Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37269003›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2023

Non-adherence and non-persistence to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Haris Shahzad, Sajid Mahmood, Sean McGee, Jessica Hubbard, Sayeed Haque, Vibhu Paudyal, Alastair K Denniston, Lisa J Hill, Zahraa Jalal

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

53 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. A post-hoc analysis of intravitreal aflibercept-treated nAMD patients from ARIES & ALTAIR: predicting treatment intervals and frequency for aflibercept treat-and-extend therapy regimen using machine learning.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Haris Shahzad *University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK. hshahzad98@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9165-3095
Sajid Mahmood *Deputy Drugs Controller, Specialized Healthcare and Medical Education Department, Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan.
Sean McGee *School of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jessica Hubbard *School of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Sayeed HaqueInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Vibhu PaudyalSchool of Pharmacy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Alastair K DennistonNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital and University College London Institute of Ophthalmology, London, UK.
Lisa J Hill *School of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Zahraa Jalal *School of Pharmacy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections play a key role in treating a range of macular diseases. The effectiveness of these therapies is dependent on patients' adherence (the extent to which a patient takes their medicines as per agreed recommendations from the healthcare provider) and persistence (continuation of the treatment for the prescribed duration) to their prescribed treatment regimens. The aim of this systematic review was to demonstrate the need for further investigation into the prevalence of, and factors contributing to, patient-led non-adherence and non-persistence, thus facilitating improved clinical outcomes.

methodsSystematic searches were conducted in Google Scholar, Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library. Studies in English conducted before February 2023 that reported the level of, and/or barriers to, non-adherence or non-persistence to intravitreal anti-VEGF ocular disease therapy were included. Duplicate papers, literature reviews, expert opinion articles, case studies, and case series were excluded following screening by two independent authors.

resultsData from a total of 409,215 patients across 52 studies were analysed. Treatment regimens included pro re nata, monthly and treat-and-extend protocols; study durations ranged from 4 months to 8 years. Of the 52 studies, 22 included a breakdown of reasons for patient non-adherence/non-persistence. Patient-led non-adherence varied between 17.5 and 35.0% depending on the definition used. Overall pooled prevalence of patient-led treatment non-persistence was 30.0% (P = 0.000). Reasons for non-adherence/non-persistence included dissatisfaction with treatment results (29.9%), financial burden (19%), older age/comorbidities (15.5%), difficulty booking appointments (8.5%), travel distance/social isolation (7.9%), lack of time (5.8%), satisfaction with the perceived improvement in their condition (4.4%), fear of injection (4.0%), loss of motivation (4.0%), apathy towards eyesight (2.5%), dissatisfaction with facilities 2.3%, and discomfort/pain (0.3%). Three studies found non-adherence rates between 51.6 and 68.8% during the COVID-19 pandemic, in part due to fear of exposure to COVID-19 and difficulties travelling during lockdown. DISCUSSION: Results suggest high levels of patient-led non-adherence/non-persistence to anti-VEGF therapy, mostly due to dissatisfaction with treatment results, a combination of comorbidities, loss of motivation and the burden of travel. This study provides key information on prevalence and factors contributing to non-adherence/non-persistence in anti-VEGF treatment for macular diseases, aiding identification of at-risk individuals to improve real-world visual outcomes. Improvements in the literature can be achieved by establishing uniform definitions and standard timescales for what constitutes non-adherence/non-persistence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020216205.

Indexed as

Angiogenesis InhibitorsEye DiseasesRanibizumabHumansMedication AdherenceVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAngiogenesis InhibitorsRanibizumabVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAnti-VEGFCOVID-19IntravitrealMacularMeta-analysisNon-adherenceNon-persistence

Identifiers

PMID37269003
PMCPMC10237080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.