Aflibercept (5) – Eylea®

Myopic choroidal neovascularisation

Characteristics

Start date 01.12.2015 – Marketing authorisation: 28.10.2015
Resolution 19.05.2016
INN Aflibercept
Brand name Eylea®
Pharm. company Bayer Vital GmbH
G-BA Procedure ID D-197
ATC code S01LA05 Antineovascularisation agents (S01LA)
ICD-10 codes (AIS) H31.8Other specified disorders of choroid
Alpha-ID codes (AIS) I119191Choroidal neovascularization
DDD 20 mg P
Therapeutic area Eye diseases Myopic choroidal neovascularisation
Reason for procedure New therapeutic indication

Therapeutic indication of the resolution

Eylea is indicated for adults for the treatment of visual impairment due to myopic choroidal neovascularisation (myopic CNV).

Subpopulation Indication Comparator
Adult patients with visual impairment due to myopic choroidal neovascularization (myopic CNV) Ranibizumab

Studies and Results

No. of studies
(best subpopulation)
1 (MYRROR)
Study design
(best subpopulation)
H2H vs. non-ACT + no ITC
Meta analysis
(best subpopulation)
no

  • Clinical trials
    • The MYRROR registration trial for aflibercept (for the treatment of visual impairment due to myopic CNV) was a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind Phase III clinical trial.
    • The target population for the trial was adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with choroidal neovascularisation (CNV) due to pathological myopia (PM). At the start of the trial, the treatment arm received a single intravitreal injection of aflibercept, followed by monthly follow-up injections as required, whilst the control arm received intravitreal sham injections.

Adults for the treatment of visual impairment due to myopic choroidal neovascularisation (myopic CNV)

  • For patients with visual impairment due to myopic choroidal neovascularisation (myopic CNV), additional benefit is not proven.
  • The pharmaceutical manufacturer has not submitted any study to assess the additional benefit of aflibercept compared with the G-BA’s appropriate comparator therapy (ranibizumab).
  • This is because the G-BA’s appropriate comparator therapy was not used in any study.
  • Furthermore, the pharmaceutical manufacturer has not identified any study for a possible indirect comparison.
  • The G-BA cannot take the MYRROR study into account because ‘sham injections’ do not constitute the appropriate comparator therapy.
  • On the basis of the information in the dossier, the IQWiG’s benefit assessment and the comments on the benefit assessment, the G-BA concludes that the additional benefit of aflibercept over the appropriate comparator therapy is not proven.
  • Morbidity – improvement in visual acuity with best possible correction
    • The primary endpoint examined was the improvement in best-corrected visual acuity over a period of 24 weeks.
  • Conclusion
    • On the basis of the information in the dossier, the IQWiG’s benefit assessment and the comments on the benefit assessment, the G-BA concludes that additional benefit from aflibercept compared with the appropriate comparator therapy is not proven.

Courtesy translation only, please refer to the German original.

Associated procedures



<< List of all resolutions