ArticleEye (London, England)2024
Two-year efficacy and safety of different anti-vascular endothelial growth factor regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Uncovering drug-associated risk signals for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: an integrative pharmacovigilance and proteogenomic study.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the 2-year efficacy and safety of various anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).
methodsA comprehensive search was performed on multiple electronic databases up to April 2023 and updated in June 2024, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Key outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving a vision gain of ≥15 letters and maintaining stable vision (loss of <15 letters) in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), changes in mean BCVA from baseline, serious ocular adverse events (SAEs), adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation and any cause of death at 2 years.
resultsNineteen trials with 12,654 patients and 25 treatment regimens were analyzed in the study. All anti-VEGF regimens showed superior efficacy compared to sham therapy. Specifically, faricimab 6 mg (4+up to Q16W) and ranibizumab 0.5 mg (2-week T&E) displayed top-level effect in vision gain. Bevacizumab 1.25 mg (2-week T&E) and aflibercept 2 mg (2-week T&E) demonstrated the most stable vision outcomes. Bevacizumab 1.25 mg (2-week T&E) and ranibizumab 0.5 mg (2-week T&E) exhibited the most pronounced mean BCVA improvement. Compared to sham therapy, the risk of SAEs was significantly higher for brolucizumab 6 mg (3 + Q12W/ Q8W) (RR = 6.04, 95% CI: 1.30-28.02) and PDS 100 mg/ml (Q24W) (RR = 10.95, 95% CI: 2.14-56.02), but not for other anti-VEGF regimens.
conclusionsRanibizumab 0.5 mg (2-week T&E) emerges as a potentially optimal regimen for nAMD over a 2-year period. Future studies need to consider the impact of baseline characteristics on treatment outcomes.
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.