Survival of medical treatment success in primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Topical agents to lower intraocular pressure (IOP) are the most common initial therapeutic measure in glaucoma prevention. This study aims to assess treatment success duration among patients initiating or intensifying topical glaucoma medication. METHODS: Medical records (2013‒2018) for adults initiating/intensifying topical glaucoma medication were extracted from five secondary-care and tertiary-care UK ophthalmology centres. Main study outcomes were time from treatment initiation/intensification to treatment failure (<20% IOP reduction or IOP >21 mm Hg at consecutive clinic visits, or intensification of glaucoma treatment) and time from treatment change to subsequent treatment intensification. RESULTS: Study eyes (n=6587) underwent treatment intensification 0-to-1 glaucoma drop (5358 events), 1-to-2 drops (1469 events) and 2-to-3 drops (857 events) during the observation period. Median time to treatment failure was 1.60 (95% CI 1.57 to 1.65), 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.07) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.02) years following escalation 0-to-1, 1-to-2 and 2-to-3 drops, respectively. Median time to treatment intensification (non-IOP-based criterion) was 4.68 (95% CI 4.50 to 5.08) years for treatment initiators, 3.83 (95% CI 3.36 to 4.08) years on escalation 1-to-2 drops and 4.35 (95% CI 3.82 to 4.88) years on escalation 2-to-3 drops. On multivariable regression, significant risk factors for both treatment failure and intensification were lower baseline visual field mean deviation, primary open-angle glaucoma and lower eyedrop count in the fellow eye; lower baseline IOP was associated with treatment failure, higher baseline IOP with treatment intensification. CONCLUSION: Large-scale survival analyses provide the expected duration of treatment success from topical glaucoma medication.

Burden of Glaucoma in the United Kingdom: A Multicenter Analysis of United Kingdom Glaucoma Services.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the spectrum of glaucoma-associated health care resource utilization among outpatients attending National Health Service (NHS) hospital glaucoma clinics and the costs of managing glaucoma in this setting. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study using electronic medical record data. SUBJECTS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years attending 5 NHS glaucoma clinics in the United Kingdom (2013‒2018) with ≥ 12 months of continuous electronic medical record data. METHODS: Deidentified Medisoft Ophthalmology electronic medical record data (January 2013‒December 2018) from 43 742 eligible patients were categorized by year of clinic visit. Extracted information included patient demographics, glaucoma diagnoses, topical glaucoma medication prescription start/stop dates, types/numbers of glaucoma clinic visits, glaucoma investigations (visual acuity, intraocular pressure, visual field, and OCT), and glaucoma procedures received over 12 months after the first ("index") visit of the specified year. Direct glaucoma-related health care costs (clinic visits, investigations, procedures, and ongoing glaucoma medication initiated in the clinic) were estimated from event volumes and unit costs (UK national tariffs) and expressed from the direct-payer perspective. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Glaucoma diagnoses and topical glaucoma medication use at the index clinic visit; numbers of glaucoma clinic visits, investigations and procedures; and glaucoma-related health care costs over 12 months postindex. RESULTS: For the 2016 cohort (n = 21 719), the estimated average total cost of NHS-provided glaucoma care over 12 months was £405 per patient (medical staff services £209, glaucoma investigations £126, glaucoma medication £40, glaucoma procedures £26). Among this cohort, 40.8% had ocular hypertension/suspected glaucoma, 70% had 0-to-mild visual field impairment, and 14% had undergone a glaucoma procedure. Over 12 months, patients received (mean) 2.0 glaucoma clinic visits and 1.5 visual field tests, and 7% underwent glaucoma procedure(s). Results were similar for the other years examined. CONCLUSIONS: Cost estimates for managing patients with glaucoma in the UK are required for effective service planning. Appreciable proportions of patients managed in NHS glaucoma clinics may be considered at low risk of blindness (glaucoma suspects and those with ocular hypertension with mild visual field loss) and may be more appropriately managed with alternative, more affordable models of care.

Relative value assessment: characterizing the benefit of oncology therapies through diverse survival metrics from a US perspective.

OBJECTIVES: The introduction of innovative, high-cost oncology treatments, coupled with mounting budgetary pressures, necessitates value trade-offs across cancer types. Defining value is critical to informing decision-making. A cost-value analysis tool was used to assess relative clinical value from a US perspective using multiple outcome metrics for a variety of metastatic cancers. METHODS: Literature published (January 1, 2000-August 31, 2016) was reviewed to identify outcome metrics for approved treatments for metastatic cancers. Data were extracted or derived for median and mean overall survival (OS), landmark survival rates, and other survival metrics, and compared across treatments vs their respective trial comparators, with and without considering costs. RESULTS: Reported survival metrics varied by agent within cancer type. For treatment of prostate cancer, abiraterone yielded the highest improvement in 1-year survival rate (13.7%, previously treated), whereas enzalutamide yielded the highest median OS improvement (4.8 months, previously treated) and sipuleucel-T, the highest mean OS improvement (3.6 months, previously untreated) vs their respective trial comparators. For treatment of non-small cell lung cancer vs their respective trial comparators, nivolumab yielded the highest improvement in mean OS (11.9 months) and 3-year survival rate (12.6%), each in previously treated squamous disease, whereas afatinib yielded the highest median OS improvement (4.1 months, previously untreated EGFR del19 and L858R mutants). Cost-value analysis results varied with the applied survival metric. CONCLUSIONS: Although median OS is the traditional gold standard oncology efficacy metric, it fails to capture long-term survival benefits-the ultimate goal of cancer treatment-offered by new treatment modalities. Diverse metrics are needed for comprehensive value assessments of cancer therapies.