Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31562118›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of ophthalmology2020

Visual benefit versus visual gain: what is the effect of baseline covariants in the treatment arm relative to the control arm? A pooled analysis of ANCHOR and MARINA.

Adnan Tufail, Philippe Margaron, Tadhg Guerin, Michael Larsen

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Central geographic atrophy vs. neovascular age-related macular degeneration: differences in longitudinal vision-related quality of life.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021
    Article
  9. Trends in Real-World Neovascular AMD Treatment Outcomes in the UK.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020
    Review
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Adnan TufailMedical Retina, Moorfields Eye Hospital & Institute of Ophthalmology UCL, London, UK adnan.tufail@moorfields.nhs.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-0965-4890
Philippe MargaronNovartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland.
Tadhg GuerinTheravance Biopharma, Dublin, Ireland.
Michael LarsenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Rigshospitalet & Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
DS Biopharma (Ireland) · IEMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBNovartis (Switzerland) · CHUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to elucidate visual benefits of ranibizumab in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) compared with control arms and identify factors affecting response.

methodsThis is a post-hoc pooled analysis of two phase III studies, ANCHOR and MARINA, of ranibizumab for the treatment of nAMD. ANCHOR included 83 international sites. MARINA included 96 sites in the USA. Analysis included patients (control, n=323; ranibizumab, n=332) with nAMD and a baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of ≥35-<85 letters.

resultsPatients receiving ranibizumab achieved an adjusted mean BCVA superiority of 18.9 and 21.2 letters over 12 and 24 months, respectively, compared with control. Ranibizumab treatment, higher baseline BCVA, lower age and smaller lesion size were positively associated with the ability to achieve BCVA >69 letters. Patients with the highest baseline BCVA had lowest BCVA gains. Ranibizumab treatment, lower baseline BCVA, lower age and smaller lesion size were identified as significant predictors of BCVA gain from baseline at month 24 (all p<0.0001). However, the difference in mean BCVA gains at month 24 between treatment and control groups was similar for all baseline BCVA subgroups (≥35-<55 letters, 21.9 letters; ≥55-<70 letters, 25.2 letters; ≥70-<85 letters, 19.3 letters).

conclusionsHigher baseline BCVA is associated with lower BCVA gains but a greater likelihood of achieving good final BCVA >69 letters due to smaller gains needed to achieve response. Visual benefits, including maintenance of visual acuity (VA), final VA achieved and relative gain compared with natural disease progression, should be considered when assessing treatment response in nAMD.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAngiogenesis InhibitorsFemaleHumansIntravitreal InjectionsMaleMiddle AgedRanibizumabTime FactorsTomography, Optical CoherenceTreatment OutcomeVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AVisual AcuityWet Macular DegenerationAngiogenesis InhibitorsRanibizumabVascular Endothelial Growth Factor Aretinavision

Identifiers

PMID31562118
PMCPMC7212932
OpenAlexW2975769673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.