SynthesisGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2018
The reactivation time in the treatment of AMD: a forgotten key parameter?
Synthesis in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSummarize and compare the available evidence on the reactivation times in patients with age-related macular degeneration treated with Ranibizumab (RNB).
methodSystematic review of studies that reported the reactivation time of patients (direct method) or the number of injections received in a certain period of follow-up (indirect method).
resultsOnly 18 of 89 selected studies reported the average reactivation time of patients in a manifest form, without the need of any calculation. The average calculated, weighted reactivation time was 101.8 days with the direct method and 99.8 days in the indirect method (84 studies included). With both methods, it was found that the average reactivation time of the RCTs was between 2 and 3 weeks less than the average time identified in the observational studies. These differences are also reflected in the clinical results, there being a correlation between the number of doses received and the change in BCVA. The analysis of 11 comparative studies showed a difference in reactivation times between patients treated with RNB or Bevacizumab (BVZ).
conclusionThere are few direct studies of reactivation time, but calculation from the PRN dose number turns out to be a good approximation for retrospective study of the variable. The use of the PRN, with criteria not based on optical coherence tomography scans, delays the application of doses between 2 or 3 weeks, and patients suffer loss of clinical benefits. RNB enables patients to receive less injections than BVZ throughout treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29675724What 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.