ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2024
Efficacy and Safety of an Indian Bevacizumab BIOSimilar (BEVATAS) for Retinal Vein Occlusion (BIOS-RVO Study).
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. 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.
- Biosimilars of anti-VEGF agents in retinal diseases: a narrative review of regulatory, clinical, and pharmacoeconomic aspects.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2026Review
- Biosimilar anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents: Clinical outcomes, safety, and cost-effectiveness in India.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Biosimilars for Use in the Aging Eye.Drugs & aging · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety of an Indian Bevacizumab BIOSimilar (BEVATAS) for Treatment-Naïve Diabetic Macular Edema (BIOS-DME Study).Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Review
- Quantitative Assessment of En‑face OCT‑Derived Minimum Intensity Fluid Changes Following Ranibizumab Biosimilar Therapy in Macular Neovascularization Secondary to nAMD and PCV.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Bevatas Patients and Methods: The BIOS-RVO study was a retrospective interventional study conducted at a single tertiary eye care facility in India. 154 treatment-naïve eyes with RVO (CRVO: 62 eyes; BRVO: 92 eyes) received intravitreal bevacizumab biosimilar (IVBb) therapy. Data on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure (IOP) were collected at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-therapy. Results: The average age of participants was approximately 55.99 (+12.56) years, with a nearly equal gender distribution (M:F = 49.4:50.6). Age differences between BRVO and CRVO groups were not significant ( Conclusion: The BIOS-RVO study demonstrates that Bevatas is an effective and safe treatment option for both CRVO and BRVO. These findings support the use of Bevatas as a cost-effective alternative to branded anti-VEGF agents, particularly in resource-limited settings.
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.