IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0133968.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Treatment Frequency and Dosing Interval of Ranibizumab and Aflibercept for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in Routine Clinical Practice in the USA

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Ferreira
  • Alexandros Sagkriotis
  • Melvin Olson
  • Jingsong Lu
  • Charles Makin
  • Fran Milnes

Abstract

Purpose: To compare treatment patterns of intravitreal ranibizumab and aflibercept for the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in a real-world setting over the first 12 months of treatment. Methods: A proprietary clinical database was used to identify treatment-naïve patients with nAMD in the USA with claims for ranibizumab or aflibercept between November 1, 2011 and November 30, 2013 and with follow-up of at least 12 months. Patients were considered treatment-naïve if they had no anti-VEGF treatment code for 6 months before the index date. Mean numbers of injections and of non-injection visits to a treating physician were compared between the two treatment cohorts (ranibizumab or aflibercept). In addition, the mean interval between doses was also investigated. Results: Patient characteristics were similar for those receiving either ranibizumab (n = 5421) or aflibercept (n = 3506) at the index date. The mean (± standard deviation) numbers of injections received by patients treated with ranibizumab (4.9 ± 3.3) or aflibercept (5.2 ± 2.9) were not clinically different. The mean number of non-injection visits was 2.8 ± 2.8 and 2.1 ± 2.5 for ranibizumab and aflibercept, respectively. Mean dosing interval was 51.0 days (± 41.8 days) in patients receiving ranibizumab and 54.1 days (± 36.0 days) in those receiving aflibercept. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses for definition of treatment-naïve, length of follow-up and treatment in the index eye only. Conclusions: Limited data exist regarding real-world treatment patterns of aflibercept for the management of nAMD. Our results suggest that, in routine clinical practice, patients receive a comparable number of injections in the first year of treatment with ranibizumab or aflibercept.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Ferreira & Alexandros Sagkriotis & Melvin Olson & Jingsong Lu & Charles Makin & Fran Milnes, 2015. "Treatment Frequency and Dosing Interval of Ranibizumab and Aflibercept for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in Routine Clinical Practice in the USA," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0133968
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133968
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133968
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133968&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0133968?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Cruess & Gergana Zlateva & Xiao Xu & Gièle Soubrane & Daniel Pauleikhoff & Andrew Lotery & Jordi Mones & Ronald Buggage & Caroline Schaefer & Tyler Knight & Thomas Goss, 2008. "Economic Burden of Bilateral Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 57-73, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Hoyle & Tariq Mehmood Aslam, 2017. "Generative mathematical modelling to demonstrate virtual simulations of neovascular age related macular degeneration," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-12, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bjoern Schwander, 2014. "Early health economic evaluation of the future potential of next generation artificial vision systems for treating blindness in Germany," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Kathleen Ke, 2010. "The direct, indirect and intangible costs of visual impairment caused by neovascular age-related macular degeneration," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(6), pages 525-531, December.
    3. Yuliya Chuvarayan & Robert P. Finger & Juliane Köberlein-Neu, 2020. "Economic burden of blindness and visual impairment in Germany from a societal perspective: a cost-of-illness study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(1), pages 115-127, February.
    4. Bennion, Amy E. & Shaw, Rachel L. & Gibson, Jonathan M., 2012. "What do we know about the experience of age related macular degeneration? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(6), pages 976-985.
    5. Ra Ho & Lina D Song & Jin A Choi & Donghyun Jee, 2018. "The cost-effectiveness of systematic screening for age-related macular degeneration in South Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0133968. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.