Observational studyActa ophthalmologica2026
Predictive factors for injection interval extension after switching to faricimab in neovascular AMD: The FAR WEST multicentre study.
Observational study in Acta ophthalmologica, 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
41 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess whether switching to faricimab allowed extending injection intervals after 12 months (M12) in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and to identify predictive factors for interval extension.
designFAR WEST was a multicentre, observational, retrospective cohort study.
participantsPatients with nAMD treated with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections for at least 1 year before switching to faricimab.
methodsThe reason for switching (clinician's intent to extend the interval in the absence or presence of a recurrence or refractory status), and the switch strategy (whether an induction phase comprising 2, 3 or 4 injections was performed using the same or a shorter interval, or whether the interval was immediately extended from the second injection without induction) were left to the physician's discretion.
main outcome measuresThe following data were collected from the medical records at the time of the decision to switch to faricimab (M0) and at the M12 follow-up visit: recurrence-free interval, last injection interval, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), exudation status and intraocular inflammation events.
resultsA total of 845 eyes of 718 patients were included in 23 centres. The recurrence-free injection interval increased significantly from 5.7 weeks at M0 to 8.6 weeks at M12 (difference: +2.9 weeks, p < 0.001). The proportion of exudative patients decreased from 571 (68%) to 337 (42%) (- 41%, p < 0.001). BCVA decreased from 0.33 (20/40) to 0.35 logMAR (20/40) (p = 0.0038). Among 238 refractory cases at M0, 84 (35%) achieved a dry macula at M12. In multivariable analysis, absence of an induction phase was associated with greater injection interval gain. (p < 0.001). There were no differences according to time since the first injection, type of neovascularization. The number of injections per year decreased from 8.7 at M0 to 6.1 at M12 (-2.6, p < 0.001), and the number of consultations decreased from 6.1 at M0 to 5.2 at M12 (-0.9, p < 0.001). The intraocular inflammation rate was 1.6% (n = 14).
conclusionSwitching to faricimab allowed significantly extending the recurrence-free injection interval, decreasing the proportion of exudative patients and reducing the therapeutic burden in nAMD patients. Further studies are needed to determine the most appropriate switching modalities and which patients actually require an induction phase.
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.