ArticleActa ophthalmologica2022
12-month outcomes of ranibizumab versus aflibercept for macular oedema in central retinal vein occlusion: data from the FRB! registry.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Faricimab in Treatment-Naïve nAMD: Regional UK Real-World Experience.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Efficacy, Safety, and Treatment Burden of Aflibercept 2 mg and Ranibizumab in Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- Initial response and 12-month outcomes after commencing dexamethasone or vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors for retinal vein occlusion in the FRB registry.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- Rate and associations of inner retinal thinning in eyes with retinal vein occlusion and regressed macular oedema.Eye (London, England) · 2024Observational
- Impact of cataract surgery on patients receiving intravitreal therapy for retinal vein occlusion.Clinical & experimental ophthalmologyArticle
- Outliers of Treatment Frequency in Retinal Vein Occlusion: 24-Month Comparative Analysis of Fight Retinal Blindness! Practitioners.Clinical & experimental ophthalmologyObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare 12-month treatment outcomes of eyes receiving aflibercept or ranibizumab for macular oedema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in routine clinical practice.
methods296 treatment-naïve eyes receiving either aflibercept (171 eyes, 2 mg) or ranibizumab (125 eyes, 0.5 mg) for macular oedema secondary to CRVO were recruited retrospectively from centres using the prospectively designed FRB! registry. The primary outcome measure was the mean change in LogMAR letter scores of visual acuity (VA). Secondary outcomes included change in central subfield thickness (CST), injections and visits, time to first grading of inactivity, switching and non-completion from baseline to 12 months.
resultsBaseline VA (SD) was somewhat better in aflibercept- versus ranibizumab-treated eyes (42.5 ± 25.5 letters versus 36.9 ± 26 letters; p = 0.07) with similar CST (614 (240) μm versus 616 (234) μm: p = 0.95). The 12-month adjusted mean (95%CI) VA change was +16.6 (12.9, 20.4) letters for aflibercept versus +9.8 (5.5, 14.1) letters for ranibizumab (p = 0.001). The mean (95%CI) adjusted change in CST was significantly greater in aflibercept- versus ranibizumab-treated eyes: -304 (-276, -333) µm versus -252 (-220, -282) µm (p < 0.001). Both groups had a median (Q1, Q3) of 7 (5, 9) injections and 10 (8,13) visits. Aflibercept-treated eyes became inactive sooner than ranibizumab (p = 0.02). Switching occurred more commonly from ranibizumab (26 eyes, 21%) than from aflibercept (9 eyes, 5%) (p < 0.001).
conclusionBoth aflibercept and ranibizumab improved VA and reduced CST in eyes with CRVO in routine clinical practice, with aflibercept showing significantly greater improvements in this comparative analysis.
Indexed as
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.