Scholarlink

Objectives <p>The cost-effectiveness of low-dose atropine SYD-101 (0.01%) eye drops in combination with standard of care (SoC) was evaluated in comparison with SoC alone for pediatric myopia. The SoC included single-vision eyeglasses or soft, daily-wear, single-vision contact lenses.</p> Methods <p>A cohort state-transition model with nine mutually exclusive states encompassing myopia severity, complications, and death was developed. Population characteristics and clinical data were obtained from the STudy of Atropine for the Reduction (STAR) of Myopia Progression in Children. The model included children with a myopia progression rate of ≥ 0.50 D per year and myopia between −0.5 D and −6.0 D, inclusive, in both eyes. The analysis used the English National Health Services and Personal Social Services perspective, applying a lifetime horizon and annual discounting of costs and health effects at 3.5%, and 2023 as a common year of costing. The main outcomes were total and disaggregated costs, quality-adjusted life-years&#xa0;(QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).</p> Results <p>SYD-101 (0.01%) increased QALYs by 0.139 at an added cost of £2239 compared to SoC, resulting in an ICER of £16,164/QALY, below the willingness-to-pay threshold. The improved health outcomes were primarily driven by a reduced proportion of individuals progressing to high myopia and fewer myopia-related complications. Scenario and sensitivity analyses together validated the robustness of base-case results. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 85% of the simulations for SYD-101 (0.01%) compared to SoC were in the northeast quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane. The probability of SYD-101 (0.01%) being more cost-effective compared to SoC was 58.2% or 64.2% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY or £25,000/QALY, respectively.</p> Conclusions <p>Adding SYD-101 (0.01%) to SoC can be considered a cost-effective option for treating pediatric myopia in the United Kingdom over a lifetime horizon. These results support the integration of SYD-101 (0.01%) into routine clinical practice to enhance long-term visual outcomes and lower healthcare expenses.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Low-Dose Atropine Eye Drops (0.01%) for the Treatment of Myopia in Children: A United Kingdom Perspective

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月2日

查看全文
  • Kun Shi-van Wielink,
  • Annegret Dahlmann-Noor,
  • Jieyi Li,
  • Thom W. L. de Milliano,
  • Frederic Ernst,
  • Francesco Croci,
  • Yuvraj Sharma,
  • Yogesh Punekar

摘要

Objectives

The cost-effectiveness of low-dose atropine SYD-101 (0.01%) eye drops in combination with standard of care (SoC) was evaluated in comparison with SoC alone for pediatric myopia. The SoC included single-vision eyeglasses or soft, daily-wear, single-vision contact lenses.

Methods

A cohort state-transition model with nine mutually exclusive states encompassing myopia severity, complications, and death was developed. Population characteristics and clinical data were obtained from the STudy of Atropine for the Reduction (STAR) of Myopia Progression in Children. The model included children with a myopia progression rate of ≥ 0.50 D per year and myopia between −0.5 D and −6.0 D, inclusive, in both eyes. The analysis used the English National Health Services and Personal Social Services perspective, applying a lifetime horizon and annual discounting of costs and health effects at 3.5%, and 2023 as a common year of costing. The main outcomes were total and disaggregated costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Results

SYD-101 (0.01%) increased QALYs by 0.139 at an added cost of £2239 compared to SoC, resulting in an ICER of £16,164/QALY, below the willingness-to-pay threshold. The improved health outcomes were primarily driven by a reduced proportion of individuals progressing to high myopia and fewer myopia-related complications. Scenario and sensitivity analyses together validated the robustness of base-case results. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 85% of the simulations for SYD-101 (0.01%) compared to SoC were in the northeast quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane. The probability of SYD-101 (0.01%) being more cost-effective compared to SoC was 58.2% or 64.2% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY or £25,000/QALY, respectively.

Conclusions

Adding SYD-101 (0.01%) to SoC can be considered a cost-effective option for treating pediatric myopia in the United Kingdom over a lifetime horizon. These results support the integration of SYD-101 (0.01%) into routine clinical practice to enhance long-term visual outcomes and lower healthcare expenses.