Retinal Prosthesis System for Advanced Retinitis Pigmentosa: A Health Technology Assessment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Retinitis pigmentosa is a group of genetic disorders that involves the breakdown and loss of photoreceptors in the retina, resulting in progressive retinal degeneration and eventual blindness. The Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System is the only currently available surgical implantable device approved by Health Canada. It has been shown to improve visual function in patients with severe visual loss from advanced retinitis pigmentosa. The objective of this analysis was to examine the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, budget impact, and safety of the Argus II system in improving visual function, as well as exploring patient experiences with the system. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of the literature for studies examining the effects of the Argus II retinal prosthesis system in patients with advanced retinitis pigmentosa, and appraised the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria, focusing on visual function, functional outcomes, quality of life, and adverse events. We developed a Markov decision-analytic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Argus II system compared with standard care over a 10-year time horizon. We also conducted a 5-year budget impact analysis. We used a qualitative design and an interview methodology to examine patients' lived experience, and we used a modified grounded theory methodology to analyze information from interviews. Transcripts were coded, and themes were compared against one another. RESULTS: One multicentre international study and one single-centre study were included in the clinical review. In both studies, patients showed improved visual function with the Argus II system. However, the sight-threatening surgical complication rate was substantial. In the base-case analysis, the Argus II system was cost-effective compared with standard care only if willingness-to-pay was more than $207,616 per quality-adjusted life-year. The 5-year budget impact of funding the Argus II system ranged from $800,404 to $837,596. Retinitis pigmentosa significantly affects people's ability to navigate physical and virtual environments. Argus II was described as enabling the fundamental elements of sight. As such, it had a positive impact on quality of life for people with retinitis pigmentosa. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence of moderate quality, patients with advanced retinitis pigmentosa who were implanted with the Argus II retinal prosthesis system showed significant improvement in visual function, real-life functional outcomes, and quality of life, but there were complications associated with the surgery that could be managed through standard ophthalmologic treatments. The costs for the technology are high.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".