Psychosocial and economic impact of uveitis in Mexico.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the psychosocial and economic impact suffered by patients diagnosed with uveitis in Mexico. METHODS: Survey in uveitis-diagnosed patients. Demographic data and socioeconomic level were recorded. Symptoms, time to diagnosis, type of treatment, behavior, attitudes and feelings towards the disease were identified. RESULTS: One hundred surveys were conducted in patients with uveitis, who had a mean age of 45 ± 17.08 years, and socioeconomic level ≤ D; 54 were females. Diagnostic delay was 1.87 ± 2.73 years. Annually, patients attend 2.1 ± 2.14 appointments per month, and are admitted once to the emergency department and remain hospitalized for 3.7 days. Patients use systemic treatment with steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (53 %), immunosuppressant agents (31 %), biological therapy (7 %), topical treatment with lubricants (44 %) or steroids (26 %) and undergo surgery (39 %). Observed comorbidities include hypertension, diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis (18 %), Sjögren's syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus, and nonspecific chronic ulcerative colitis. Complications: visual impairment, cataracts and blindness. Uveitis affects their life in 83 % of cases, in 41 % does it daily, and 49 % need care from another person. Seventy-nine percent receive private care and 43 % have social security, with $ 3,590 ± $ 2,730.65 pesos being spent monthly on medicines, transportation, medical appointments and studies. Annually, work absenteeism is 8.5 ± 14.56 days, plus 7.0 days of disability or hospitalization; 51% refer lack of support to learn about the disease. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first national study to portray the condition of patients with uveitis and the shortcomings they go through, including the economic and biopsychosocial fields.

OBJETIVO: Conocer el impacto psicosocial y económico quede la uveítis en México. MÉTODOS: Encuesta en pacientes diagnosticados con uveítis. Se registraron datos demográficos y nivel socioeconómico. Se identificaron síntomas, tiempo al diagnóstico, tratamiento, comportamiento, actitudes y sentimientos ante la enfermedad. RESULTADOS: Se realizaron 100 encuestas a pacientes con uveítis, con edad media de 45 ± 17.08 años, nivel socioeconómico ≤ D; 54 eran mujeres. El diagnóstico se realizó al 1.87 ± 2.73 años. Acuden anualmente a cita 2.1 ± 2.14 mes, más de 1 a urgencias y son hospitalizados 3.7 días. Utilizan tratamiento sistémico con antiinflamatorios esteroideos (53 %), inmunosupresor (31 %), terapia biológica (7 %), tratamiento tópico con lubricantes (44 %), esteroides (26 %) y cirugías (39 %). Comorbilidades observadas: hipertensión arterial, diabetes mellitus, artritis reumatoide (18 %), síndrome de Sjögren, lupus y colitis ulcerativa crónica inespecífica. Complicaciones: deterioro visual, cataratas y ceguera. La uveítis afecta su vida en el 83 % de los casos, en el 41 % a diario y el 49 % necesitan cuidados de otra persona. El 79 % reciben atención privada, el 43 % cuenta con seguridad social, gastando mensualmente $3,590 ± $2,730.65 pesos en medicamentos, transporte, consulta médicas y estudios. Anualmente con ausentismo laboral de 8.5 ± 14.56 días, más 7.0 días de incapacidad u hospitalización. El 51 % refieren falta de apoyo para conocer la enfermedad. CONCLUSIONES: Se trata del primer estudio nacional que escenifica la condición de los pacientes con uveítis y las insuficiencias por las que atraviesan, incluyendo el ámbito económico y biopsicosocial.

Impacto psicosocial y económico de la uveítis en México / Psychosocial and economic impact of uveitis in Mexico

Resumen Objetivo: Conocer el impacto psicosocial y económico quede la uveítis en México. Métodos: Encuesta en pacientes diagnosticados con uveítis. Se registraron datos demográficos y nivel socioeconómico. Se identificaron síntomas, tiempo al diagnóstico, tratamiento, comportamiento, actitudes y sentimientos ante la enfermedad. Resultados: Se realizaron 100 encuestas a pacientes con uveítis, con edad media de 45 ± 17.08 años, nivel socioeconómico ≤ D; 54 eran mujeres. El diagnóstico se realizó al 1.87 ± 2.73 años. Acuden anualmente a cita 2.1 ± 2.14 mes, más de 1 a urgencias y son hospitalizados 3.7 días. Utilizan tratamiento sistémico con antiinflamatorios esteroideos (53 %), inmunosupresor (31 %), terapia biológica (7 %), tratamiento tópico con lubricantes (44 %), esteroides (26 %) y cirugías (39 %). Comorbilidades observadas: hipertensión arterial, diabetes mellitus, artritis reumatoide (18 %), síndrome de Sjögren, lupus y colitis ulcerativa crónica inespecífica. Complicaciones: deterioro visual, cataratas y ceguera. La uveítis afecta su vida en el 83 % de los casos, en el 41 % a diario y el 49 % necesitan cuidados de otra persona. El 79 % reciben atención privada, el 43 % cuenta con seguridad social, gastando mensualmente $3,590 ± $2,730.65 pesos en medicamentos, transporte, consulta médicas y estudios. Anualmente con ausentismo laboral de 8.5 ± 14.56 días, más 7.0 días de incapacidad u hospitalización. El 51 % refieren falta de apoyo para conocer la enfermedad. Conclusiones: Se trata del primer estudio nacional que escenifica la condición de los pacientes con uveítis y las insuficiencias por las que atraviesan, incluyendo el ámbito económico y biopsicosocial.

Abstract Objective: Determine the psychosocial and economic impact suffered by patients diagnosed with uveitis in Mexico. Methods: Survey in uveitis-diagnosed patients. Demographic data and socioeconomic level were recorded. Symptoms, time to diagnosis, type of treatment, behavior, attitudes and feelings towards the disease were identified. Results: One hundred surveys were conducted in patients with uveitis, who had a mean age of 45 ± 17.08 years, and socioeconomic level ≤ D; 54 were females. Diagnostic delay was 1.87 ± 2.73 years. Annually, patients attend 2.1 ± 2.14 appointments per month, and are admitted once to the emergency department and remain hospitalized for 3.7 days. Patients use systemic treatment with steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (53 %), immunosuppressant agents (31 %), biological therapy (7 %), topical treatment with lubricants (44 %) or steroids (26 %) and undergo surgery (39 %). Observed comorbidities include hypertension, diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis (18 %), Sjögren’s syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus, and nonspecific chronic ulcerative colitis. Complications: visual impairment, cataracts and blindness. Uveitis affects their life in 83 % of cases, in 41 % does it daily, and 49 % need care from another person. Seventy-nine percent receive private care and 43 % have social security, with $ 3,590 ± $ 2,730.65 pesos being spent monthly on medicines, transportation, medical appointments and studies. Annually, work absenteeism is 8.5 ± 14.56 days, plus 7.0 days of disability or hospitalization; 51% refer lack of support to learn about the disease. Conclusions: This is the first national study to portray the condition of patients with uveitis and the shortcomings they go through, including the economic and biopsychosocial fields.

Quality of life in patients with uveitis: data from the ULISSE study (Uveitis: cLInical and medico-economic evaluation of a Standardised Strategy for the Etiological diagnosis).

AIMS: To assess vision-related (VR-QOL) and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in a large series of patients with de novo uveitis at baseline and 6-month follow-up. METHODS: Non-inferiority, prospective, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial registered under the Unique Identifier: NCT01162070. VR-QOL and HR-QOL were assessed by the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: At inclusion, 466 patients completed the VFQ-25. The mean composite score was 80.0 (±16.7). In multivariate analysis, higher age, female sex and insidious onset were significantly associated with lower QOL. At 6 months, 138 patients completed the VFQ-25, with a significantly higher mean composite score of 82.6 (±16.7). SF-36 mental component was 42.9 (±11.3) and physical component was 47.2 (±8.5) at inclusion (n=425). HR-QOL improvement at 6 months was not clinically significant. CONCLUSION: QOL seems relatively well preserved in this cohort; only VR-QOL improved significantly at 6 months, especially in patients with low initial visual acuity.

Incidence, prevalence, and risk factors of infectious uveitis and scleritis in the United States: A claims-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ocular inflammation causes significant visual morbidity in the United States, yet little is known about the epidemiology of infectious uveitis and scleritis. This study aims to evaluate the epidemiology of infectious uveitis/scleritis employing a large national medical claims database. METHODS: This was a retrospective, case-control study, employing Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database, containing data from 21.5 million privately insured individuals with enrollment for at least 15 months within 2007-2015. Inclusion in the uveitis/scleritis sample required an index uveitis/scleritis diagnosis based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes. Exclusion criteria included index date within 3 months after intraocular surgery. Rates for uveitis/scleritis were determined by anatomic site. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine odds ratios for the incidence and prevalence of uveitis/scleritis by anatomic category. FINDINGS: Infectious etiologies accounted for less than 20% of uveitis/scleritis, with mean rates of 18.9 (incidence) and 60.6 (prevalence) per 100,000 persons. The mean prevalences of infectious anterior, intermediate, posterior, panuveitis, and scleritis were 27.7, 0.17, 23.4, 4.4, and 4.6, per 100,000, respectively. Overall risk of prevalent infectious uveitis/scleritis increased with age (OR>3.3 for each decade over age 18, p<0.01), female sex (OR = 1.2, p<0.01), non-Hispanic white race (OR<1 for all other races, p<0.01), as well as the East South Central census division (OR = 1.2, p<0.01), comprising Alabama, Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee. Medical comorbidities, including HIV infection (OR = 6.4, p<0.01) and rheumatologic disease (OR = 1.9, p<0.01), were common in the infectious uveitis/scleritis cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence and prevalence of infectious uveitis/scleritis in the United States were higher than previously reported estimates but remained lower than in developing countries. Rates varied by age, sex, race, and medical comorbidities, and may reflect differential susceptibility to various infectious agents with disparate geographic distributions within the United States.

Evaluating the cost-consequence of a standardized strategy for the etiological diagnosis of uveitis (ULISSE study).

MAIN OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess the cost-consequence of a standardized diagnostic strategy as to compared to an open one for the etiological diagnosis of uveitis. DESIGN: This was a prospective, non-inferiority, multicentre, randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We included all consecutive patients with uveitis who had visited at least one of the Departments of Ophthalmology. In the standardized group, patients had a minimal work-up regardless of the type of uveitis (including evaluation of the CBC, ESR, C-reactive protein, tuberculin skin test, syphilis serology and chest X-ray). Depending on ophthalmological findings, further investigations could be performed. In the open strategy, ophthalmologists were free to order any kind of investigation. The main outcome was the mean cost per patient of each strategy. RESULTS: 903 uveitis patients were included from January, 2010 to May, 2013. The mean cost per patient of the standardized strategy was 182.97 euros [CI 95% (173.14; 192.80)], and the mean cost per patient of the open strategy was 251.75 euros [CI 95% (229.24; 274.25)]. Therefore, the mean cost per patient of the standardized strategy was significantly lower than the mean cost per patient of the open strategy (p<0.001). There were significantly fewer visits (p<0.001), fewer radiological procedures (p<0.004) and fewer laboratory investigations (p<0.001) in the standardized group. CONCLUSION: A standardized strategy is a cost-saving approach for the etiological diagnosis of uveitis.

Economic Burden of Non-Infectious Inflammatory Eye Disease (NIIED) in a Commercially-Insured Population in the United States.

Purpose: To assess the economic burden of non-infectious inflammatory eyedisease (NIIED) in a commercially-insured population in the United StatesMethods: Adult patients with a NIIED diagnosis between 2006 and 2015 were selected from a de-identified, privately insured claims database and were matched 1:1 to a non-NIIED control. Ophthalmologic complications, direct healthcare resource use and costs, and indirect work loss (from the payer perspective) were calculated for a 12-month period and compared across the 2 cohorts.Results: Among the 14 876 matched pairs, NIIED patients were significantly more likely than controls to experience ocular complications, including glaucoma and cataracts (p < 0.001). NIIED patients had significantly higher healthcare resource utilization and costs compared with matched controls (relative difference 40%, p < 0.001). NIIED patients missed 12.2 days of work ($2925 annual work-loss costs), 46% more than non-NIIED patients (p < 0.001).Conclusion: NIIED imposes a significant clinical and economic burden, suggesting an unmet need for expanded access to alternative treatment options.

Dexamethasone implant for non-infectious uveitis: is it cost-effective?

BACKGROUND: Uveitis is inflammation inside the eye. The objective of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of a dexamethasone implant plus current practice (immunosuppressants and systemic corticosteroids) compared with current practice alone, in patients with non-infectious intermediate, posterior or pan-uveitis and to identify areas for future research. METHODS: A Markov model was built to estimate the costs and benefits of dexamethasone. Systematic reviews were performed to identify available relevant evidence. Quality of life data from the key randomised-controlled trial (HURON) was used to estimate the interventions' effectiveness compared with the trial's comparator arm (placebo plus limited current practice (LCP)). The analysis took a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Costs were calculated based on standard UK sources. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of one dexamethasone implant compared with LCP is estimated as £19 509 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The factors with the largest impact on the results were rate of blindness and relative proportion of blindness cases avoided by dexamethasone. Using plausible alternative assumptions, dexamethasone could be cost saving or it may be associated with an ICER of £56 329 per QALY gained compared with LCP. CONCLUSIONS: Dexamethasone is estimated to be cost-effective using generally accepted UK thresholds. However, there is substantial uncertainty around these results due to scarcity of evidence. Future research on the following would help provide more reliable estimates: effectiveness of dexamethasone versus current practice (instead of LCP), with subgroup analyses for unilateral and bilateral uveitis, incidence of long-term blindness and effectiveness of dexamethasone in avoiding blindness.

Adalimumab for non-infectious uveitis: is it cost-effective?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Uveitis is inflammation inside the eye. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab compared with current practice (immunosuppressants and systemic corticosteroids) in patients with non-infectious intermediate, posterior or panuveitis and to identify areas for future research. METHODS: A Markov model was built to estimate costs and benefits of the interventions. Systematic reviews were performed to identify the available relevant clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence. Data collected in two key randomised controlled trials (VISUAL I and VISUAL II) were used to estimate the interventions' effectiveness compared with the trials' comparator arms (placebo plus limited current practice (LCP)). The analysis was performed from the National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Costs were calculated based on standard UK sources. RESULTS: The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of adalimumab versus LCP for the base case are £92 600 and £318 075 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for active and inactive uveitis, respectively. In sensitivity analyses, the ICER varied from £15 579 to £120 653 and £35 642 to £800 775 per QALY for active and inactive uveitis. CONCLUSION: The estimated ICERs of adalimumab versus LCP are above generally accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness in the UK. Adalimumab may be more cost-effective in patients with active uveitis at greater risk of blindness. However, there is an unmet need for additional primary data to provide more reliable estimates in several important areas, including effectiveness of adalimumab versus current practice (instead of LCP), incidence of long-term blindness, adalimumab effectiveness in avoiding blindness, and rates and time to remission while on adalimumab.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Adalimumab for the Treatment of Uveitis Associated with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.

PURPOSE: To investigate the cost effectiveness of adalimumab in combination with methotrexate, compared with methotrexate alone, for the management of uveitis associated with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). DESIGN: A cost-utility analysis based on a clinical trial and decision analytic model. PARTICIPANTS: Children and adolescents 2 to 18 years of age with persistently active uveitis associated with JIA, despite optimized methotrexate treatment for at least 12 weeks. METHODS: The SYCAMORE (Randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness, SafetY and Cost effectiveness of Adalimumab in combination with MethOtRExate for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis associated uveitis) trial (identifier, ISRCTN10065623) of methotrexate (up to 25 mg weekly) with or without fortnightly administered adalimumab (20 or 40 mg, according to body weight) provided data on resource use (based on patient self-report and electronic records) and health utilities (from the Health Utilities Index questionnaire). Surgical event rates and long-term outcomes were based on data from a 10-year longitudinal cohort. A Markov model was used to extrapolate the effects of treatment based on visual impairment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Medical costs to the National Health Service in the United Kingdom, utility of defined health states, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost per QALY. RESULTS: Adalimumab in combination with methotrexate resulted in additional costs of £39 316, with a 0.30 QALY gain compared with methotrexate alone, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £129 025 per QALY gained. The probability of cost effectiveness at a threshold of £30 000 per QALY was less than 1%. Based on a threshold analysis, a price reduction of 84% would be necessary for adalimumab to be cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab is clinically effective in uveitis associated with JIA; however, its cost effectiveness is not demonstrated compared with methotrexate alone in the United Kingdom setting.

Documento de recomendaciones de tratamiento de la uveítis anterior no infecciosa / Treatment recommendations for non-infectious anterior uveitis

Fundamento y objetivo Desarrollar recomendaciones basadas en la mejor evidencia disponible y experiencia sobre el uso de inmunodepresores en pacientes con uveítis anterior (UA) no infecciosa no neoplásica. Material y métodos: Se seleccionó un grupo multidisciplinar de 5 expertos, que en la primera reunión de grupo nominal, acordó el alcance, usuarios y apartados del documento. Posteriormente, se realizó una revisión sistemática de la literatura sobre la eficacia y seguridad de los inmunodepresores en pacientes con UA no infecciosa no neoplásica. En la segunda reunión de grupo nominal, se generaron 33 recomendaciones en base a la evidencia encontrada en la revisión sistemática y a la experiencia de los expertos. Mediante la metodología Delphi, el grado de acuerdo con las recomendaciones se extendió a 25 expertos más que votaron según una escala de uno (total desacuerdo) a 10 (total acuerdo). El acuerdo se definió como una puntuación ≥7 en al menos el 70% de los participantes. El nivel de evidencia y grado de recomendación se clasificaron según el modelo del Center for Evidence Based Medicine de Oxford. Resultados: Se aceptaron las 33 recomendaciones generadas. Se incluyen recomendaciones específicas para pacientes con UA no infecciosa no neoplásica, así como para distintas líneas de tratamiento. Conclusiones: En los pacientes con UA no infecciosa no neoplásica, estas recomendaciones sobre el uso de inmunodepresores pueden servir como guía que ayude en la toma de decisiones terapéuticas, dada la ausencia de estudios con potencia estadística suficiente, u otros algoritmos universalmente aceptados sobre los que apoyar dichas decisiones (AU)

Background and objective: To develop recommendations on the use of immunodepressors in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic anterior uveitis (AU) based on best evidence and experience. Material and methods: A multidisciplinary panel of five experts was established, who, in the first nominal group meeting defined the scope, users, and chapters of the document. A systematic literature review was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of immunosuppressors in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic AU. All the above was discussed in a second nominal group meeting and 33 recommendations were generated. Through the Delphi methodology, the degree of agreement with the recommendations was tested also by 25 more experts. Recommendations were voted on from one (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% voted ≥7. The level of evidence and degree of recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine's Levels of Evidence. Results: The 33 recommendations were accepted. They include specific recommendations on patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic AU, as well as different treatment lines. Conclusions: In patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic AU, these recommendations on the use of immunosuppressors might be a guide in order to help in the treatment decision making, due to the lack of robust evidence or other globally accepted algorithms (AU)

Carga y costes directos de la uveítis no infecciosa en España / Burden and direct costs of non infectious uveitis in Spain

OBJETIVOS: No existen datos actualizados sobre la epidemiología y los costes asociados de la uveítis no infecciosa (UNI) en España. Este estudio investiga la frecuencia de los tipos de uveítis y el coste de los recursos utilizados en su manejo en 2011. Material y método. Se recogió información mediante búsqueda bibliográfica de datos epidemiológicos y de costes directos de la UNI. La información se completó mediante consenso de 2 paneles de expertos y cuestionario a oftalmólogos y reumatólogos especialistas en esta enfermedad. Los costes de los recursos se obtuvieron de la base de datos Oblikue, de una sociedad médica y de los precios de los medicamentos aprobados en España. RESULTADOS: En 2011 se diagnosticaron 9.398 nuevos pacientes de UNI (45% hombres, el 70% entre 16 y 65 años). La incidencia por tipos fue: uveítis anterior aguda (UAA) 55%, uveítis posterior (UP) y panuveítis (PU) 15% y uveítis anterior crónica en edad adulta, uveítis anterior crónica pediátrica y uveítis intermedia 5%. Del total de costes calculados (77.834.282,10 €), el tratamiento farmacológico inicial fue el recurso más costoso (43.602.359,29 €), seguido del tratamiento quirúrgico de las complicaciones (8.367.420,43 €). Respecto a los tipos de uveítis, los costes asociados más elevados fueron los de la PU (26.692.948,29 €), la UP (22.283.330,50 €) y la UAA (14.336.755,38 €). CONCLUSIONES: La UNI en España genera unos elevados costes tanto de diagnóstico como de tratamiento. Un diagnóstico y tratamiento precoz de la enfermedad permitirían un ahorro sustancial al Sistema Nacional de Salud

OBJECTIVES: There is no updated information on epidemiology and cost of management of non infectious uveitis (NIU) in Spain. This study assessed the frequency of various types of uveítis as well as associated costs of resources used in their management. Material and method. NIU epidemiological data and direct costs were collected from a literature search. This was complemented with consensus information from 2 expert panel meetings and data from questionnaires to ophthalmologists and rheumatologists, experts on these conditions. Healthcare resources costs were obtained from the Oblikue database, from a medical society and from approved drug prices in Spain. RESULTS: During 2011 the estimate number of NIU was 9,398 (45% male, 70% aged 16-65 years). Incidence per type of uveitis was: acute anterior uveitis (AAU) 55%; posterior uveitis (PU) and pan-uveitis (PanU) 15% each; adult chronic anterior uveitis, paediatric chronic anterior uveitis and intermediate uveitis 5% each. Among total costs (77,834,282.10€), initial drug therapy was the highest (43,602,359.29€), followed by surgical treatment of complications (8,367,420.43€). With respect to types of uveitis, PanU (26,692,948.29€), PU (22,283,330.50€) and AAU (14,336,755.38€) showed the highest associated costs. CONCLUSIONS: Non infectious uveitis is associated to high costs in Spain, both in its diagnosis and in its treatment. Early diagnosis and treatment should allow for substantial savings for the National Health System

Burden and direct costs of non infectious uveitis in Spain. / Carga y costes directos de la uveítis no infecciosa en España.

OBJECTIVES: There is no updated information on epidemiology and cost of management of non infectious uveitis (NIU) in Spain. This study assessed the frequency of various types of uveítis as well as associated costs of resources used in their management. MATERIAL AND METHOD: NIU epidemiological data and direct costs were collected from a literature search. This was complemented with consensus information from 2 expert panel meetings and data from questionnaires to ophthalmologists and rheumatologists, experts on these conditions. Healthcare resources costs were obtained from the Oblikue database, from a medical society and from approved drug prices in Spain. RESULTS: During 2011 the estimate number of NIU was 9,398 (45% male, 70% aged 16-65 years). Incidence per type of uveitis was: acute anterior uveitis (AAU) 55%; posterior uveitis (PU) and pan-uveitis (PanU) 15% each; adult chronic anterior uveitis, paediatric chronic anterior uveitis and intermediate uveitis 5% each. Among total costs (77,834,282.10€), initial drug therapy was the highest (43,602,359.29€), followed by surgical treatment of complications (8,367,420.43€). With respect to types of uveitis, PanU (26,692,948.29€), PU (22,283,330.50€) and AAU (14,336,755.38€) showed the highest associated costs. CONCLUSIONS: Non infectious uveitis is associated to high costs in Spain, both in its diagnosis and in its treatment. Early diagnosis and treatment should allow for substantial savings for the National Health System.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for interferon-γ release assays and tuberculin skin test in tuberculous uveitis.

BACKGROUND: Although tuberculous uveitis remains a major cause of ocular morbidity in the developing world, there is no consensus on which diagnostic test or testing strategy is the most cost effective. In this study we carried out a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the most cost-effective diagnostic test strategy. METHODS: In this prospective study, we recruited 102 patients from Singapore National Eye Centre with signs suggestive of tuberculous uveitis. Using prospective data from this cohort and from published meta-analyses, we modelled the incremental cost effectiveness of the following strategies: tuberculin skin test (TST) only; interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) only; IGRA following a positive TST result; and dual-test strategy, conducting TST and IGRA at presentation. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each strategy and analysed using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: In our population, the least cost effective was the IGRA-only strategy. The dual-test strategy was the most cost effective, with an improvement of 0.017 QALY at an incremental cost of $190 relative to the TST-only strategy (ICER $11,500); while the TST-only strategy was more cost effective than the third strategy, using IGRA following a positive TST result (ICER $3610). This remained consistent while varying the costs of IGRA and TST, the incidence of tuberculosis and tuberculous uveitis, as well as the diagnostic accuracy of IGRA and TST found in previous studies in various populations. CONCLUSIONS: The dual-test strategy (performing TST and IGRA at presentation) was the most cost effective strategy for the diagnosis of tuberculous uveitis in our population.

A randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab in combination with methotrexate for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis associated uveitis (SYCAMORE Trial).

BACKGROUND: Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in children. Children with JIA are at risk of inflammation of the uvea in the eye (uveitis). Overall, 20% to 25% of paediatric uveitis is associated with JIA. Major risk factors for development of uveitis in JIA are oligoarticular pattern of arthritis, an age at onset of arthritis of less than seven years of age, and antinuclear antibody positivity. In the initial stages of mild to moderate inflammation the uveitis is asymptomatic. This has led to current practice of screening all children with JIA for uveitis. Approximately 12% to 38% of patients with JIA develop uveitis in seven years following onset of arthritis. In 30% to 50% of children with JIA-associated uveitis structural complications are present at diagnosis. Furthermore about 50% to 75% of those with severe uveitis will eventually develop visual impairment secondary to ocular complications such as cataract and glaucoma. Defining the severity of inflammation and structural complications in uveitis patients is now possible following Standardised Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) guidelines, and modified to incorporate the consensus of end point and outcome criteria into the design of randomised trials. Despite current screening and therapeutic options (pre-biologics) 10% to 15% of children with JIA-associated uveitis may develop bilateral visual impairment and certified legally blind. To date, there remains no controlled trial evidence of benefits of biologic therapy. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will randomise 154 patients aged 2 to 18 years with active JIA-associated uveitis (despite methotrexate (MTX) treatment for at least 12 weeks). All participants will be treated for 18 months, with follow up of 3 years from randomisation (continuing on MTX throughout). All participants will receive a stable dose of MTX and in addition either adalimumab (20 mg/0.8 ml for patients<30 kg or 40 mg/0.8 ml for patients weighing 30 kg or more, subcutaneous (s/c) injection every 2 weeks based on body weight), or placebo (0.8 ml as appropriate according to body weight) s/c injection every 2 weeks. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomised controlled trial that will assess the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost effectiveness of adalimumab in combination with methotrexate for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis associated uveitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN10065623.

The role of biologic agents in the management of non-infectious uveitis.

INTRODUCTION: Uveitis is an intriguing group of disorders characterized by inflammation of the uveal tract. Due to the potential grave consequences of the disease process, it is important to assess the various therapeutic options available for treating uveitis, and their outcomes. AREAS COVERED: This review discusses the use of conventional agents in the management of uveitis, including discussion of the molecular and clinical properties of corticosteroids, antimetabolites, calcineurin inhibitors and alkylating agents and their side effects. In addition, it also discusses the molecular and clinical properties of novel biologic agents and their side effects. Moreover, recommendations as to when biologic agents should be employed are also discussed. EXPERT OPINION: We recommend that in general (except in selected cases of Adamantiades-Behçet's disease) biologics should not be used as a first-line therapy for uveitis due to inconvenience, high cost, and potential immunosuppressive effects. However, many biologics are potent in inducing drug-free remission of uveitis and may be employed to manage recurrent diseases or diseases not responsive to conventional agents.

[Diagnostic procedure for uveitis patients: reduction of costs by a targeted assessment of laboratory tests based on clinical findings]. / Abklärung bei Uveitis: Kostenreduktion durch befundorientiertes diagnostisches Vorgehen.

BACKGROUND: Interdisciplinarity is an essential prerequisite for extensive and high-quality diagnostic work-up, therapy, and care of patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease. The ophthalmological status significantly narrows down the possible causes for the primary disease and facilitates an effective diagnostic approach. METHODS: We developed an assessment procedure according to the individual clinical findings to use as an ideal diagnostic strategy for an interdisciplinary center. To permit comparability we first introduced this new diagnostic tool in November 2002 (intervention), replacing the existing cost-intensive standard diagnostic procedure for uveitis patients. RESULTS: The average costs for laboratory tests (calculated according to GOA numbers, scale of fees for physicians) were reduced from 670+/-11 euros per patient before the intervention to 238+/-18 euros per patient after the intervention. Before intervention 16 of 31 (52%) could be assigned to a specified disease compared to 27 of 53 (51%) after the intervention. With our strategy we were able to obtain a 64% reduction of costs in the diagnostics of uveitis patients without a deterioration of our diagnostic quality. CONCLUSION: It is possible to reduce costs and still improve the care of uveitis patients by using a targeted assessment according to the individual clinical findings.

Uveitis: a potentially blinding disease.

Uveitis (intraocular inflammation) is a potentially blinding group of, probably autoimmune, conditions predominantly occurring in the working age group. Although the aetiology is unknown in most cases, many patients have an associated underlying systemic disease. Central vision loss, in the form of cystoid macular oedema, is the commonest type of visual impairment. Although historical incidence and prevalence data exists, little is known about the degree of vision loss experienced, and the social and financial consequences of having temporary or permanent visual impairment in this age group. The literature is also full of uncontrolled studies and case reports of different modalities of drug therapy for uveitis. This article attempts to raise the awareness of uveitis as an important sight-threatening group of conditions by highlighting the paucity of evidence-based data on epidemiological, quality of life, socioeconomic, and therapeutic aspects.