ReviewJournal of market access & health policy2025
Network Meta-Analysis of Bevacizumab Gamma Versus Competing Interventions for Treating Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in the United Kingdom.
Review in Journal of market access & health policy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the relative efficacy of bevacizumab gamma (an ophthalmic formulation of bevacizumab) versus alternative interventions relevant to the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in the United Kingdom (UK) via a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA). An SLR was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies for the treatment of nAMD in adult patients relevant to the UK context. The included anti-VEGF treatments were ranibizumab, aflibercept, faricimab, and bevacizumab gamma. Bayesian NMA models were used to estimate relative efficacy in terms of change from baseline (CFB) in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 12 months, the proportion of patients gaining 15 or more letters at 12 months, and the proportion of patients losing less than 15 letters at 12 months. Twenty-two relevant RCTs were included in the NMA. At 12 months, all anti-VEGF treatments were similarly efficacious to ranibizumab 0.5 mg every four weeks (Q4W) in terms of CFB in BCVA, the proportion of patients gaining 15 or more letters, and the proportion of patients losing less than 15 letters (except for ranibizumab 0.5 mg every 12 weeks [Q12W] and ranibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata [PRN]). Bevacizumab gamma provided similar improvements in visual acuity to other anti-VEGF treatments.
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.