ReviewJournal of ophthalmology2020
The Efficacy of Conbercept in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of ophthalmology, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy of conbercept 3+PRN versus 3+TAE regimens for the treatment of polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Combined treatment of submacular hemorrhage with low-dose subretinal recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and intravitreal conbercept.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Publication Trends of Research on Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy During 2001-2020: A 20-Year Bibliometric Study.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
methodsThirty studies with 1308 eyes were identified and included in this study. The primary outcome measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and secondary outcomes were optical coherence tomography characteristics and polyp regression rates. The pooled results were calculated by the random-effect or fixed-effect model according to the heterogeneity of the data.
resultsDespite a large standard deviation in means (SMD) improvement for BCVA and central retinal thickness (CRT) in the conbercept group, there was no statistically significant difference in the other outcomes compared to ranibizumab and aflibercept. However, there was a greater polyp regression rate in the conbercept group at 12 months.
conclusionsThis systematic review indicates that conbercept may achieve similar BCVA and CRT improvements as ranibizumab and aflibercept, with a superior rate of polyp regression at 12 months.
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.