References
- Allison K, Patel D, Alabi O. Epidemiology of glaucoma: the past, present, and predictions for the future. Cureus. 2020;12(11):e11686.
- Floriani I, Quaranta L, Rulli E, et al. Italian Study Group on QoL in glaucoma. Health-related quality of life in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. An Italian multicentre observational study. Acta Ophthalmol. 2016;94(5):e278–e286.
- Traverso CE, Walt JG, Kelly SP, et al. Direct costs of glaucoma and severity of the disease: a multinational long term study of resource utilisation in Europe. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89(10):1245–1249.
- Mills RP, Budenz DL, Lee PP, et al. Categorizing the stage of glaucoma from pre-diagnosis to end-stage disease. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;141(1):24–30.
- Koleva D, Motterlini N, Schiavone M, et al. Study Group GLAUCO. Medical costs of glaucoma and ocular hypertension in Italian referral centres: a prospective study. Ophthalmologica. 2007;221(5):340–347.
- European Glaucoma Society. Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma. 5th ed. Savona (Italy): PubliComm; 2020.
- Pisella PJ, Pouliquen P, Baudouin C. Prevalence of ocular symptoms and signs with preserved and preservative free glaucoma medication. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002;86(4):418–423.
- Mylla Boso AL, Gasperi E, Fernandes L, et al. Impact of ocular surface disease treatment in patients with glaucoma. Clin Ophthalmol. 2020;14:103–111.
- Quaranta L, Riva I, Gerardi C, et al. Quality of life in glaucoma: a review of the literature. Adv Ther. 2016;33(6):959–981.
- Kim CY, Park KH, Ahn J, et al. Treatment patterns and medication adherence of patients with glaucoma in South Korea. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;101(6):801–807.
- Newman-Casey PA, Niziol LM, Gillespie BW, et al. The association between medication adherence and visual field progression in the collaborative initial glaucoma treatment study. Ophthalmology. 2020;127(4):477–483.
- Newman-Casey PA, Niziol LM, Lee PP, et al. The impact of the support, educate, empower personalized glaucoma coaching pilot study on glaucoma medication adherence. Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2020;3(4):228–237.
- Daull P, Amrane M, Garrigue JS. Novasorb® cationic nanoemulsion and latanoprost: the ideal combination for glaucoma management? [Internet]. J Eye Dis Disord. 2017;2(1):1; [cited 2021 Aug 27]. Available from: https://www.walshmedicalmedia.com/open-access/novasorb-cationicnanoemulsion-and-latanoprost-the-ideal-combination-forglaucomamanagement.pdf14
- Lallemand F, Daull P, Benita S, et al. Successfully improving ocular drug delivery using the cationic nanoemulsion, novasorb. J Drug Deliv. 2012;2012:604204.
- Ismail D, Amrane M, Garrigue JS, et al. A phase 2, randomized study evaluating the safety and efficacy of STN1013001® (unpreserved latanoprost 0.005% emulsion) compared to Travatan Z® in subjects with glaucoma and ocular surface disease. Poster session presented at: Glaucoma. 14th annual meeting of the European Association for Vision and Eye Research; 2011 Oct 5–8; Crete Greece. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/21377543/A_phase_2_randomized_study_evaluating_the_safety_and_efficacy_of_Catioprost_unpreserved_latanoprost_0_005_emulsion_compared_to_Travatan_Z_in_subjects_with_glaucoma_and_ocular_surface_disease
- ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (NLM). A phase III multinational multicenter investigator-masked randomised active-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of DE-130A with Xalatan® in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. NLM identifier: NCT04133311. Bethesda (MD): U.S. NLM; [updated 2019 Oct 21; cited 2021 Aug 27]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04133311
- Annemans L, Genesté B, Jolain B. Early modelling for assessing health and economic outcomes of drug therapy. Value Health. 2000;3(6):427–434.
- IJzerman MJ, Koffijberg H, Fenwick E, et al. Emerging use of early health technology assessment in medical product development: a scoping review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(7):727–740.
- Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.
- Neumann PJ, Ganiats TG, Russell LB, et al. editors Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. 2nd. New York (NY): Oxford University Press; 2016
- Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making. 1993;13(4):322–338.
- Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in economic evaluation and presenting the results. In: Drummond M, McGuire A, editors. Economic evaluation in health care: merging theory with practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001. p. 172–214.
- Briggs A, Sculpher M, Claxton K. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.
- Lazzaro C, van Steen C, Billeit S, et al. Cost–utility analysis of a latanoprost cationic emulsion (STN1013001) versus other latanoprost in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and concomitant ocular surface disease in Germany. Clin Ophthalmol. 2022;16:323–337.
- Lazzaro C, van Steen C, Aptel F, et al. Cost-utility analysis of STN1013001, a latanoprost cationic emulsion, versus other latanoprost formulations (Latanoprost) in open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and ocular surface disease in France. J Ophthalmol. 2022;2022:3837471.
- Sistema Statistico Nazionale - Istituto Nazionale di Statistica [Internet]. Demo-geodemo. Mappe, popolazione, statistiche demografiche dell’ISTAT. Tavole di mortalità della popolazione residente. Ripartizione: Italia - Femmine - Anno: 2018. Rome: Sistema Statistico Nazionale - Istituto Nazionale di Statistica; [updated 2018 May 30; cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from: http://demo.istat.it.Italian
- Sistema Statistico Nazionale - Istituto Nazionale di Statistica [Internet]. Demo-Geodemo. Mappe, Popolazione, Statistiche Demografiche dell’ISTAT. Tavole di mortalità della popolazione residente. Ripartizione: Italia - Maschi - Anno: 2018. Rome: Sistema Statistico Nazionale - Istituto Nazionale di Statistica; [updated 2018 May 30; cited 2020 Aug 9].Available from: http://demo.istat.it
- Lohr SL. Sampling: design and analysis. 2nd ed. Boston (MA): Brooks/Cole; 2010.
- Wilkins GA [Internet]. The IAU Style Manual (1989). The preparation of astronomical papers and reports. Transactions of the International Astronomical Union. 1990; Series B: S23; cited 2022 Aug 22. Available from: https://www.iau.org/static/publications/stylemanual1989.pdf
- de Windt TS, Sorel JC, Vonk LA, et al. Early health economic modelling of single-stage cartilage repair. Guiding implementation of technologies in regenerative medicine. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2017;11(10):2950–2959.
- Fattore G per Gruppo di lavoro Associazione Italiana di Economia Sanitaria (AIES). Proposta di linee guida per la valutazione economica degli interventi sanitari in Italia. [A proposal of guidelines for the economic evaluation of health interventions in Italy]. Pharmacoeconomics-Ital Res Articles. 2009;11(2):83–93. Italian.
- Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco [Internet]. Linea guida per la compilazione del dossier a supporto della domanda di rimborsabilità e prezzo di un medicinale ai sensi del D.M. 2 agosto 2019. Versione 1.0. Rome: Agenzia del Farmaco, Settembre 2020; [updated 2020 Dec 30; cited 2022 Aug 22]. Available from: https://www.aifa.gov.it/en/-/l-aifa-approva-le-nuove-linee-guida-per-lacontrattazione-dei-prezzi-e-rimborsi-dei-farmaci. Italian
- Claxton K. Exploring uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(9):781–798.
- Keeney S, Hasson F, McKenna H. The Delphi technique in nursing and health research. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011.
- O’Hagan A, Buck CE, Daneshkhah A, et al. Uncertain judgements: eliciting experts’ probabilities. Chichester: Wiley; 2006.
- Ministero della Salute. Decreto 8 febbraio 2013. Criteri per la composizione e il funzionamento dei comitati etici. (13A03474). Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, Serie Generale, n. 96 del 24 aprile 2013; 12–21. Italian.
- Fea AM, Cattel F, Gandolfi S, et al. Cost-utility analysis of trabecular micro-bypass stents (TBS) in patients with mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma in Italy. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):824.
- van Gestel A, Webers CA, Beckers HJ, et al. The relationship between visual field loss in glaucoma and health-related quality-of-life. Eye (Lond);2010. 24(12): 1759–1769.
- Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH) [Internet]. Pharmacoeconomic review report. Cyclosporine (VERKAZIA). Ottawa: Ottawa: CADTH; 2020; cited 2022 Feb 20]. Available from 2022 Feb 20: https://cadth.ca/sites/default/files/cdr/pharmacoeconomic/sr0615-verkaziapharmacoeconomic-review-report.pdf
- Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco [Internet]. Iopize. Riassunto delle caratteristiche del prodotto. Rome: Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco; [updated 2018 Apr 6; cited 2020 Nov 30]. Available from: https://farmaci.agenziafarmaco.gov.it/aifa/servlet/PdfDownloadServlet?pdfFileName=footer_001300_039972_RCP.pdf&retry=0&sys=m0b1l3.Italian
- Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco. Liste di Trasparenza [Internet]. Rome: agenzia Italiana del Farmaco; [updated 2020 Nov 16; cited 2020 Nov 30]. Available from: https://www.aifa.gov.it/en/storico-liste-di-trasparenza.Italian
- IQVIA. MIDAS Database [Internet]. Danbury (CT): IQVIA (US); [updated 2020 Nov 30; cited 2020 Nov 30]. Available from: https://www.iqvia.com/solutions/commercialization/brand-strategy-and-management/market-measurement/midas
- Ministero della Salute [Internet]. Decreto 18 ottobre 2012. Remunerazione prestazioni di assistenza ospedaliera per acuti, assistenza ospedaliera di riabilitazione e di lungodegenza post acuzie e di assistenza specialistica ambulatoriale. (13A00528). Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana. Serie Generale, n. 23 del 28 gennaio 2013b. Allegato 3 Prestazioni di assistenza specialistica ambulatoriale; [cited 2020 Nov 30] Available from: https://www.trovanorme.salute.gov.it/norme/renderPdf.spring?seriegu=SG&datagu=28/01/2013&redaz=13A00528&artp=3&art=1&subart=1&subart1=10&vers=1&prog=001.Italian
- Regione del Veneto [Internet]. Decreto n. 47 del 22 Maggio 2013. Aggiornamento, ai sensi della DGR n. 442 del 10 aprile 2013, degli Allegati A e B del Nomenclatore Tariffario Regionale dell’assistenza specialistica ambulatoriale di cui alla DGR n. 859/2011 e successive modifiche e integrazioni. Venice: Regione del Veneto, 2013 May 22; cited 2020 Nov 30] Available from 2020 Nov 30: https://www.aulss3.veneto.it/index.cfm?action=mys.apridoc&iddoc=12647. Italian.
- Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco. Xalatan. Riassunto delle caratteristiche del prodotto [Internet]. Rome: Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (ITALY); [updated 2018 May 30; cited 2020 Nov 30]. Available from: https://farmaci.agenziafarmaco.gov.it/aifa/servlet/PdfDownloadServlet?pdfFileName=footer_000040_033219_RCP.pdf&retry=0&sys=m0b1l3
- Brouwer W, Rutten F, Koopmanschap M. Costing in economic evaluations. In: Drummond M, McGuire A, editors. Economic evaluation in health care: merging theory with practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001. p. 68–93.
- Pagano M, Gauvreau K. Principles of biostatistics. 2nd ed. Boston (MA): Brooks/Cole; 2000.
- Black WC. The CE plane: a graphic representation of cost-effectiveness. Med Decis Making. 1990;10(3):212–214.
- Stinnett AA, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making. 1998;18(2 Suppl):S68–80.
- Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ. 2001;10(8):779–787.
- Glick HA, Doshi JA, Sonnad SA, et al. Economic evaluation in clinical trials. 2nd. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014.
- Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ. 1999;18(3):341–364.
- Eckermann S, Willan AR. Expected value of information and decision making in HTA. Health Econ. 2007;16(2):195–209.
- Holmstrom S, Buchholz P, Walt J, et al. The cost-effectiveness of bimatoprost, latanoprost and timolol in treatment of primary open angle glaucoma in five European countries. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22(5):897–905.
- Hommer A, Wickstrøm J, Friis MM, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of fixed-combination therapies in patients with open-angle glaucoma: a European perspective. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24(4):1057–1063.
- Hanover Consensus Group, von der Schulenburg Jm G, Greiner W, Jost F, et al. German recommendations on health economic evaluation: third and updated version of the Hanover consensus. Value Health. 2008;11(4):539–544.
- Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) [Internet]. Choices in methods for economic evaluation. 20202; [updated 2020 Jul 2; cited 2021 Oct 10]. Available from: https://www.has-sante.fr/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-11/methodological_guidance_2020_- choices_in_methods_for_economic_evaluation.pdf
- Grabowski H. The effect of pharmacoeconomics on company research and development decisions. Pharmacoeconomics. 1997;11(5):389–397.
- Grutters JPC, Govers T, Nijboer J, et al. Problems and promises of health technologies: the role of early health economic modeling. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019;8(10):575–582.
- Brandes A, Sinner MF, Kääb S, et al. Early decision-analytic modeling - a case study on vascular closure devices. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):486.
- McAteer H, Cosh E, Freeman G, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis at the development phase of a potential health technology: examples based on tissue engineering of bladder and urethra. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2007;1(5):343–349.