ReviewOphthalmology science
Circulating VEGF-A Levels in Relation to Retinopathy of Prematurity and Treatment Effects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Ophthalmology science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of a Quantitative Vascular Severity Score in Retinopathy of Prematurity in the United States and India: New Insights Into Disease Epidemiology and Pathophysiology.American journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Robo4 inhibits neovascularization in oxygen-induced retinopathy by regulating ARF6 and VEGF.Human cell · 2025Article
- Hemorrhagic complications in premature infants treated with intravitreal bevacizumab.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Beyond anti-VEGF: expanding the therapeutic horizon and biomarker landscape in retinopathy of prematurity.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
- Neonatal retinal hemorrhage and retinopathy of prematurity: a critical review of current practices and future directions.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Topic: Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a severe retinal vascular disorder affecting preterm infants, potentially leading to retinal detachment and blindness. This review aims to elucidate the relationship between systemic VEGF levels and ROP. Clinical Relevance: This systematic review aims to consolidate evidence from available studies to guide future research and inform clinical practice. In particular, the role of circulating VEGF-A levels in predicting ROP onset and progression, and evaluating the impact of anti-VEGF therapy on these levels, is crucial in ensuring efficacy and safety in patient care. Methods: Scopus and PubMed were searched to identify studies investigating circulating VEGF-gene products in ROP patients using immunologic assays. Two authors independently screened the literature and extracted data, employing a random-effects meta-analysis to compare VEGF levels as the ratio of means between ROP patients and controls before and after treatment, heterogeneity was reported by I Results: Out of 941 papers, 54 were included, with 26 providing posttreatment data and 31 providing biomarker data. Findings show a significant decrease in VEGF-A levels in the first week after ROP treatment (ratio of means [95% confidence interval] 0.34 [0.25-0.45], I Conclusion: While anti-VEGF treatment significantly reduced blood VEGF-A levels in the first week post-ROP treatment, blood VEGF-A levels did not consistently predict ROP development. Heterogeneity in the results underscores the need for optimized analytical methods and emphasizes the importance of considering individual variation in VEGF-A concentrations independent of ROP diagnosis. Financial Disclosures: The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
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.