Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39673354›Full record

SynthesisHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2025

Anti-VEGF drugs compared with laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mark Simmonds, Alexis Llewellyn, Ruth Walker, Helen Fulbright, Matthew Walton, Rob Hodgson, Laura Bojke, Lesley Stewart, Sofia Dias, Thomas Rush and 3 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative StudyNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

13 authors.

Mark SimmondsCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1999-8515
Alexis LlewellynCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4569-5136
Ruth WalkerCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2765-7363
Helen FulbrightCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1073-1099
Matthew WaltonCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1932-3689
Rob HodgsonCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6962-2893
Laura BojkeCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7921-9109
Lesley StewartCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0287-4724
Sofia DiasCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2172-0221
Thomas RushPatient Representative, Belfast, UK.
John G LawrensonDepartment of Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University of London, London, UK.
Tunde PetoCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6265-0381
David SteelBiosciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8734-3089

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Diabetic retinopathy is a major cause of sight loss in people with diabetes. The most severe form, proliferative diabetic retinopathy, carries a high risk of vision loss, vitreous haemorrhage, macular oedema and other harms. Panretinal photocoagulation is the primary treatment for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs are used to treat various eye conditions and may be beneficial for people with diabetic retinopathy. Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy when compared to panretinal photocoagulation. Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of all published randomised controlled trials comparing anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (alone or in combination with panretinal photocoagulation) to panretinal photocoagulation in people with diabetic retinopathy. The database searches were updated in May 2023. Trials where the primary focus was treatment of macular oedema or vitreous haemorrhage were excluded. Results: A total of 14 trials were included: 3 of aflibercept, 5 of bevacizumab and 6 of ranibizumab. Two trials were of patients with non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy; all others were in proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Overall, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor was slightly better than panretinal photocoagulation at preventing vision loss, measured as best corrected visual acuity, at up to 2 years follow-up [mean difference in the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution -0.089 (or 3.6 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters), 95% confidence interval -0.180 to -0.019]. There was no clear evidence of any difference between the anti-vascular endothelial growth factors, but the potential for bias complicated the comparison. One trial found no benefit of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor over panretinal photocoagulation after 5 years. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor was superior to panretinal photocoagulation at preventing macular oedema (relative risk 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.49) and vitreous haemorrhage (relative risk 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.99). There was no clear evidence that the effectiveness of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor varied over time. Conclusions: Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections reduce vision loss when compared to panretinal photocoagulation, but the benefit is small and unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor may have greater benefits for preventing complications such as macular oedema. Observational studies extending follow-up beyond the 1-year duration of most trials are needed to investigate the longer-term effects of repeated anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections. Funding: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number NIHR132948.

Indexed as

Angiogenesis InhibitorsDiabetic RetinopathyLaser CoagulationVascular Endothelial Growth Factor ABevacizumabHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRanibizumabReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorRecombinant Fusion ProteinsTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalVisual AcuityafliberceptAngiogenesis InhibitorsBevacizumabRanibizumabReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorRecombinant Fusion ProteinsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AANTI-VEGFDIABETIC RETINOPATHYMETA-ANALYSISPANRETINAL PHOTOCOAGULATIONSYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Identifiers

PMID39673354
PMCPMC12403683

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.