ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology case reports2018
The use of bevacizumab and ranibizumab for branch retinal vein occlusion in medicare beneficiaries.
Article in American journal of ophthalmology case reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of three loading doses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Sub-optimal gain in vision in retinal vein occlusion due to under-treatment in the real world: results from an open-label prospective study of Intravitreal Ranibizumab.BMC ophthalmology · 2021Observational
- Long-term outcomes of intravitreous bevacizumab or tissue plasminogen activator or vitrectomy for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe the frequency and variation of intravitreal bevacizumab and ranibizumab use for branch retinal vein occlusion (BVO) in the United States (US).
methodsWe obtained a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries from the Medicare Denominator and Physician/Supplier Part B claims files from 2010 to 2013 and identified all beneficiaries with an ICD-9-CM code for branch retinal vein occlusion (BVO, 362.36). Patient age, gender, race, state of residence and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores were collected.
resultsDuring 2010-2013, a majority of the 3944 BVO patients who met the inclusion criteria received bevacizumab compared to ranibizumab (76.7% vs 23.3%). Most patients were aged 75-79 (22.0%) or 80-84 (22.0%), female (61.5%), white (88.3%), and had a CCI score of 1-2 (39.8%). The frequencies of bevacizumab and ranibizumab injections for BVO varied significantly between the US census divisions (p < 0.0001). The highest frequencies of bevacizumab use were in the Mountain (90.6%) and Pacific (82.7%) divisions while the highest frequencies of ranibizumab use were in the West North Central (37.9%) and Mid Atlantic (32.7%) divisions. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPORTANCE: A majority of Medicare beneficiaries with BVO received bevacizumab compared to ranibizumab from 2010 to 2013, with significant geographic variation in the use of the two anti-VEGF agents. Future research into factors driving geographic variation in the use of these agents may help direct cost-effective strategies for the management of BVO.
Indexed as
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.