Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33792788›Full record

Trial reportGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2021

Differences in the characteristics of subjects achieving complete, partial, or no resolution of macular edema in the READ-3 study.

Muhammad Sohail Halim, Rubbia Afridi, Murat Hasanreisoglu, Muhammad Hassan, Mohamed Ibrahim-Ahmed, Diana V Do, Yasir Jamal Sepah, READ-3 Investigators

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Muhammad Sohail HalimByers Eye Institute, Stanford University, 2370 Watson Court - Suite 200, Palo Alto, CA, 94303, USA.
Rubbia AfridiByers Eye Institute, Stanford University, 2370 Watson Court - Suite 200, Palo Alto, CA, 94303, USA.
Murat HasanreisogluByers Eye Institute, Stanford University, 2370 Watson Court - Suite 200, Palo Alto, CA, 94303, USA.
Muhammad HassanByers Eye Institute, Stanford University, 2370 Watson Court - Suite 200, Palo Alto, CA, 94303, USA.
Mohamed Ibrahim-AhmedOcular Imaging Research and Reading Center, Menlo Park, CA, USA.
Diana V DoByers Eye Institute, Stanford University, 2370 Watson Court - Suite 200, Palo Alto, CA, 94303, USA.
Yasir Jamal SepahByers Eye Institute, Stanford University, 2370 Watson Court - Suite 200, Palo Alto, CA, 94303, USA. yjs@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0104-6284
READ-3 Investigators
Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute · USKoç University · TRSmith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute · US

Funding

Stanford Vision Research CoreP30EY026877 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Jeffrey L Goldberg · 2017 to 2026
$8.0M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY026877
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo identify baseline characteristics of subjects enrolled in the READ-3 study that would predict the response of macular edema to ranibizumab (RBZ) therapy at year 1.

methodsIn this post hoc analysis of the READ-3 randomized, multicenter phase 2 clinical trial, subjects with diabetic macular edema (DME) were randomized to receive monthly intravitreal injections of RBZ (0.5 or 2.0 mg) for 6 consecutive injections followed by as-needed treatments based on pre-defined retreatment criteria. In this sub-study, subjects were divided into three groups (persistent, rebound, and resolved) based on edema status at month 12 (M12). Multi-logistic regression was utilized to assess the probability of edema outcomes M12, based on the baseline characteristics.

resultsOne hundred twenty-three out of 152 subjects were analyzed for this sub-study. A significant difference was observed in the baseline (BL) central subfield thickness (CST) among the study groups (p < 0.05). BL CST was a significant predictor for edema outcome at M12 with > 80% probability of the subject having persistent edema if BL CST was > 570 μm (p < 0.05). This association persisted when controlled for the dose of RBZ (relative risk (RR), 1.007; p < 0.05). BL CST was also a significant predictor for having persistent edema at M12 in subjects without vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) (> 80% probability of edema persistence at CST > 570 μm [RR, 1.006; p < 0.05]). However, in the presence of VMA, BL CST was no longer a significant predictor of having persistent edema at month 12 (RR, 1.005; p > 0.05).

conclusionsSubjects with high CST (> 570 μm) at baseline may not benefit from repeated intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF for resolution of edema.

Indexed as

Diabetic RetinopathyMacular EdemaAngiogenesis InhibitorsHumansIntravitreal InjectionsRanibizumabTomography, Optical CoherenceTreatment OutcomeVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AVisual AcuityAngiogenesis InhibitorsRanibizumabVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAnti-VEGFDiabetic macular edemaDMERanibizumabREAD

Identifiers

PMID33792788
PMCPMC10919548
OpenAlexW3144779280

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.