Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32481293›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2020

A systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of conbercept with ranibizumab in patients with macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion.

Weishai Liu, Yanjie Li, Rongxia Cao, Zichao Bai, Weiqin Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Weishai LiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, The First hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan City.
Yanjie LiDepartment of Ophthalmology, The First hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan City.
Rongxia CaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, The First hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan City.
Zichao BaiDepartment of Ophthalmology, The First hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan City.
Weiqin LiuWenzhou Medical University, China.
Shanxi Medical University · CNFirst Hospital of Shanxi Medical University · CNWenzhou Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this review and meta-analysis is to investigate the efficacy of conbercept and ranibizumab, combined with or without laser photocoagulation, in patients with macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO-ME).

methodsSeveral databases have been used to identify relevant publications. After screening, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare conbercept and ranibizumab with the support of RevMan 5.3 (Cochrane Library Software, Oxford, UK).

resultsIn this study, 9 randomized controlled trials and 6 retrospective trials were included with a total of 1180 patients. No significant difference was found in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) or central macular thickness (CMT) in the baseline parameters [BCVA (weighted mean difference (WMD): -0.01; 95% confidence interval CI: -0.03 to 0.01; P = .17), CMT (WMD: 20.14; 95% CI: -26.70 to 66.97; P = .40). No significant differences were found in the improvements of BCVA and adverse events (AEs) between the 2 groups after injection of loading dosage [the 1st month BCVA (WMD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.02; P = .54),the 3rd month BCVA (WMD: -0.02; 95% CI: --0.05 to 0.01; P = .23), the 6th month BCVA (WMD: -0.02; 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.01; P = .27), AEs (odds ratio: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.38 to 1.84; P = .66)]. However, there were significant differences between conbercept and ranibizumab treatment in terms of CMT [1st month CMT (WMD: -11.70; 95% CI: -19.71 to -3.68; P < .01), 3rd month CMT (WMD: -10.08; 95% CI: -15.62 to -4.53; P < .01), 6th month CMT (WMD: -15.83; 95% CI: -22.88 to -8.78; P < .01)] and the number of injections (WMD, -0.36; 95% CI: -0.68 to -0.04; P = .03).

conclusionThe current pooled evidence suggested that both therapies of intravitreal conbercept and intravitreal ranibizumab with or without laser photocoagulation are effective in vision function in RVO-ME patients, and confirmed that conbercept has advantages over ranibizumab in terms of CMT and the number of injections for treating RVO-ME. In addition, conbercept has the statistically same visual gains and safety as ranibizumab in RVO-ME patients. Longer-term follow-up surveys on the safety and effectiveness of these 2 treatment regimens are required.

Indexed as

Angiogenesis InhibitorsCombined Modality TherapyHumansIntravitreal InjectionsLight CoagulationMacular EdemaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRanibizumabRecombinant Fusion ProteinsRetinal Vein OcclusionRetrospective StudiesTomography, Optical CoherenceVisual AcuityAngiogenesis InhibitorsKH902 fusion proteinRanibizumabRecombinant Fusion Proteins

Identifiers

PMID32481293
PMCPMC7249991
OpenAlexW3028922255

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.