ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2026
Real-World Persistence with Anti-VEGF Therapy in Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe purpose of this study was to quantify real-world non-persistence and non-adherence to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy among Chinese patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and to identify factors associated with treatment continuity in routine practice.
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted at a one-stop intravitreal injection (IVI) clinic (Dalian University Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital) and included consecutive patients initiating anti-VEGF therapy between 1 August 2022 and 1 August 2024 (N = 179). Non-persistence was defined as no visit or treatment for ≥ 6 months. Among patients remaining on therapy, non-adherence was defined as ≥ 2 visit or injection gaps > 16 weeks within any 12-month window. Cox proportional-hazards models were used for time-to-event analyses.
resultsThe median age was 78 years (IQR 71-86 years), and 26% of patients received bilateral injections. Over a median follow-up of 383 days, 117 of 179 patients (65.4%) became non-persistent. Completion of the initial loading phase was associated with a lower hazard of discontinuation (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.38-0.98), with similar estimates in prespecified sensitivity analyses. Among patients remaining on therapy (n = 62), 32.3% met criteria for non-adherence. In parsimonious models, increasing age was associated with a higher likelihood of extended treatment gaps, although this secondary finding was exploratory.
conclusionIn this pro re nata (PRN)-managed cohort, loss to follow-up was frequent, and one-third of persistent patients experienced clinically meaningful schedule deviations. Early treatment regularity-particularly completion of the loading phase-was the most actionable factor associated with improved persistence. Associations between older age and non-adherence highlight the need to address age-related barriers to sustained care, but should be interpreted cautiously given the exploratory nature of this secondary endpoint. Strategies focusing on early phase support and burden reduction may help narrow the real-world efficacy gap in nAMD management.
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.