Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 2009 (2009), Article ID 540431, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2009/540431
Clinical Study

Joint Assessment of Intended and Unintended Effects of Medications: An Example Using Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitors for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

1Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada B3H 1V7
2Epidemiology, Oxford Outcomes Ltd., Vancouver, Canada V6B 1P1
3Section of Public Health and Health Policy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8RZ, UK
4Outcomes Research, Pfizer, La Jolla, CA 92121, USA
5Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA

Received 3 March 2009; Revised 31 July 2009; Accepted 2 December 2009

Academic Editor: Jie Jin Wang

Copyright © 2009 Adrian R. Levy et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. Health Canada, “What is the progressive licensing project?” Generic, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  2. A. H. Briggs and A. R. Levy, “Pharmacoeconomics and pharmacoepidemiology: curious bedfellows or a match made in heaven?” PharmacoEconomics, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 1079–1086, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. D. A. Hughes, A. M. Bayoumi, and M. Pirmohamed, “Current assessment of risk-benefit by regulators: is it time to introduce decision analyses?” Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 123–127, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. R. Klein, B. E. K. Klein, and K. L. P. Linton, “Prevalence of age-related maculopathy. The Beaver Dam Eye Study,” Ophthalmology, vol. 99, no. 6, pp. 933–943, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. F. L. Ferris III, S. L. Fine, and L. Hyman, “Age-related macular degeneration and blindness due to neovascular maculopathy,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 102, no. 11, pp. 1640–1642, 1984. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. E. S. Gragoudas, A. P. Adamis, E. T. Cunningham Jr., M. Feinsod, and D. R. Guyer, “Pegaptanib for neovascular age-related macular degeneration,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 351, no. 27, pp. 2805–2816, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. D. M. Brown, P. K. Kaiser, M. Michels et al., “Ranibizumab versus verteporfin for neovascular age-related macular degeneration,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 355, no. 14, pp. 1432–1444, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. P. J. Rosenfeld, D. M. Brown, J. S. Heier et al., “Ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 355, no. 14, pp. 1419–1431, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. Genentech, “SAILOR Safety Information—Interim Analysis,” January 2007. View at Google Scholar
  10. J. S. L. Tan, J. J. Wang, G. Liew, E. Rochtchina, and P. Mitchell, “Age-related macular degeneration and mortality from cardiovascular disease or stroke,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 509–512, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. T. Y. Wong, R. Klein, C. Sun et al., “Age-related macular degeneration and risk for stroke,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 145, no. 2, pp. 98–106, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. P. P. Glasziou and L. M. Irwig, “An evidence based approach to individualising treatment,” British Medical Journal, vol. 311, no. 7016, pp. 1356–1359, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. M. C. Weinstein and W. B. Stason, “Foundations of cost effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 296, no. 13, pp. 716–721, 1977. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. Statistics Canada, “Complete life table, Canada, 2000 to 2002, males,” Statistics Canada, July 2006, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/84-537-x/t/pdf/4198612-eng.pdf.
  15. Statistics Canada, “Complete life table, Canada, 2000 to 2002, females,” Statistics Canada, July 2006, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/84-537-x/t/pdf/4198611-eng.pdf.
  16. United States Life Tables, Center for Disease Control, 2003, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/84-537-x/4064441-eng.htm.
  17. U. Chakravarthy, A. P. Adamis, E. T. Cunningham Jr. et al., “Year 2 efficacy results of 2 randomized controlled clinical trials of pegaptanib for neovascular age-related macular degeneration,” Ophthalmology, vol. 113, no. 9, pp. 1508–1525, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  18. “Collaborative overview of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy—I: prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke by prolonged antiplatelet therapy in various categories of patients. Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration,” British Medical Journal, vol. 308, no. 6921, pp. 81–106, 1994. View at Scopus
  19. M. M. Brown, G. C. Brown, J. D. Stein, Z. Roth, J. Campanella, and G. R. Beauchamp, “Age-related macular degeneration: economic burden and value-based medicine analysis,” Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 277–287, 2005. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. G. C. Brown, “Vision and quality-of-life. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1999;97:473–511,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 129, no. 6, p. 833, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  21. T. O. Tengs and T. H. Lin, “A meta-analysis of quality-of-life estimates for stroke,” PharmacoEconomics, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 191–200, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. J. Tsevat, L. Goldman, J. R. Soukup et al., “Stability of time-tradoff utilities in survivors of myocardial infarction,” Medical Decision Making, vol. 13, pp. 161–165, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  23. A. Maetzel, M. Hrahn, and G. Naglie, “The cost-effectiveness of celecoxib and rofecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis,” Tech. Rep. 23, Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment, Ottawa, Canada, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  24. P. W. Groeneveld, T. A. Lieu, A. M. Fendrick et al., “Quality of life measurement clarifies the cost-effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori eradication in peptic ulcer disease and uninvestigated dyspepsia,” American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 96, no. 2, pp. 338–347, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions, Hypertension: Management in Adults in Primary Care: Pharmacological Update, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK, 2006.
  26. W. Flanagan, C. N. McIntosh, C. Le Petit, and J.-M. Berthelot, “Deriving utility scores for co-morbid conditions: a test of the multiplicative model for combining individual condition scores,” Population Health Metrics, vol. 4, article 13, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. A. M. Pleil, S. M. Szabo, K. M. Beusterien et al., “Health state classification system for deriving preference weights in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NV-AMD),” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 50, no. 4, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  28. J. Lipscomb, M. C. Weinstein, and G. W. Torrance, “Time preference,” in Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, M. R. Gold, J. E. Siegel, L. B. Russel et al., Eds., pp. 214–246, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  29. A. H. Briggs, A. E. Ades, and M. J. Price, “Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for decision trees with multiple branches: use of the Dirichlet distribution in a Bayesian framework,” Medical Decision Making, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 341–350, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. A. H. Briggs, M. J. Sculpher, and K. Claxton, Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2006.
  31. ISPOR, Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines around the World, ISPOR, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA, 2007, http://www.ispor.org/peguidelines/countrydet.asp?c=24&t=1.
  32. N. M. Bressler, “Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration with verteporfin: two-year results of 2 randomized clinical trials—tap report 2,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 198–207, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. J. Arnold, I. Barbezetto, R. Birngruber et al., “Verteporfin therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration: two-year results of a randomized clinical trial including lesions with occult with no classic choroidal neovascularization—verteporfin in photodynamic therapy report 2,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 131, no. 5, pp. 541–560, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. A. Mehrez and A. Gafni, “Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy-years equivalents,” Medical Decision Making, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 142–149, 1989. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. A. Mehrez and A. Gafni, “Healthy-years equivalents versus quality-adjusted life years: in pursuit of progress,” Medical Decision Making, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 287–292, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. G. C. Brown, S. Sharma, M. M. Brown, and J. Kistler, “Utility values and age-related macular degeneration,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 118, no. 1, pp. 47–51, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. W. Furlong, D. Feeny, G. W. Torrance, R. Barr, and J. Horsman, “Guide to design and development of health-state utility instrumentation,” Tech. Rep. 90-9, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  38. I. A. Falkenstein, D. E. Cochran, S. P. Azen et al., “Comparison of visual acuity in macular degeneration patients measured with snellen and early treatment diabetic retinopathy study charts,” Ophthalmology, vol. 115, no. 2, pp. 319–323, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. A. Z. Fu and M. W. Kattan, “Utilities should not be multiplied: Evidence from preference-based scores in the United States,” Medecal Care, no. 46, pp. 984–90, 2008. View at Google Scholar