in ophthalmology (London)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15761/NFO.1000243","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:“观察与计划”(O&P)是一种治疗血管性AMD (nAMD)的新方案。它旨在优化玻璃体内抗vegf注射频率,同时显著减少临床审查次数(与PRN/治疗和延长相比)。然而,目前还没有对O&P与其他方案进行正面比较:我们的目标是确定O&P是否优于PRN,以及是否具有经济优势。方法:前瞻性干预性队列研究:纳入接受PRN afliberept治疗nAMD的患者。所有人都换成了O&P,为期一年。记录最佳矫正视力(BCVA)、中央黄斑厚度(CMT)、就诊次数和玻璃体内注射次数。他们的结果在配对分析中与他们自己在前一年接受PRN治疗时的数据进行了比较。结果:25例患者入组。17例完成了一年的治疗,其中1例随后被排除(混淆病理)。BCVA和CMT的曲线下面积分析发现,O&P不逊于PRN p=0.03, p<0.01。O&P组的平均临床回顾次数显著减少(每年1.80次(SD 0.68) vs. 8.66次(SD 0.72);P=<0.01),注射就诊比(1.01 vs 1.67次/注射)有所改善,相当于每位患者每年节省1228英镑。结论:O&P方案治疗nAMD的临床疗效不逊于PRN。在减轻nAMD的健康经济负担和治疗负担方面,O&P方案优于PRN方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Head to head comparison of the clinical and cost effectiveness of Observe and Plan versus PRN for the treatment of wet macular degeneration
Purpose: “Observe and Plan” (O&P) is a novel treatment regimen for neovascular AMD (nAMD). It aims to optimise the intravitreal anti-VEGF injection frequency whilst dramatically reducing the number of clinical reviews (compared to PRN/ treat and extend). However, there has been no head-to-head comparison of O&P versus the other regimens: We aim to establish whether O&P is non-inferior to PRN and whether there is an economic advantage. Methods: Prospective interventional cohort study: Patients undergoing treatment with PRN aflibercept for nAMD were enrolled. All were switched to O&P aflibercept for one year. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were recorded in addition to the number of clinic visits and intravitreal injections. Their results were compared in a paired analysis to their own data whilst on PRN treatment the preceding year. Results: 25 patients were enrolled. 17 completed one year of treatment, one of whom was subsequently excluded (confounding pathology). Analysis of area under the curve for BCVA and CMT found O&P to be non-inferior to PRN p=0.03, p<0.01. The mean number of clinical reviews was significantly reduced under O&P (1.80 (SD 0.68) vs. 8.66 (SD 0.72) visits per year; P=<0.01) with an improvement in injection to visit ratio (1.01 vs. 1.67 vists/injection), equating to an estimated saving of £1,228 per patient per year. Conclusion: The O&P regimen for treatment of nAMD was clinically non-inferior to PRN. The O&P regimen was superior to PRN in terms of reducing the health economic burden and treatment burden of nAMD.
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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信