ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2018
Impact of Baseline Central Retinal Thickness on Outcomes in the VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME Studies.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diabetic Macular Edema Management: A Review of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Therapies.Cureus · 2024Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Brolucizumab, Aflibercept, and Ranibizumab for the Treatment of Patients with Visual Impairment Due to Diabetic Macular Oedema: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2023Article
- Predictive effect of TCED-HFV grading and imaging biomarkers on anti-VEGF therapy in diabetic macular edema.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Indicators of Visual Prognosis in Diabetic Macular Oedema.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Primary outcomes of the VIDI study: phase 2, double-masked, randomized, active-controlled study of ASP8232 for diabetic macular edema.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo report the impact of baseline central retinal thickness (CRT) on outcomes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME.
methodsPost hoc analyses of two randomized controlled trials in which 862 DME patients were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to treatment with intravitreal aflibercept 2.0 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), intravitreal aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks after five initial monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation at baseline and as needed. We compared visual and anatomical outcomes in subgroups of patients with baseline CRT < 400
resultsAt weeks 52 and 100, outcomes with intravitreal aflibercept 2q4 and 2q8 were superior to those in laser control-treated patients regardless of baseline CRT. When looked at in a binary fashion, the treatment effect of intravitreal aflibercept versus laser was not significantly better in the ≥400
conclusionsPost hoc analyses of VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME demonstrated the benefits of intravitreal aflibercept treatment in DME patients with baseline CRT < 400
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.