Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29038796›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology. Retina

Serious Adverse Events with Bevacizumab or Ranibizumab for Age-related Macular Degeneration: Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data.

Bevacizumab-Ranibizumab International Trials Group

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

1 author at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Bevacizumab-Ranibizumab International Trials Group
University of Pennsylvania · USHospices Civils de Lyon · FROslo University Hospital · NOUniversity of Amsterdam · NLUniversity of Bristol · GBCleveland Eye Clinic · USUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

Coordinating Center for the Comparison of AMD Treatments TrialsU10EY017823 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MAGUIRE, MAUREEN G · 2006 to 2012
$19.2M
Portable iridium-electrode inhaled Nitric Oxide generator for treatment of lung diseasesR44TR001704 · NCATS · THIRD POLE, INC. · PI HALL, GREG · 2016 to 2022
$3.8M
Follow-up Study: Comparison of AMD Treatments Trial (CATT)U10EY023530 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MAGUIRE, MAUREEN G · 2013 to 2016
$3.5M
Photograph Reading Center for the Comparison of AMD Treatment TrialsU10EY017826 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GRUNWALD, JUAN E · 2006 to 2013
$2.8M
Comparison of AMD Treatment Trials-OCT Reading CenterU10EY017825 · NEI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JAFFE, GLENN · 2006 to 2013
$2.3M
Chair Grant for the Comparison of AMD Treatment TrialsU10EY017828 · NEI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI MARTIN, DANIEL F · 2006 to 2012
$1.9M
Secondary Data Analysis of the Data from Comparison of AMD Treatments TrialsR21EY023689 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI YING, GUI-SHUANG · 2013 to 2014
$436k
Department of Health 07/36/01NCATS NIH HHS R44 TR001704NEI NIH HHS R21 EY023689NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017823NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017825NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017826NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017828NEI NIH HHS U10 EY023530
6 · The paper itself

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

PMID29038796
PMCPMC5640431
OpenAlexW2588132158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.