Impact of out‐of‐pocket costs on patient initiation, adherence and persistence rates for patients treated with anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor medicines

Jackson, Shaun; Stokes, John

doi:10.1111/ceo.13706

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both Australian 18 and international studies associate a pattern of decreased adherence to medications with increased OOP costs [19][20][21] and the opposite with reduced OOP costs. 22 Australian research suggests that up to 14% of the population and 24% of those with chronic health concerns forgo recommended healthcare due to cost 23 ; this is consistent with international studies. [24][25][26] These statistics highlight the need to further stratify and understand why certain populations are disproportionally affected by OOP healthcare costs.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Real price of health-experiences of out-of-pocket costs in Australia: protocol for a systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAustralians have substantial out-of-pocket (OOP) health costs compared with other developed nations, even with universal health insurance coverage. This can significantly affect access to care and subsequent well-being, especially for priority populations including those on lower incomes or with multimorbidity and chronic illness. While it is known that high OOP healthcare costs may contribute to poorer health outcomes, it is not clear exactly how these expenses are experienced by people with chronic illnesses. Understanding this may provide critical insights into the burden of OOP costs among this population group and may highlight policy gaps.Method and analysisA systematic review of qualitative studies will be conducted using Pubmed, CINAHL Complete (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, PsycINFO (Ovid) and EconLit from date of inception to June 2022. Primary outcomes will include people’s experiences of OOP costs such as their preferences, priorities, trade-offs and other decision-making considerations. Study selection will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and methodological appraisal of included studies will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. A narrative synthesis will be conducted for all included studies.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was not required given this is a systematic review that does not include human recruitment or participation. The study’s findings will be disseminated through conferences and symposia and shared with consumers, policymakers and service providers, and published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42022337538.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Real price of health-experiences of out-of-pocket costs in Australia: protocol for a systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In another study from Australia, lower out-of-pocket costs were associated with Fig. 1 Key biosimilar legislation and guidance development and biosimilar cumulative approvals in the EU and USA higher adherence and compliance rates for anti-VEGF therapy in patients with AMD or DME [46]. Treatment costs may have an even greater impact in low-and middle-income countries.…”

Section: What Role May Biosimilars Play In the Ophthalmology Space?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the USA the presence of a co-pay decreased the odds of patients with DME receiving anti-VEGF therapy (by 40%) and also decreased the odds of the patient following up (by 37%) [ 45 ]. In another study from Australia, lower out-of-pocket costs were associated with higher adherence and compliance rates for anti-VEGF therapy in patients with AMD or DME [ 46 ]. Treatment costs may have an even greater impact in low- and middle-income countries.…”

Section: What Role May Biosimilars Play In the Ophthalmology Space?mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Introduction to Biosimilars for the Treatment of Retinal Diseases: A Narrative Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological therapies have revolutionized the treatment of disease across a number of therapeutic areas including retinal diseases. However, on occasion, such treatments may be relatively more expensive compared to small molecule therapies. This can restrict patient access and treatment length leading to suboptimal clinical outcomes. Several biosimilar candidates of ranibizumab and aflibercept are currently in development and the first biosimilar of ranibizumab received EMA approval in August and FDA approval in September 2021. Biosimilars are biological medicines that are highly similar to an already-approved biological medicine (reference product). The physicochemical and clinical similarity of a biosimilar is determined by a rigorous analytical and clinical program, including extensive pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis with phase III equivalence studies where appropriate. These phase III studies are carried out in a patient population that is representative of all of the potential approved therapeutic indications of the originator product and the most sensitive for detecting potential differences between the biosimilar and the reference product. Biosimilars have been used successfully across a wide range of therapeutic areas for the past 15 years where they have achieved substantial cost savings that can be reinvested into healthcare systems without affecting the quality of patient care. The current review provides an introduction to biosimilars with the aim of preparing retinal specialists for discussing these products with their patients.

show abstract

“…In his engaging 2020 editorial in Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology -Register your interest 1 -Gillies outlined the high merits of observational outcomes registries in ophthalmology, highlighting three articles [2][3][4] in the same issue that used this approach to generate 'information that is useful for the management of our patients'. The current issue of the journal includes three articles that use the other major clinical investigation, the randomised controlled trial (RCT).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomised controlled trials in ophthalmology

Smith

2022

Clinical Exper Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact of out‐of‐pocket costs on patient initiation, adherence and persistence rates for patients treated with anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor medicines

Cited by 10 publications

References 10 publications

Real price of health-experiences of out-of-pocket costs in Australia: protocol for a systematic review

Real price of health-experiences of out-of-pocket costs in Australia: protocol for a systematic review

An Introduction to Biosimilars for the Treatment of Retinal Diseases: A Narrative Review

Randomised controlled trials in ophthalmology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About