Table 6 Study characteristics and economic outcomes data reported in the included studies

Taylor et al., 2014 [33]

3.50 %

At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000/QALY gained, the probability of ranibizumab being cost-effective is 68.3 %

UK; CEA

Cost per treatment

£742.17

£798

T: ranibizumab

Cost of administration

£192.00

£206

C: observation

Total costs

£20,646

£22,189

Cost year: 2011

QALYs

7.383

NA

Observation

Total costs

£11,430

£12,284

QALYs

6.844

NA

£17,103

£18,381

ICER, cost/QALY

£423

£455

Incremental cost per month free from blindness

Eriksson et al., 2014 [29]

NR

Aflibercept

PSA showed that aflibercept was dominating over ranibizumab in 70 % of the simulations

Sweden; CEA

Incremental costs

−35,000 SEK

−£2654

T: aflibercept

Incremental QALYs

0.061

NA

C: ranibizumab

Ranibizumab

−8537 SEK

−£647

Cost year: not reported^a

Incremental drug cost

−5793 SEK

−£439

Incremental administration cost

Duff et al., 2012 [31]

3 %

Ranibizumab

PSA demonstrated that at a threshold of $50,000/QALY, ranibizumab was cost-effective in 88.3 % of simulations

USA; CUA

Product cost per vial

$1950

£1419

T: ranibizumab

Cost of adverse events

$376

£274

C: dexamethasone intravitreal implants

Dexamethasone

$1295

£942

Cost year: 2011

Product cost per implant

$180

£131

Cost of administration

$63

£46

Cost of adverse events

ICER, cost/QALY

$34,204

£24,882

Haig et al., 2012 [32]

5 %

ICER, cost/QALY

Not reported

Canada; CUA

Healthcare perspective

CAD$28,046

£16,243

T: ranibizumab

Societal perspective

CAD$2103

£1218

C: observation

Cost year: not reported

Vicente et al., 2013 [30]

5 %

ICUR, cost/QALY

Throughout the 1000 iterations of the PSA the ICER consistently fell below a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAD$50,000/QALY gained. Although robust, the model was most sensitive to age of entry and the utilities used for both the best-seeing eye and worst-seeing eye

Canada; CUA

Public payer perspective

CAD$21,568

£12,492

T: dexamethasone 700 μg intravitreal implant

Societal perspective

CAD$14,103

£8168

C: observation

Cost year: 2012

Duff et al., 2012 [31]

3 %

Dexamethasone

At low cost-effectiveness thresholds (<$19,000/QALY), steroid treatment was most likely to be cost-effective

USA; CUA

Product cost per implant

$1295

£942

T: dexamethasone intravitreal implants

Cost of administration

$180

£131

C: steroids: triamcinolone acetonide

Cost of adverse events

$63

£46

Cost year: 2011

Steroid

$3

£2

Product cost

$123

£89

Cost of adverse events

$19,126

£13,913

ICER, cost/QALY

Hayward et al., 2011 [34]

NR

Dexamethsone

PSA showed that at a threshold of £30,000, dexamethasone was a cost-effective option in 85.2 % of simulations

UK; CEA

Total costs

£12,332

£13,254

T: dexamethasone intravitreal implants

QALYs

11.18

NA

C: observation

Observation

Cost year: not reported^a

Total costs

£7600

£8168

QALYs

10.89

NA

ICER, cost/QALY

£16,522

£17,757

Kowalski et al., 2011 [35]

3 %

ICER, cost/QALY

$20,597

£14,983

PSA demonstrated that the ICERs fall below a threshold of $50,000 per QALY in 92 % of simulations. ICER was sensitive to the percentage of patients incurring CRVO in the best-seeing eye, risk of fellow eye occurrence, and cost of vision loss

USA

T: dexamethasone 700 μg intravitreal implant

C: observation

Cost year: not reported^a