Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32532760›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2021

Real world evidence on 5661 patients treated for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, intravitreal dexamethasone or macular laser.

Richard Gale, Maria Pikoula, Aaron Y Lee, Spiros Denaxas, Catherine Egan, Adnan Tufail, Paul Taylor, UK EMR Users Group

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Richard GaleOphthalmology, Hightown Surgery, York, UK.
Maria PikoulaInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, London, UK.
Aaron Y LeeDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Spiros DenaxasInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, London, UK.
Catherine EganMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Adnan TufailMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Paul TaylorInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, London, UK p.taylor@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-6296-2948
UK EMR Users Group
Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GBHealth Data Research UK · GBUniversity of Washington · USYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Epidemiology and clinical outcomes of diabetic macular edemaK23EY029246 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LEE, AARON · 2018 to 2022
$1.1M
Medical Research Council MR/K006584/1NEI NIH HHS K23 EY029246
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsClinical trials suggest anti-vascular endothelial growth factor is more effective than intravitreal dexamethasone as treatment for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion. This study asks if 'real world' data from a larger and more diverse population, followed for a longer period, also support this conclusion.

methodsData collected to support routine care at 27 NHS (National Health Service) Trusts between February 2002 and September 2017 contained 5661 treatment-naive patients with a single mode of treatment for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion and no history of cataract surgery either during or recently preceding the treatment. Number of treatment visits and change in visual acuity from baseline was plotted for three treatment groups (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF), intravitreal dexamethasone, macular laser) for up to 3 years.

resultsMean baseline visual acuity was 57.1/53.1/62.3 letters in the anti-VEGF/dexamethasone/macular laser groups, respectively. This changed to 66.72 (+9.6)/57.6 (+4.5)/63.2 (+0.9) at 12 months. Adequate numbers allowed analysis at 18 months for all groups (66.6 (+9.5)/56.1 (+3.0)/60.8 (-1.5)) and for anti-VEGF at 36 months (68.0, +10.9) Mean number of treatments were 5.1/1.5/1.2 at 12 months, 5.9/1.7/1.2 at 18 months for all three groups and 10.3 at 36 months for anti-VEGF.

conclusionsVisual acuity improvements were higher and more sustained with anti-VEGF. Higher treatment burden occurred with anti-VEGF but this reduced over 36 months. Patients with better vision at baseline than those in the clinical trials maintained high levels of vision with both anti-VEGF and dexamethasone.

Indexed as

Visual AcuityAgedAngiogenesis InhibitorsDexamethasoneDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGlucocorticoidsHumansIntravitreal InjectionsLaser TherapyMacula LuteaMacular EdemaMaleRetinal Vein OcclusionRetrospective StudiesAngiogenesis InhibitorsDexamethasoneGlucocorticoidsVascular Endothelial Growth FactorsEpidemiologyretina

Identifiers

PMID32532760
PMCPMC8005793
OpenAlexW3034379259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.