ArticleOphthalmology. Retina
Serious Adverse Events with Bevacizumab or Ranibizumab for Age-related Macular Degeneration: Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data.
Article in Ophthalmology. Retina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravitreal vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor systemic and renal toxicity registry.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- Article
- Cardiovascular Adverse Events With Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.JAMA ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Evolution of Intravitreal Therapy for Retinal Diseases-From CMV to CNV: The LXXIV Edward Jackson Memorial Lecture.American journal of ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Serum Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Levels in the IVAN Trial; Relationships with Drug, Dosing, and Systemic Serious Adverse Events.Ophthalmology. Retina · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
topicA comparison between ranibizumab and bevacizumab of the incidence of systemic serious adverse events (SAEs) among patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) who participated in a large-scale randomized trial. Use of individual patient data, rather than aggregate data, allowed adjustment for strong predictors of SAEs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Relative safety of ranibizumab and bevacizumab is important in choosing an anti-VEGF drug for the hundreds of thousands of patients with nAMD treated each year worldwide.
methodsResults of a Cochrane aggregate meta-analysis of the relative efficacy and safety of bevacizumab and ranibizumab that used searches of bibliographic databases and clinical trial registries as of March 14, 2014 and hand searching were reviewed to identify 6 large-scale, multicenter clinical trials. Individual patient data on SAEs, assigned drug and dosing regimen, and baseline prognostic factors were requested from the leaders of the 6 trials. A two-stage approach was used to estimate relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for baseline prognostic factors. The primary outcome measure was development of ≥1 SAE; secondary outcome measures were death, arteriothrombotic events, events associated with systemic anti-VEGF therapy, and events not associated with systemic anti-VEGF therapy.
resultsIndividual patient data were received from 5 trials to provide information on 3052 patients. There were no large imbalances between drug groups on baseline factors. The adjusted relative risk (95% CI) for bevacizumab relative to ranibizumab was 1.06 [(0.84, 1.35); p=0.61] for ≥1 SAEs. For secondary outcomes, adjusted relative risks were 0.99 [ (0.69, 1.43); p=0.97] for death, 0.89 [ (0.62, 1.28); p=0.53] for arteriothrombotic events, 1.10 [ (0.81, 1.50); p=0.54] for events related to anti-VEGF treatment, and 1.11 [ (0.87, 1.40); p=0.40] for events not related to anti-VEGF treatment.
conclusionOur findings support the absence of large differences in risk of systemic serious adverse events between these two anti-VEGF drugs; i.e., relative risks of ≥1.5 are unlikely. Because additional head-to-head trials are unlikely, any further investigation of differential risk between anti-VEGF agents will only be achieved though post-marketing surveillance or through the interrogation of healthcare databases.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.