ArticleInternational ophthalmology2025
Comparative efficacy of conbercept 3+PRN versus 3+TAE regimens for the treatment of polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeTo compare the efficacy and safety of the 3+ pro re nata (PRN) and 3+ treat-and-extend (TAE) regimens of intravitreal conbercept for treating polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV).
methodsThis retrospective, single-center study included 106 treatment-naïve PCV patients who received intravitreal conbercept injections between March 2019 and September 2023. Patients were divided into two groups based on post-loading regimens: 3+PRN (65 patients) or 3+TAE (41 patients). All patients received three initial monthly injections. The 3+PRN group received additional injections as needed, while the 3+TAE group had treatment intervals adjusted based on lesion activity and visual acuity stability. Outcomes were assessed over 12 months, including best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), pigment epithelial detachment (PED) height, polyp regression, number of injections, and follow-up visits.
resultsBoth groups showed significant improvements in BCVA from baseline to month 12 (3+TAE: 53.9 ± 16.5-61.4 ± 10.9 letters; 3+PRN: 54.6 ± 15.8-60.7 ± 11.5 letters; both P < 0.05), with no significant differences between groups (P > 0.05). CRT and PED height decreased significantly in both groups (P < 0.001), with no intergroup differences. Polypoidal lesion regression rates were similar at month 12 (3+TAE: 43.9%, 3+PRN: 44.6%; P = 0.964). The 3+PRN group required fewer injections (7.4 ± 0.7 vs. 8.2±1.6; P = 0.003) but more follow-up visits (12.6 ± 1.4 vs. 10.7 ± 1.2; P < 0.001) compared to the 3+TAE group. No ocular or systemic complications were reported in either group.
conclusionsBoth the 3+PRN and 3+TAE conbercept regimens are effective and safe for treating PCV, demonstrating similar improvements in visual and anatomical outcomes. The 3+TAE regimen requires more injections but fewer follow-up visits, which may enhance patient adherence by reducing clinic visits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40167859What 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.