You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letters
Cost of epimacular brachytherapy for treatment-naive neovascular age-related macular degeneration
  1. Timothy L Jackson1,2,
  2. Lucy Kirkpatrick2,
  3. Genevieve Tang3,
  4. Somdutt Prasad4
  1. 1School of Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
  2. 2Department of Ophthalmology, King's College Hospital, London, UK
  3. 3Quorum Consulting, San Francisco, California, USA
  4. 4Department of Ophthalmology, Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral, UK
  1. Correspondence to Tim Jackson, Department of Ophthalmology, King's College Hospital, London SE5 9RS, UK; t.jackson1{at}nhs.net

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-302511

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Dear Sir,

    Epimacular brachytherapy (EMB) combines pars plana vitrectomy and intraocular delivery of 24 grey irradiation for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration. We previously compared the projected cost of treatment with EMB, in combination with as required (Pro Re Nata (PRN)) anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy, with PRN anti-VEGF monotherapy.1 At that time, phase III trials of EMB were unavailable, and our projections were based on phase II trials.2 ,3 The CABERNET study recently provided phase III data in treatment-naive disease.4 Herein we present updated costs for …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors TLJ devised the original concept that was modified in discussion with LK and SP. GT devised the economic model and provided the output data and then LK used this to prepare the table and figure. TLJ wrote the first draft that was critically reviewed by all authors.

    • Funding This original work to develop the methodology used in this project was supported by funding from NeoVista. No grant was made to support the work herein.

    • Competing interest TLJ and SP receive research grant funding from NeoVista for other projects. TLJ also received research grant funding from Novartis and Oraya (competing companies). LK and GT received funding from NeoVista.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data sharing statement Data are presented in full in this paper.