ArticleBMC ophthalmology2025
Three-year visual outcomes after brolucizumab in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
Article in BMC 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study is to investigate the 3-year outcomes of intravitreal brolucizumab and determine the factors that affect the visual acuity (VA) in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
methodsAll received three consecutive, monthly, induction brolucizumab injections (6.0 mg/0.05 ml) and fixed-dose every 2-or-3-month treatment for 12 months, after which a pro re nata (PRN) or treat-and-extend (TAE) regimen began. Best-corrected VAs (BCVAs) on a Landolt C eye chart were compared before and 4, 12, and 36 months after initial treatment. Factors affecting VA improvements and morphologic characteristics associated with VA at 36 months were determined.
resultsFifty-nine eyes were assessed at 36 months. The mean logMAR BCVAs at baseline and 4, 12, and 36 months after the initial injection were 0.37 ± 0.39, 0.34 ± 0.48, 0.30 ± 0.47, and 0.36 ± 0.51 in the PRN group and 0.31 ± 0.28, 0.22 ± 0.27, 0.18 ± 0.28, and 0.20 ± 0.31 in the TAE group, respectively. In the PRN group, post-injection BCVA did not improve significantly compared with baseline throughout 36 months (p = 0.999, p = 0.814, and p = 0.999 at 4, 12, and 36 months, respectively). In the TAE group, the post-injection BCVA at 12 and 36 months improved significantly compared with baseline (p = 0.006 and p = 0.032, respectively). The baseline BCVA, central foveal thickness (CFT) and TAE regimen were associated with improved VA (p < 0.05 for all). Eyes with subretinal fluid (SRF) at 36 months had significantly better VA (p = 0.019).
conclusionThe TAE regimen achieved better visual outcomes at 3 years. Residual SRF should be tolerated during the maintenance phase if the change of CFT was little compared to the previous image.
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.