SynthesisJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2026
Different aflibercept regimens for wet age-related macular degeneration: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2026. 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
backgroundIntravitreal aflibercept injection for wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) was initially approved with a regimen consisting of three monthly loading doses followed by maintenance doses every 8 weeks. Alternative regimens with a reduced treatment burden have been explored. The treat-and-extend (TAE) regimen involves gradually extending the treatment interval in accordance with disease activity, and the pro-re-nata (PRN) regimen involves administering injections only when signs of disease activity are observed during follow-up visits. This study evaluated these alternative regimens aimed at reducing treatment burden in real-world clinical practice.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A random-effects model was adopted for network meta-analysis. Results are presented as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool.
resultsSeven RCTs (1683 patients with wet AMD) were included in the network meta-analysis. No significant inter-regimen differences were observed in visual acuity or central retinal thickness. The TAE and PRN regimens required significantly fewer injections than did bimonthly and monthly regimens, respectively (TAE vs bimonthly: SMD -1.091, 95% CI -2.030 to -0.153; TAE vs monthly: SMD -3.024, 95% CI -4.584 to -1.465; PRN vs bimonthly: SMD -1.919, 95% CI -3.307 to -0.532; PRN vs monthly: SMD -3.852, 95% CI -5.717 to -1.988). However, injection count did not differ significantly between the TAE and PRN regimens (TAE vs PRN: SMD 0.828, 95% CI -0.847 to 2.503). Nonetheless, the TAE regimen was associated with fewer clinic visits than the PRN regimen.
conclusionThe TAE regimen maintains efficacy while reducing treatment burden in patients with wet AMD receiving intravitreal aflibercept.
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.