ArticleFrontiers in medicine2021
Efficacy of Initial vs. Delayed Photodynamic Therapy in Combination With Conbercept for Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT02821520 (Efficacy and Safety of Initial Versus Delayed Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy in Combination With Conbercept in Patients With Symptomatic Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Efficacy and Safety of Initial Versus Delayed Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy in Combination With Conbercept in Patients With Symptomatic Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the efficacy of initial vs. delayed photodynamic therapy (PDT) in combination with intravitreal injection of conbercept (IVC) for polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV).
designMulticenter, randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial. SUBJECTS: Naïve PCV patients.
methodsPatients were randomized 1:1 into two groups: initial PDT with IVC and delayed PDT with IVC. At baseline, patients in the initial combination group were treated with PDT and IVC within 1 week, while patients in the delayed combination group were treated with IVC alone. PDT and IVC was given PRN during the follow-up in each group.
main outcome measuresNon-inferiority of delayed PDT with IVC to initial PDT with IVC for mean change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline to month 12 (95% CI of the difference entirely above -5 letters).
resultsEighty-six patients were enrolled, with 43 in each group. At month 12, the change of BCVA in initial combination group was equivalent to that in the delayed combination group, with gains of 6.42 ± 1.89 and 7.49 ± 2.14 (mean ± standard error) letters, respectively [delayed group minus initial group: 1.07 letters; 95% confidence interval (CI): -4.62 to 6.76;
conclusionsThere was effective in both groups in patients with PCV. The initial combination group showed a more efficient decrease in CRT and polyp regression, along with fewer injections. However, the initial combination group was non-inferior compared with the delayed combination group in terms of the improvement of BCVA.
trial registrationhttps://ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02821520.
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.