ReviewInternational ophthalmology2026
Efficacy and safety of netarsudil compared with prostaglandin-based therapies: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Review in International ophthalmology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of netarsudil (NET), alone or in fixed-dose combinations (FDC), in comparison with prostaglandin analogues (PGAs: bimatoprost [BIM], latanoprost [LAT], travoprost [TRA], and tafluprost [TAF]) for the treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension. Literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science (inception to July 2025). Identified 26 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (5,390 patients). The primary outcome was the mean difference in intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction at 3 months; the secondary outcome was the incidence of conjunctival hyperemia. Pair-wise meta-analysis used Cochrane Review Manager 5.4, Bayesian network meta-analysis via Aggregate Data Drug Information System (ADDIS) with Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulations. Inconsistency assessed via node-splitting, convergence evaluated via Brooks-Gelman-Rubin method. Network meta-analysis showed 3-month IOP -lowering hierarchy: FDC > BIM > TRA > LAT > TAF > NET. Conjunctival hyperemia incidence (highest to lowest): TAF > FDC > NET > BIM > TRA > LAT. Node-splitting confirmed consistency (P ≥ 0.05), convergence was satisfactory. Funnel plots indicated no publication bias for IOP outcomes but potential bias for conjunctival hyperemia. Although NET ranked lower in IOP-lowering efficacy compared to most PGAs and FDC, it demonstrated a favorable safety profile, particularly with a relatively lower incidence of conjunctival hyperemia than TAF and FDC. These findings suggest that NET may serve as a valuable alternative in patients who are intolerant to PGAs or require adjunctive therapy, warranting further investigation in targeted populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42133103What 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.