October 2006
Volume 47, Issue 10
Free
Clinical and Epidemiologic Research  |   October 2006
Estimating the Yearly Number of Eyes with Treatable Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Using a Direct Standardization Method and a Markov Model
Author Affiliations
  • Jean-François Korobelnik
    From the Department of Ophthalmology, CHU (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire) de Bordeaux, Hopital Pellegrin, Bordeaux, France; the
  • Nicholas Moore
    Department of Pharmacology, Université Victor Segalen, Bordeaux, France,
    INSERM (Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale) Unité 657, Bordeaux, France;
  • Patrick Blin
    Department of Pharmacology, Université Victor Segalen, Bordeaux, France,
  • Chandrabhan Dharmani
    The Mattson Jack Group, St. Louis, Missouri, USA; the
  • Gilles Berdeaux
    Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Paris, France; and
    Alcon France, Rueil-Malmaison, France.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science October 2006, Vol.47, 4270-4276. doi:10.1167/iovs.05-1467
  • Views
  • PDF
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jean-François Korobelnik, Nicholas Moore, Patrick Blin, Chandrabhan Dharmani, Gilles Berdeaux; Estimating the Yearly Number of Eyes with Treatable Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Using a Direct Standardization Method and a Markov Model. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(10):4270-4276. doi: 10.1167/iovs.05-1467.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

purpose. To estimate the number of treatable eyes with neovascular subfoveal age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) in France.

methods. A literature search for studies documenting neovascular ARMD incidence rates and direct standardization according to age and gender were performed. Projection to the year 2025 was based on OECD (Organization for Economic and Co-operation Development) data. A cohort of patients aged 75 years was simulated by a seven-state Markov model. The mean treatment duration was fixed arbitrarily at 2 years. The probability of ARMD in the second eye was fixed at 30% at 5 years. Monthly mortality incidence was modeled from INSEE (Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques) mortality tables. The time horizon of the model was 25 years. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

results. Based on the Rotterdam Study, 30,192 citizens per year will develop ARMD in one eye. Among them, 17,585 will be neovascular and 13,805 neovascular subfoveal ARMD. Taking into account the second eye, mortality, and a 2-year treatment duration, the number of neovascular subfoveal treatable eyes yearly would be 37,019 by 2025. Treatment duration was the most sensitive parameter. The number of eyes would be 18,899, 53,204, 67,535, and 80,162, for treatment lasting 1, 3, 4, and 5 years, respectively. A 2% yearly increase is expected up to 2025, due to population aging and the 1950s baby boom.

conclusions. According to the study model, the yearly number of subfoveal neovascular ARMD treatable eyes in France will be 37,019 by 2025. Average treatment duration was the most sensitive parameter.

Age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) is the most common cause of blindness in adults in Western developed countries. 1 2 ARMD significantly impairs vision- and health-related quality of life and functional independence. 3 4 5 6 7 The burden of ocular morbidity and visual disability due to ARMD will increase further with an expanding older population if there is no reduction of its incidence or improvement in treatment. Already, a steady increase in the number of people registering as blind in most Western countries suggests that the incidence of ARMD is growing. 8 Therefore, ARMD is becoming an increasing public health issue for decision makers when allocating resources. 
Two drugs are registered for the treatment of neovascular ARMD, verteporfin (Visudyne; Novartis, Basel, Switzerland) and pegaptanib (Macugen; OSI Pharmaceuticals, Melville, NY). Market authorization for these drugs was based on the results of placebo-controlled clinical trials. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Other treatments, with other mechanisms of action, are currently in development. Phase II randomized clinical trial results suggest that anecortave acetate is better than placebo with a similar efficacy to verteporfin, 17 18 with respect to preserving visual acuity, at least during the first year of treatment. Last, ranibizumab has shown efficacy superior to that of placebo. 19  
Cost-effectiveness analysis is the standard procedure for obtaining reimbursement from third-party payers in Western developed countries. 20 Population size is a major parameter when estimating the additional budget necessary to finance an innovation. Several health technology assessment (HTA) reports have been published since verteporfin was marketed. For a comprehensive review, we attempted to collect all verteporfin HTA reports on treatment of neovascular AMD published in 15 European Economic Community (EEC) countries, knowing that most reports are not made public. We located one accessible report in each of the following countries: Germany, 21 Sweden, 22 France, 23 and the United Kingdom. 24 However, the methods used to delineate the target population differed. Some estimates were based on incidence rates and others on prevalence rates. Some countries favored local surveys, whereas others used foreign data. Also, definitions of the targeted populations were not identical. Some reports restricted the use of verteporfin to patients with visual acuity from 1/10 to 5/10, based on the visual acuity range for the patient eligibility in the clinical trials. Last, the ratio of classic to occult CNV in neovascular ARMD was based on different information sources. It was therefore not surprising to find significant target population differences between countries. In the England and Wales (52.8 million inhabitants) 5,000 new patients per year would require photodynamic therapy to treat predominantly classic neovascular ARMD; in Germany (82.5 million inhabitants) the number of new patients per year was between 9,000 and 60,000, in France (59.5 million inhabitants) it was 20,000, and in Sweden (8.9 million inhabitants) 700 to 1,000. 
Several factors should be taken into account to estimate the number of patients with neovascular ARMD who would be treated each year: number of new cases per annum, treatment duration, the probability of the fellow eye’s being affected by ARMD, the increasing death rate with advancing age. Last, population aging due to the 1950s baby-boom and longer life expectancy should be included. The present study was designed to estimate the total number of eyes affected by classic subfoveal neovascular ARMD that will be treated annually in France. 
Materials and Methods
The study was performed in three steps: (1) identification of epidemiologic studies on ARMD; (2) first treated eye incidence rate direct standardization to include effect of age (the major risk factor of ARMD); and (3) construction of a Markov model to estimate the total number of neovascular ARMD treatments in France per annum, taking into account the mortality rate, the occurrence of treatable disease in the second eye, and treatment duration. 
Literature Search
A comprehensive literature review was conducted by searching the PubMed database. 25 Publications were searched from 1965 to June 2004. Search terms included age-related maculopathy (ARM), age-related macular degeneration (ARMD), neovascular ARMD, dry ARMD, atrophic ARMD, nonexudative ARMD, late ARMD, exudative ARMD, wet ARMD, soft drusen, large drusen, small drusen, pigmentary abnormalities, hyperpigmentation, hypopigmentation, increased retinal pigment, retinal pigment epithelial hypopigmentation, extrafoveal, juxtafoveal, subfoveal, incidence, prevalence, names of the relevant countries, predominantly classic lesions, minimally classic lesions, occult lesions, second-eye involvement, and progression from wet- to dry-form ARMD, along with epidemiologic terms and disease etiologies. 
All articles retrieved by this process were screened for relevance to the present study. Case reports and animal studies were excluded. Any article that provided the incidence and/or prevalence of ARMD was further reviewed in detail. Priority was given to well-conducted, population-based epidemiologic studies that provided valid, reliable and generalizable estimates of ARMD. The completeness of this search was checked against citations in published articles and by reviewing the published ARMD epidemiology literature in books. 
A thorough Internet search was also conducted for further information on ARMD epidemiology. These were conducted via large search engines (e.g., Yahoo [http://www.yahoo.com], Google [http://www.google.com]) targeting both public and subscription-based medical Web sites (e.g., Medscape [http://www.medscape.com], MD Consult [http://www.mdconsult.com]). 
Articles that provided estimates on any of the searched terms were included for review and analysis for this study. Priority was given to well-conducted population-based epidemiologic studies which provided valid, reliable, and generalizable estimates. Studies were focused on France, but other countries were admitted. Articles had to report incidence or prevalence rates of neovascular ARMD by age groups, to permit direct standardization. Papers reporting incidence rates were favored, since current neovascular ARMD treatments should be initiated soon after the onset of disease. Reports of incidence or prevalence rates from visual impairment registries were ignored, because about half of all visually impaired patients do not register. 4 5 26 27 Last, ARMD had to be medically confirmed, preferably according to the International Age-Related Maculopathy Epidemiologic Study Group rules. 28  
Direct Standardization
Demographic data by age and gender, projected to 2025, was derived from United Nations data 29 Because gender is not a confounding factor for ARMD’s incidence or prevalence, direct standardization was conducted on age only. This allowed adjustment for age, when data concerned foreign countries, and took into account population aging when projections were made to 2025. 
The Markov Model
A Markov model was developed (Tree Age Pro 2004; TreeAge Software Inc., Williamstown, MA), counting treatment months from diagnosis of ARMD in the first eye to the patient’s death. This method made it possible to estimate the annual number of treatable eyes, while taking into account treatment duration, death, and ARMD development in the second eye. A cohort of 1000 hypothetical patients entered the model with a new diagnosis of neovascular subfoveal ARMD in the first eye. Age was set at 75 years (the mean age of diagnosis of neovascular ARMD). 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 The sex ratio was modeled as a 4th-order polynomial function of age, estimated from national demographic data. 30 Hence the sex ratio of this cohort was country specific. The cohort was processed by the Markov model and followed up throughout 25 years, with a cycle duration of 1 month and death as the absorption state. Patients entered the model with treated neovascular ARMD in one eye and could change state at the end of each month. Three new states were possible: (1) treated disease in the second eye, (2) treatment stopped in one eye, and (3) death. Figure 1presents a schematic design of the model. 
Many studies evaluated the risk of development of an exudative lesion in the second eye. Some studies performed in the 1970s and 1980s 31 32 33 34 35 36 reported frequency of development of neovascular ARMD in the second eye ranging from 3% at 1 year 35 to 48% at 4 years. 33 Annual incidence, estimated using a time-independent probabilistic model, varied from 3% 35 to 15%. 33 Other studies published later 37 38 reported calculated (same method as above) annual incidence rates varying from 8% to 12%. We used a 7% annual incidence rate for our central scenario. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for the uncertainty associated with this estimate. 
A reference scenario fixed the average treatment duration at 2 years Monthly probabilities were estimated using an exponential model. It was hypothesized that the duration of treatment for the second eye would be the same as the first. The monthly mortality incidence function is already published. 39 Mortality tables per age and gender were collected from INSEE (Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques). Yearly mortality was modeled as a function of intercept (−5.233), age-square (in year, 4.958 10−4), gender (1: male, 2: female; −1.385), and the age × square by gender interaction (1.271 10−4). Hence the mortality incidence rate of the cohort was country specific. 
The Markov reward was the number of months under treatment. Reward was fixed to 1 month when one eye (either the first or the second) was treated and to 2 months when both eyes were treated during the same month. The number of treatable eyes/1000 patients was defined as the asymptotic value of the cumulative function of rewards over time. 
Results
As mentioned, a comprehensive literature review was conducted by searching the PubMed database. These searches yielded 3671 articles. The abstracts of all these articles were reviewed for relevance, resulting in 304 relevant articles. Of these, we reviewed all articles published in English. For articles published in other languages, we reviewed their findings as reported in their abstracts. After thoroughly reviewing these 304 articles, 48 studies were considered relevant for inclusion in the analysis of this study. 
Two studies were identified in France. A national study 40 was performed in 1995 by the IPSEN Institute, to assess low vision. The objectives of this study were to estimate the incidence of low vision and related eye diseases presenting at ophthalmologists’ consultations. This study was not retained because neovascular ARMD was not clearly specified. 
Delcourt et al. 41 conducted the first large prospective population based study (POLA) in France, evaluating the association of cardiovascular disease and its risk factors with ARMD, and included both cataract and ARMD with their respective risk factors. These investigators predicted age- and gender-specific prevalence estimates of ARMD and its subtypes, in a sample of 2584 community residents aged 60 to 95 years. Definitions and diagnostic criteria were based on the International Classification of Diseases. However, the cross-sectional design of the survey did not permit an estimation of incidence rates. 
Three studies were identified outside France that satisfied the selection criteria: the Rotterdam Study, 42 The Blue Mountains Eye Study, 43 and the Beaver Dam Eye Study. 44 The Rotterdam Study was selected because, regarding the ARMD risk factors, French citizens are supposed to be more comparable (e.g., sun exposure, eating habits) to the Dutch than to Americans or Australians from the two other studies. 
The Rotterdam Study reported neither the location (extrafoveal, juxtafoveal, or subfoveal) nor the type of neovascular lesion ARMD (classic versus occult). This information was available neither for French nor European patients. The results reported by Moissieiev 45 were not used, since data generated on the basis of the Macular Photocoagulation Study guideline did not fit our needs (e.g., the minimally/classic distinction and the type of lesions per localization were not addressed in detail). Olsen et al. 46 and Margerhio et al. 47 reported this information in two cross-sectional surveys. There was good agreement on localization—that is, 82.7% of neovascular ARMD lesions were subfoveal according to Margherio et al., and 78.5% according to Olsen et al. However, discrepancies arose concerning the nature of the condition. According to Margherio et al. 54.0% of neovascular lesions were subfoveal and classic, whereas the proportion was 19.5% according to Olsen et al. Results will be presented according to both findings. Finally, it was hypothesized that these estimates were the same for the first and second eye. 
Table 1presents the yearly incidence per age group reported in the Rotterdam Study. Depending on the type of lesion, dry or neovascular, incidence rates increased exponentially with age. 
Table 2shows the population projection for France estimated by the United Nations. In the next 20 years, the population aged >55 years will increase by 29.2%. 
Table 3indicates the number of single-eye ARMD cases according to direct standardization, showing that 30,192 new cases should have appeared in 2005 (17,585 neovascular and 12,607 dry). The number of neovascular subfoveal ARMD eyes will lie between 13,805 and 14,543, and the number of classic subfoveal neovascular ARMD eyes between 3,429 and 9,498. In the next 20 years the number of neovascular ARMD will increase by 33.2%, irrespective of location and type. 
Figure 2illustrates Markov’s stated probabilities for a patient having the first neovascular eye (FE) treatment at age 75. The probability of dying before 100 years of age was close to 1 (97.5%). After an average treatment duration fixed at 2 years, the probability of treatment continuing beyond 5 years was 4.2%, and the probability of treatment for neovascular ARMD in the second eye (SE) by the fourth year peaked at 8.8%. Under the hypothesis that a neovascular eye (whether the first or second eye) treatment is stopped when its visual acuity (VA) is >1.0 logMAR (average patient VA included in TAP was close to 0.7 logMAR and a failure was defined by a loss of 3 lines 48 ), patients belonging to the “FE not treated+SE not treated” state had poor visual acuity in both eyes and were legally blind. Their curve reaches a plateau 10 to 12 years after the onset of disease and 25.8% of them were legally blind. Among 1000 ARMD patients starting a treatment for a subfoveal CNV in the first eye at 75 and followed-up for 5 years, 192 would die, 15 would be legally blind due to ARMD, 61 would still be treated for the first eye, 386 would have the disease in the fellow eye, and 83 would be treated for the second eye. 
Table 4shows the cumulative number of treatable eyes over 5 years, among 1000 new patients per year with one eye already treated, according to age at diagnosis, treatment duration, and different incidence rates of neovascular ARMD in the second eye during the same period, as determined by our Markov model. With respect to our reference scenario (based on Fig. 2 : average treatment duration 2 years, age at diagnosis 75 years, second-eye incidence rate 30% in 5 years) the projections in Table 3should be multiplied by 2.682. 
The Rotterdam Study provided first-eye incidence rates (Table 1) . Table 4gives the number of additional eyes that would be treated if the treatment duration is fixed at one year. For example, a population of 1000 persons diagnosed with neovascular ARMD at age 75 and subject to a 5-year second-eye incidence rate of 30%, followed up over their full life, would generate 369 second eyes needing treatment. 
Table 5presents results for France in 2005, projected to the end of the year. After 2 years of prior treatment and a second-eye 5-year incidence of 30%, the number of neovascular subfoveal eyes lies between 37,019 and 39,000, and the number of neovascular classic subfoveal eyes between 9,196 and 25,469. 
Discussion
Direct standardization based on the Rotterdam Study, 42 associated with a Markov model, was used to estimate the number of neovascular subfoveal ARMD treatable eyes in France, accounting for mortality, treatment duration, age at diagnosis, and the probability of ARMD in the second eye. We used the United Nations’ 29 demographic projection for 2025 to identify future needs. According to our reference scenario (average treatment duration of 2 years, age at diagnosis 75 years, and second-eye incidence rate 30% in 5 years) neovascular subfoveal ARMD eyes totaling 37,019 to 39,000 should have needed treatment in 2005, of which 9,196 to 25,469 should have been classic. The cases will increase by >1% per annum until 2025. 
A comparison with the verteporfin HTA reports 21 22 23 24 is not straightforward because we did not use the same methods, and our results are expressed as number of treatable eyes, whereas the HTA reports describe number of patients. We believe that the use of incidence rates, instead of dividing prevalence by average disease duration to derive a proxy for the incidence rate, is a more appropriate method, especially with neovascular ARMD where age plays a predominant role. Also, the second eye contributes significantly to the number of treated eyes. If the bilateral nature of the disease is overlooked, the resources needed to treat patients adequately are underestimated by about one third. 
The Olsen et al. 46 paper was published after the publication of the HTA reports. If this article has confirmed the frequency of subfoveal localization, reported by Margherio et al., 47 a dramatic discrepancy exists in the rate of classic neovascular lesions. Olsen et al. 46 themselves discussed a variety of selection biases to explain the acknowledged difference. More data are needed to resolve this uncertainty about the number of treatable subfoveal classic eyes. 
Our approach has several limitations. We used Dutch data as a proxy for French data so that we could use incidence estimates rather than prevalence estimates. The French POLA survey, 41 projecting a life expectancy of 10 years after the diagnosis of ARMD, would have given similar results. In our attempt to evaluate treatment needs in 2025 we hypothesized a constant incidence of neovascular ARMD per age group, which somewhat contradicts an RNIB (Royal National Institute of the Blind) report. 8 Some strong hypotheses were built into our Markov model: (1) equal treatment duration for both eyes; (2) treatment probability independent of age; (3) treatment failure probability, an exponential function; (4) independent disease evolution in the two eyes; (5) independence of visual impairment and death; and (6) no bilateral disease at entry into the model. Some refinements could be added to the model should it be combined with a full stochastic approach, but the sensitivity analyses in Table 4has taken into account the three major variables contributing to outcome: age at diagnosis, treatment duration, and 5-year second-eye incidence rate. 
Apart from sex ratio and mortality incidence rates, no other data in our model were country specific. Life expectancy and the age structure are very similar across 15 of the EEC countries 49 (excluding eastern European Union countries). Therefore, the estimations in Table 4may be used for countries other than France, with a fair approximation. We also tried to provide sufficient estimates to permit a reasonable linear extrapolation. However, we advise use of an exponential extrapolation, which would give less biased results as our estimates came from a multiplicative model. 
New drug classes for neovascular ARMD will become available after verteporfin. It may be that drug combinations and cyclical treatment will be used, as with other chronic diseases, such as cancer. These developments may preserve visual acuity for a longer time, but lengthy treatment would call for additional resources. Table 4can be used to estimate the incremental resources required. For example, a new drug necessitating administration for more than 3 years instead of 2 years, would increase the number of treatable eyes by 43.7% (line 3 of Table 4 : [3854 – 2682]/2682), according to our reference scenario. 
In conclusion, the allocation of resources to neovascular ARMD should cover the bilateral extension of the disease. New drugs will have an impact on treatment duration, and this should be anticipated by public health decision makers. To neglect now the long-term trend of increasing incidence will incur serious consequences for patient care delivery 20 years hence. 
Finally, much uncertainty remains as to the incidence rate of classic neovascular subfoveal ARMD. If public health decision makers want to consider this subgroup of patients as a potential target population, additional epidemiologic work must be done. 
 
Figure 1.
 
The Markov model structure. Patients enter the model with neovascular ARMD in the first eye. At the end of each month, the disease can appear in the second eye (SE treated), a treatment (FE treated, SE treated) can be stopped (FE not treated, SE not treated), or the patient can die (death). All second eyes developing the disease are treated. Death probability is described in the text. Treatment duration models used exponential functions. Five-year to 1-month incidence rates were extrapolated using an independent probabilistic calculation.
Figure 1.
 
The Markov model structure. Patients enter the model with neovascular ARMD in the first eye. At the end of each month, the disease can appear in the second eye (SE treated), a treatment (FE treated, SE treated) can be stopped (FE not treated, SE not treated), or the patient can die (death). All second eyes developing the disease are treated. Death probability is described in the text. Treatment duration models used exponential functions. Five-year to 1-month incidence rates were extrapolated using an independent probabilistic calculation.
Table 1.
 
Incidence (per thousand) of Dry and Neovascular ARMD According to the Rotterdam Study Results after 6.5 Years of Follow-Up
Table 1.
 
Incidence (per thousand) of Dry and Neovascular ARMD According to the Rotterdam Study Results after 6.5 Years of Follow-Up
Age (y) Follow-Up in Person-Years Dry Neovascular Dry + Neovascular
Number Incidence Number Incidence Number Incidence
55–59 2,240 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000
60–64 6,218 0 0.000 1 0.161 1 0.161
65–69 6,602 3 0.454 2 0.303 5 0.757
70–74 5,460 3 0.549 7 1.282 10 1.832
75–79 3,578 5 1.397 9 2.515 14 3.913
80+ 2,494 8 3.208 9 3.609 17 6.816
Total 26,592 19 0.715 28 1.053 47 1.767
Table 2.
 
French Population Demographics in 2005 with Projection to 2025 in Spans of 5 Years
Table 2.
 
French Population Demographics in 2005 with Projection to 2025 in Spans of 5 Years
Age (y) Current year 2005 2006-2025 Demographic Projection
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2015 2020 2025
55–59 3,968,000 3,971,600 3,975,200 3,978,800 3,982,400 3,986,000 3,934,000 4,022,000 4,003,000
60–64 2,659,000 2,888,200 3,117,400 3,346,600 3,575,800 3,805,000 3,830,000 3,788,000 3,879,000
65–69 2,498,000 2,497,200 2,496,400 2,495,600 2,494,800 2,494,000 3,579,000 3,612,000 3,580,000
70–74 2,404,000 2,374,400 2,344,800 2,315,200 2,285,600 2,256,000 2,259,000 3,251,000 3,293,000
75–79 2,014,000 2,016,000 2,018,000 2,020,000 2,022,000 2,024,000 1,909,000 1,918,000 2,775,000
80–84 1,060,000 1,072,000 1,084,000 1,096,000 1,108,000 1,120,000 1,117,000 1,130,000 1,161,788
85+ 1,227,000 1,270,000 1,313,000 1,356,000 1,399,000 1,442,000 1,645,000 1,707,000 1,753,212
Total 15,830,000 16,089,400 16,348,800 16,608,200 16,867,600 17,127,000 18,273,000 19,428,000 20,445,000
Table 3.
 
Yearly Incident Cases Using a Direct Standardization Approach, Applying French Demographics to Incidence Rates in van Leeuven et al. 42
Table 3.
 
Yearly Incident Cases Using a Direct Standardization Approach, Applying French Demographics to Incidence Rates in van Leeuven et al. 42
Yearly Incident Cases 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2015 2020 2025
Neovascular + dry (van Leeuwen et al. 42 ) 30,192 30,557 30,921 31,286 31,651 32,016 33,760 36,142 40,094
Dry (van Leeuwen et al. 42 ) 12,607 12,769 12,931 13,094 13,257 13,419 14,395 15,208 16,664
Neovascular (van Leeuwen et al. 42 ) 17,585 17,788 17,990 18,192 18,394 18,597 19,365 20,934 23,430
Neovascular subfoveal (Olsen et al. 46 ) 13,805 13,963 14,122 14,281 14,439 14,598 15,202 16,433 18,392
Neovascular subfoveal classic (Olsen et al. 46 ) 3,429 3,469 3,508 3,547 3,587 3,626 3,776 4,082 4,569
Neovascular subfoveal (Margherio et al. 47 ) 14,543 14,710 14,878 15,045 15,212 15,379 16,015 17,312 19,376
Neovascular subfoveal classic (Margherio et al. 47 ) 9,498 9,607 9,716 9,825 9,934 10,044 10,459 11,306 12,654
Figure 2.
 
Treatment of subfoveal CNV in AMD: Markov’s stated probabilities. Probabilities presented are not conditional to death. Age at diagnosis: 75 years. INSEE mortality tables. At 5 years, disease will develop in the second eye of 30% of the patients. Two Markov states (SE treated+FE treated; SE not treated+FE treated) are not shown because their probabilities were always inferior to 5%. Average treatment duration: 2 years.
Figure 2.
 
Treatment of subfoveal CNV in AMD: Markov’s stated probabilities. Probabilities presented are not conditional to death. Age at diagnosis: 75 years. INSEE mortality tables. At 5 years, disease will develop in the second eye of 30% of the patients. Two Markov states (SE treated+FE treated; SE not treated+FE treated) are not shown because their probabilities were always inferior to 5%. Average treatment duration: 2 years.
Table 4.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes among 1000 New Neovascular ARMD Cases Per Annum in France
Table 4.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes among 1000 New Neovascular ARMD Cases Per Annum in France
Fellow Eye 5-Year Incidence Rate (%) 65 Years 75 Years 85 Years
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
10 1193 2401 3536 4596 5577 1082 2141 3091 3937 4685 960 1828 2539 3120 3596
20 1395 2792 4101 5319 6444 1243 2441 3513 4463 5302 1067 2018 2794 3425 3941
30 1533 3063 4497 5832 7065 1369 2682 3854 4892 5807 1163 2191 3027 3706 4260
40 1627 3249 4774 6195 7510 1468 2872 4128 5240 6220 1250 2348 3241 3965 4556
50 1690 3377 4968 6453 7830 1545 3023 4347 5521 6556 1327 2491 3438 4204 4830
Table 5.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes in France in 2005
Table 5.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes in France in 2005
Treatment Duration (y) Second-Eye 5-Year Incidence Rate (%) Type of Lesion
Neovascular Subfoveal 46 Neovascular Subfoveal Classic 46 Neovascular Subfoveal 47 Neovascular Subfoveal Classic 47
1 10 14,938 3,711 15,738 10,278
20 17,153 4,261 18,071 11,801
30 18,899 4,695 19,911 13,003
40 20,265 5,034 21,350 13,943
50 21,327 5,298 22,468 14,673
2 10 29,550 7,341 31,131 20,331
20 33,703 8,372 35,506 23,188
30 37,019 9,196 39,000 25,469
40 39,650 9,849 41,772 27,280
50 41,730 10,366 43,963 28,710
3 10 42,670 10,600 44,953 29,357
20 48,500 12,048 51,095 33,368
30 53,204 13,216 56,051 36,605
40 56,981 14,155 60,030 39,203
50 60,006 14,906 63,217 41,284
4 10 54,343 13,499 57,250 37,388
20 61,616 15,306 64,913 42,392
30 67,535 16,776 71,148 46,464
40 72,331 17,968 76,202 49,764
50 76,213 18,932 80,291 52,435
5 10 64,672 16,065 68,132 44,495
20 73,187 18,180 77,103 50,353
30 80,162 19,913 84,452 55,152
40 85,858 21,328 90,452 59,071
50 90,506 22,482 95,349 62,269
LeibowitzHM, KruegerDE, MaunderLR, et al. The Framingham Eye Study monograph: an ophthalmological and epidemiological study of cataract, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, macular degeneration, and visual acuity in a general population of 2631 adults, 1973–1975. Surv Ophthalmol. 1980;24:335–610. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
RosenbergT, KlieF. The incidence of registered blindness caused by age-related macular degeneration. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1996;74:399–402. [PubMed]
ArnoldJJ, SarksSH. Age related macular degeneration. BMJ. 2000;321:741–744. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BrézinA, LafumaA, FagnaniF, MesbahM, BerdeauxG. Prevalence and burden of self-reported blindness and low vision for subjects living in institutions: a nation-wide survey. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:27. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BrézinA, LafumaA, FagnaniF, MesbahM, BerdeauxG. Prevalence and burden of self-reported blindness, low vision and visual impairment in the community: a nation-wide survey. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:1117–1124. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BrézinA, LafumaA, FagnaniF, MesbahM, BerdeauxG. Blindness, low vision and other handicaps as risk factors attached to institutional residence. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88:1330–1337. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BerdeauxG, NordmannJP, ColinE, BenoitA. Vision-related quality of life in patients suffering from age-related macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139:271–279. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Royal National Institute for the Blind. Office of National Statistics mid-1996 population estimates, estimates for 1996 of visually impaired people (ie, registerable) and the number of people registered blind and partially sighted as at 31st March 1997 in the UK. ;Available at http://www.rnib.org.uk/wesupply/fctsheet/authuk.html. Accessed March 2000.
BlinderKJ, BradleyS, BresslerNM, et al. Effect of lesion size, visual acuity, and lesion composition on visual acuity change with and without verteporfin therapy for choroidal neovascularization secondary to age related macular degeneration: TAP and VIP report no. 1. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;136:407–418. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group. Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration with verteporfin: two-year results of 2 randomized clinical trials—TAP report no. 2. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:198–207. [PubMed]
BresslerNM, ArnoldJ, BenchabouneM, et al. Verteporfin therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in patients with age related macular degeneration: additional information regarding baseline lesion composition’s impact on vision outcomes—TAP report no. 3. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:1443–1454. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
RubinGS, BresslerNM, ArnoldJ, et al. Effects of verteporfin therapy on contrast sensitivity: Results from the Treatment of Age Related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) investigation—TAP Report No. 4. Retina. 2002;22:536–544. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BlumenkranzMS, BresslerNM, BresslerSB, et al. Verteporfin therapy for subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age related macular degeneration: three year results of an open label extension of 2 randomized clinical trials—TAP report no. 5. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:1307–1314. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Verteporfin in Photodynamic Therapy Study Group. Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in pathologic myopia with verteporfin. 1-year results of a randomized clinical trial—VIP report no. 1. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:841–852. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BlinderKJ, BlumenkranzMS, BresslerNM, et al. Verteporfin therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in pathologic myopia: 2-year results of a randomized clinical trial—VIP report no. 3. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:667–673. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
GragoudasES, AdamisAP, CunninghamET, FeinsodM, GuyerDR. Pegaptanib for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2805–2816. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
D’AmicoDJ, GoldbergMF, HudsonH. Anecortave acetate as monotherapy for treatment of subfoveal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration: twelve-month clinical outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:2372–2383. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
SlakterJS, BochowTW, D’AmicoDJ, et al. Anecortave acetate (15 milligrams) versus photodynamic therapy for treatment of subfoveal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology. 2006 Jan;113:3–13. [CrossRef]
HeierJS, AntoszykAN, PavanPR, et al. Ranibizumab for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a phase I/II multicenter, controlled, multidose study. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:642.
HjelmgrenJ, BerggrenF, AnderssonF. Health economic guidelines: similarities, differences and some implications. Value Health. 2001;4:225–250. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Photodynamische Therapie mit Verteprofin bei altersabhängiger feuchter Makuladegeneration mit subfovealären klassischen choriodalen Neovaskularisationen. Zusammenfassender Bericht des Arbeitsausschusses ,,Ärztliche Behandlung“ des Bundesausschusses der Ärtze und Krankenkassen über die Beratungen gemäss § 135 Abs. 2001;V.Geschäftsführung des Arbeitsausschusses 1 SGB Koln, Germany.
Photodynamic treatment for macular degeneration. SBU. 2001;The Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care Stockholm, Sweden.http://www.sbu.se/www/index.asp. Accessed August 2005.
Journal Officiel de la République Française. Arrêté du 13 Février 2001 modifiant la liste des spécialités pharmaceutiques remboursables aux assurés sociaux. Le 22 Février 2001;2898–2900.Ed le Journal officiel Paris.
MeadsC, SalasC, RobertsT, MooreD, Fry-SmithA, HydeC. Clinical effectiveness and cost-utility of photodynamic therapy for wet age-related macular degeneration: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7:v–vi.1–98 [PubMed]
PubMed. ;National Library of Medicine Bethesda, MD.Available at http://www.ncbi.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi.
RobinsonR, DeutschJ, JonesHS, et al. Unrecognised and unregistered visual impairment. Br J Ophthalmol. 1994;78:736–740. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
WormaldR, EvansJ. Registration of blind and partially sighted people. Br J Ophthalmol. 1994;78:733–734. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
The International. ARM Epidemiological Study Group: An international classification and grading system for age-related maculopathy and age-related macular degeneration. Surv Ophthalmol. 1995;39:367–374. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
United Nations. World population prospects: the 1998 revision. 1999;United Nations Population Division New York.
Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques. http://www.insee.fr/fr/home/home_page.asp. Accessed January 2005.
ChandraSR, GragoudasES, FriedmanE, van BuskirkEM, KleinML. Natural history of disciform degeneration of the macula. Am J Ophthalmol. 1974;78:579–582. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
GassJDM. Drusen and disciform macular detachment and degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol. 1973;90:206–217. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
GregorZ, BirdAC, ChisholmIH. Senile disciform macular degeneration in the second eye. Br J Ophthalmol. 1977;61:141–147. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
TeetersVW, BirdAC. The development of neovascularization of senile disciform macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol. 1973;76:1–18. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
StrahlmannER, FineSL, HillisA. The second eye of patients with senile macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol. 1983;101:1191–1193. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BresslerSB, BresslerNM, FineSL, et al. Natural course of choroidal neovascular membranes within the foveal avascular zone in senile macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;93:157–163. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
The Macular Photocoagulation Study Group. Risk factors for choroidal neovascularization in the second eye of patients with juxtafoveal or subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:741–747. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
The Choroidal Neovascularisation Prevention Trial Research Group. Laser treatment in fellow eyes with large drusen: updated findings from a pilot randomized clinical trial. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:971–978. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
BillotteC, BerdeauxG. Adverse clinical consequences of posterior capsular opacification treatment by Nd-Yag laser. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30:2064–2071. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
MergierJ. Epidemiologie de la malvoyance. Bull ARIBA. 1998;2:2–4.
DelcourtC, MichelF, ColvezA, LacrouxA, DelageM, VernetM. Associations of cardiovascular disease and its risk factors with age-related macular degeneration: the POLA study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2001;8:237–249. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
van LeeuwenR, KlaverCC, VingerlingJR, HofmanA, de JongPT. The risk and natural course of age-related maculopathy: follow-up at 6 1/2 years in the Rotterdam study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121:519–526. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
MitchellP, WangJJ, ForanS, SmithW. Five-year incidence of age-related maculopathy lesions: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:1092–1097. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
KleinR, KleinBE, TomanySC, MossSE. Ten year incidence and progression of age related maculopathy: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:1767–1779. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
MoissieievJ, AlhalelA, MasuriR, TreisterG. The impact of the macular photocoagulation study results on the treatment of exudative age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:185–189. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
OlsenT, FengX, KasperT, RathP, SteurE. Fluorescein angiographic lesion type frequency in neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology. 2004;111:250–255. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
MargherioRR, MargherioAR, DeSantisME. Laser treatments with verteporfin therapy and its potential impact on retinal practices. Retina. 2000.20325–20330.
Treatment of age-related macular degeneration with photodynamic therapy (TAP) study group. Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation in age-related macular degeneration with verteprofin: one year results of 2 randomized clinical trials—TAP report 1. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1329–1345. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
OECD Health Data 2005. Statistics and Indicators for 30 Countries. 2005;OECD Publishing Paris.Available at www.oecd.org/health. Accessed May 2005.
Figure 1.
 
The Markov model structure. Patients enter the model with neovascular ARMD in the first eye. At the end of each month, the disease can appear in the second eye (SE treated), a treatment (FE treated, SE treated) can be stopped (FE not treated, SE not treated), or the patient can die (death). All second eyes developing the disease are treated. Death probability is described in the text. Treatment duration models used exponential functions. Five-year to 1-month incidence rates were extrapolated using an independent probabilistic calculation.
Figure 1.
 
The Markov model structure. Patients enter the model with neovascular ARMD in the first eye. At the end of each month, the disease can appear in the second eye (SE treated), a treatment (FE treated, SE treated) can be stopped (FE not treated, SE not treated), or the patient can die (death). All second eyes developing the disease are treated. Death probability is described in the text. Treatment duration models used exponential functions. Five-year to 1-month incidence rates were extrapolated using an independent probabilistic calculation.
Figure 2.
 
Treatment of subfoveal CNV in AMD: Markov’s stated probabilities. Probabilities presented are not conditional to death. Age at diagnosis: 75 years. INSEE mortality tables. At 5 years, disease will develop in the second eye of 30% of the patients. Two Markov states (SE treated+FE treated; SE not treated+FE treated) are not shown because their probabilities were always inferior to 5%. Average treatment duration: 2 years.
Figure 2.
 
Treatment of subfoveal CNV in AMD: Markov’s stated probabilities. Probabilities presented are not conditional to death. Age at diagnosis: 75 years. INSEE mortality tables. At 5 years, disease will develop in the second eye of 30% of the patients. Two Markov states (SE treated+FE treated; SE not treated+FE treated) are not shown because their probabilities were always inferior to 5%. Average treatment duration: 2 years.
Table 1.
 
Incidence (per thousand) of Dry and Neovascular ARMD According to the Rotterdam Study Results after 6.5 Years of Follow-Up
Table 1.
 
Incidence (per thousand) of Dry and Neovascular ARMD According to the Rotterdam Study Results after 6.5 Years of Follow-Up
Age (y) Follow-Up in Person-Years Dry Neovascular Dry + Neovascular
Number Incidence Number Incidence Number Incidence
55–59 2,240 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000
60–64 6,218 0 0.000 1 0.161 1 0.161
65–69 6,602 3 0.454 2 0.303 5 0.757
70–74 5,460 3 0.549 7 1.282 10 1.832
75–79 3,578 5 1.397 9 2.515 14 3.913
80+ 2,494 8 3.208 9 3.609 17 6.816
Total 26,592 19 0.715 28 1.053 47 1.767
Table 2.
 
French Population Demographics in 2005 with Projection to 2025 in Spans of 5 Years
Table 2.
 
French Population Demographics in 2005 with Projection to 2025 in Spans of 5 Years
Age (y) Current year 2005 2006-2025 Demographic Projection
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2015 2020 2025
55–59 3,968,000 3,971,600 3,975,200 3,978,800 3,982,400 3,986,000 3,934,000 4,022,000 4,003,000
60–64 2,659,000 2,888,200 3,117,400 3,346,600 3,575,800 3,805,000 3,830,000 3,788,000 3,879,000
65–69 2,498,000 2,497,200 2,496,400 2,495,600 2,494,800 2,494,000 3,579,000 3,612,000 3,580,000
70–74 2,404,000 2,374,400 2,344,800 2,315,200 2,285,600 2,256,000 2,259,000 3,251,000 3,293,000
75–79 2,014,000 2,016,000 2,018,000 2,020,000 2,022,000 2,024,000 1,909,000 1,918,000 2,775,000
80–84 1,060,000 1,072,000 1,084,000 1,096,000 1,108,000 1,120,000 1,117,000 1,130,000 1,161,788
85+ 1,227,000 1,270,000 1,313,000 1,356,000 1,399,000 1,442,000 1,645,000 1,707,000 1,753,212
Total 15,830,000 16,089,400 16,348,800 16,608,200 16,867,600 17,127,000 18,273,000 19,428,000 20,445,000
Table 3.
 
Yearly Incident Cases Using a Direct Standardization Approach, Applying French Demographics to Incidence Rates in van Leeuven et al. 42
Table 3.
 
Yearly Incident Cases Using a Direct Standardization Approach, Applying French Demographics to Incidence Rates in van Leeuven et al. 42
Yearly Incident Cases 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2015 2020 2025
Neovascular + dry (van Leeuwen et al. 42 ) 30,192 30,557 30,921 31,286 31,651 32,016 33,760 36,142 40,094
Dry (van Leeuwen et al. 42 ) 12,607 12,769 12,931 13,094 13,257 13,419 14,395 15,208 16,664
Neovascular (van Leeuwen et al. 42 ) 17,585 17,788 17,990 18,192 18,394 18,597 19,365 20,934 23,430
Neovascular subfoveal (Olsen et al. 46 ) 13,805 13,963 14,122 14,281 14,439 14,598 15,202 16,433 18,392
Neovascular subfoveal classic (Olsen et al. 46 ) 3,429 3,469 3,508 3,547 3,587 3,626 3,776 4,082 4,569
Neovascular subfoveal (Margherio et al. 47 ) 14,543 14,710 14,878 15,045 15,212 15,379 16,015 17,312 19,376
Neovascular subfoveal classic (Margherio et al. 47 ) 9,498 9,607 9,716 9,825 9,934 10,044 10,459 11,306 12,654
Table 4.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes among 1000 New Neovascular ARMD Cases Per Annum in France
Table 4.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes among 1000 New Neovascular ARMD Cases Per Annum in France
Fellow Eye 5-Year Incidence Rate (%) 65 Years 75 Years 85 Years
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
10 1193 2401 3536 4596 5577 1082 2141 3091 3937 4685 960 1828 2539 3120 3596
20 1395 2792 4101 5319 6444 1243 2441 3513 4463 5302 1067 2018 2794 3425 3941
30 1533 3063 4497 5832 7065 1369 2682 3854 4892 5807 1163 2191 3027 3706 4260
40 1627 3249 4774 6195 7510 1468 2872 4128 5240 6220 1250 2348 3241 3965 4556
50 1690 3377 4968 6453 7830 1545 3023 4347 5521 6556 1327 2491 3438 4204 4830
Table 5.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes in France in 2005
Table 5.
 
Number of Treatable Eyes in France in 2005
Treatment Duration (y) Second-Eye 5-Year Incidence Rate (%) Type of Lesion
Neovascular Subfoveal 46 Neovascular Subfoveal Classic 46 Neovascular Subfoveal 47 Neovascular Subfoveal Classic 47
1 10 14,938 3,711 15,738 10,278
20 17,153 4,261 18,071 11,801
30 18,899 4,695 19,911 13,003
40 20,265 5,034 21,350 13,943
50 21,327 5,298 22,468 14,673
2 10 29,550 7,341 31,131 20,331
20 33,703 8,372 35,506 23,188
30 37,019 9,196 39,000 25,469
40 39,650 9,849 41,772 27,280
50 41,730 10,366 43,963 28,710
3 10 42,670 10,600 44,953 29,357
20 48,500 12,048 51,095 33,368
30 53,204 13,216 56,051 36,605
40 56,981 14,155 60,030 39,203
50 60,006 14,906 63,217 41,284
4 10 54,343 13,499 57,250 37,388
20 61,616 15,306 64,913 42,392
30 67,535 16,776 71,148 46,464
40 72,331 17,968 76,202 49,764
50 76,213 18,932 80,291 52,435
5 10 64,672 16,065 68,132 44,495
20 73,187 18,180 77,103 50,353
30 80,162 19,913 84,452 55,152
40 85,858 21,328 90,452 59,071
50 90,506 22,482 95,349 62,269
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×