Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25541937›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Ranibizumab monotherapy or combined with laser versus laser monotherapy for diabetic macular edema: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Guohai Chen, Wensheng Li, Radouil Tzekov, Fangzheng Jiang, Sihong Mao, Yuhua Tong

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Aflibercept with adjuvant micropulsed yellow laser versus aflibercept monotherapy in diabetic macular edema.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2019
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. The Evolving Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020
    Review
  4. Comparison of two individualized treatment regimens with ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2017
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Diabetic Retinopathy: An Overview of Treatments.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolism
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Guohai ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, Zhejiang, PR China.
Wensheng LiXiamen Eye Center of Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian, PR China.
Radouil TzekovThe Roskamp Institute, Sarasota, Florida, United States of America; Department of Ophthalmology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, United States of America.
Fangzheng JiangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, Zhejiang, PR China.
Sihong MaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, Zhejiang, PR China.
Yuhua TongDepartment of Ophthalmology, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, Zhejiang, PR China.
Quzhou City People's Hospital · CNRoskamp Institute · USXiamen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the relative efficacy of ranibizumab (RBZ) monotherapy or combined with laser (RBZ + Laser) versus laser monotherapy for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

methodsA comprehensive literature search using PUBMED, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RBZ or RBZ + Laser to laser monotherapy in patients with DME. Efficacy estimates were determined by comparing weighted mean differences (WMD) in the change of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) from baseline, and the risk ratios (RR) for the proportions of patients with at least 15 letters change from baseline. Safety analysis estimated the RR of cardiac disorders at 6 to 12 months in RBZ therapy vs. laser monotherapy. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.1 software.

resultsSeven RCTs were selected for this meta-analysis, including 1749 patients (394 patients in the RBZ group, 642 patients in the RBZ + Laser group, and 713 patients in the laser group). RBZ and RBZ + Laser were superior to laser monotherapy in the mean change of BCVA and CMT from baseline (WMD = 5.65, 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.44-6.87, P<0.00001; WMD  = 5.02, 95% CI, 3.83-6.20, P<0.00001, and WMD  = -57.91, 95% CI, -77.62 to -38.20, P<0.00001; WMD  = -56.63, 95% CI, -104.81 to -8.44, P = 0.02, respectively). The pooled RR comparing the proportions of patients with at least 15 letters improvement or deterioration were also in favor of RBZ and RBZ + Laser (RR = 2.94, 95% CI, 1.82-4.77, P<0.00001; RR = 2.04, 95% CI, 1.50-2.78, P<0.00001, and RR = 0.21, 95% CI, 0.06-0.71, P = 0.01; RR = 0.52, 95% CI, 0.29-0.95, P = 0.03, respectively). There were no significant differences between RBZ and RBZ + Laser for any of the parameters. There were no difference in the safety profile between RBZ and laser.

conclusionRBZ and RBZ + Laser had better visual and anatomic outcomes than laser monotherapy in the treatment of DME. RBZ + Laser seemed to be equivalent to RBZ.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCombined Modality TherapyDiabetic RetinopathyHumansLaser TherapyMacular EdemaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRanibizumabAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedRanibizumab

Identifiers

PMID25541937
PMCPMC4277392
OpenAlexW2034850440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.