Trial reportClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Intravitreal Double-Dose Conbercept Injection for the Treatment of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Pilot Real-Life Clinical Practice Study.
Trial report in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. 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.
- Clinical Outcomes After Same-Agent Double-Dose Anti-VEGF Escalation in Eyes with a Suboptimal Response to Standard-Dose Treatment for Exudative Macular Diseases: A Real-World Pre-Post Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Boosting peptide half-life: enabling efficient generation of Fc-peptide conjugates.Chemical science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of conbercept for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) when administered at the labeled dose (0.5 mg) and double dose (1.0 mg). Methods: Patients with nAMD were randomized to either 1.0 mg or 0.5 mg groups. The 1.0 mg group received intravitreal injection of 1.0 mg conbercept once monthly for the first three months, followed by a pro re nata regimen (3+PRN). The 0.5 mg group received 3+PRN regimens of intravitreal 0.5 mg conbercept throughout the treatment period. Changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and maximum pigment epithelial detachment (PED) height from baseline were compared between the two treatment groups at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Results: Thirty-three patients completed the study, including 16 in the 0.5 mg group with an average age of 74.00 ± 8.23 years, and 17 in the 1.0 mg group with an average age of 72.29 ± 6.47 years. At 3-month, BCVA improvement in the 1.0 mg group was significantly higher than in the 0.5 mg group ( Conclusion: While the 1.0 mg group showed a transient but significant BCVA improvement at 3 months and a longer recurrence interval, further large-scale trials are needed to validate these preliminary findings. Trial Registration: This study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn/, ChiCTR2000029503). Registration date: 03/02/2020.
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.