Sight Sciences Publishes Cost-Utility Analysis Comparing TearCare and Cyclosporine 0.05% in Dry Eye

Sight Sciences has released findings from a new cost-utility analysis (CUA) evaluating the TearCare® System versus cyclosporine 0.05% (CsA) in the treatment of moderate to severe meibomian gland disease (MGD)-associated dry eye disease. The results suggest that TearCare not only improves clinical outcomes but also offers a more cost-effective option for patients and payers.

Evaluating Efficacy and Economic Value in Dry Eye Therapy

The TearCare System applies localized heat therapy through a flexible and patient-friendly design that permits natural blinking during treatment. Using Thermal-Activated Restorative Gland Expression Therapy, TearCare addresses the underlying cause of dry eye disease by restoring meibomian gland function.

The cost-utility analysis was conducted from a US healthcare payer perspective using a one-year time horizon. Findings indicate that TearCare is associated with greater health utility over time and demonstrates significant cost savings compared with CsA.

Key Findings from the Cost-Utility Model

TearCare resulted in lower per-patient annual costs of $4,916 and produced 0.76 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). In comparison, patients treated with CsA incurred annual costs of $5,819 and achieved 0.74 QALYs. The study highlighted that TearCare led to a cost reduction of $903 per patient per year, assuming two procedures were performed within the year.

Additionally, patients in the TearCare group experienced an incremental QALY gain of 0.014 over those receiving CsA therapy, further reinforcing its value-based advantage.

Expert Commentary

Dr. Nathan Lighthizer, OD, FAAO, the lead investigator of the study and Dean at Northeastern State University Oklahoma College of Optometry, emphasized the broader implications of the findings:

“TearCare not only improves patient outcomes but also represents a more economically sustainable approach to managing MGD-associated dry eye disease. The demonstrated cost savings of over $900 per patient per year are significant in our current health care environment.”