ArticleBMC ophthalmology2025
One-year clinical outcomes of four-dose induction versus immediate treat-and-extend faricimab regimens in pretreated 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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study aimed to compare one-year clinical outcomes of two faricimab treatment strategies in patients with previously treated exudative neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD): (1) immediate switch to treat-and-extend dosing (T&E), and (2) initiation with a four-dose induction ("loading") regimen. SUBJECT/
methodsRetrospective comparing two cohorts of pretreated nAMD patients with 12 months of follow-up who were either switched to Faricimab with immediate T&E dosing (Lucerne protocol, "on-the-fly"), or initiated with a four-dose induction phase (Lugano protocol,"re-loading"). Both cohorts were subsequently managed according to a T&E regimen. Demographic and clinical data, including prior intravitreal agents, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST) on optical coherence tomography (OCT), and length of treatment intervals were analysed. Multivariable models were adjusted for baseline differences.
resultsBoth cohorts (Lucerne, 183 eyes; Lugano, 33 eyes) were similar in baseline characteristics. BCVA improved by 0.81 ETDRS letters in Lucerne and by 2.42 in the Lugano cohort (p = 0.250). CRT decreased by -38.3 μm in Lucerne and by -57.8 μm in Lugano (p = 0.053). Treatment intervals increased by 2.2 weeks in Lucerne and 3.4 weeks in Lugano (p = 0.092). At 12 months, 15.3% of Lucerne patients and 27.3% of Lugano patients achieved intervals ≥ 12 weeks, with significantly higher odds of extension in Lugano (OR 3.87; p = 0.013).
conclusionsBoth cohorts showed anatomical and functional improvements after switching to faricimab. The Lugano cohort, using a four-dose induction phase, showed longer treatment intervals, suggesting better disease stability. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.