Efficacy, safety, and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus alternative anti-VEGF regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis
This study aimed to compare efficacy and treatment burden of treat-and-extend (T&E) anti-VEGF against fixed and pro re nata (PRN) regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched. Randomized-controlled trials and observational studies c...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Eye (London) 2023-01, Vol.37 (1), p.6-16 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 16 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 6 |
| container_title | Eye (London) |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Rosenberg, Daniel Deonarain, Deven M. Gould, Jonah Sothivannan, Amirthan Phillips, Mark R. Sarohia, Gurkaran S. Sivaprasad, Sobha Wykoff, Charles C. Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy Sarraf, David Bakri, Sophie J. Chaudhary, Varun |
| description | This study aimed to compare efficacy and treatment burden of treat-and-extend (T&E) anti-VEGF against fixed and pro re nata (PRN) regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched. Randomized-controlled trials and observational studies comparing T&E to PRN or fixed dosing for treatment-naïve AMD patients were included. Mean difference (MD) for visual acuity (VA) and number of injections are presented. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. Methodology was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). VA improvement was similar with T&E and fixed dosing at one (MD −0.08 letters,
p
= 0.95) and two years (MD 0.58 letters,
p
= 0.62). In contrast, VA improvements were significantly greater for T&E when compared against a PRN regimen at one (MD 3.95 letters,
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1038/s41433-022-02020-7 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9829919</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2762558180</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-5680e3a6d5200ebc61081f6dbb778b610e7b5bb8a36646f9a02e6985a1e2be373</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1vFSEUhonR2Gv1D7gwJG5ciPIxMIwLk6beVpMaN2rcEZh75kozHy0wV--_8Cd72qn1Y2EIIfA-54XDS8hjwV8IruzLXIlKKcalxImD1XfISlS1YbrS1V2y4o3mTEr55YA8yPmccxRrfp8cKK0ao-tqRX6suy62vt0_p9l3UHD144aWBL4MMBYa5rSBkU7dcsZQZfC9AEI7SHnO1PcF0uhL3AHWlsg-r09PaIJtRINMuynR8ej9m1fU07zPBQZEW9R3Eb5dXzZA8ejr-32O-SG51_k-w6Ob9ZB8Oll_PH7Lzj6cvjs-OmNtpXhh2lgOypuNlpxDaI3gVnRmE0Jd24A7qIMOwXplTGW6xnMJprHaC5ABVK0OyevF92IOA2xa7DX53l2kOPi0d5OP7m9ljF_ddtq5xsqmEQ0aPLsxSNPlDLm4IeYW-t6PMM3ZSVNZ2ygtFKJP_0HPpxm_rEeqNlJrKyxHSi5Um6acE3S3jxHcXQXulsAdBu6uA3dXbTz5s43bkl8JI6AWIKM0biH9vvs_tj8BG9u4ZA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2762558180</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Efficacy, safety, and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus alternative anti-VEGF regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Rosenberg, Daniel ; Deonarain, Deven M. ; Gould, Jonah ; Sothivannan, Amirthan ; Phillips, Mark R. ; Sarohia, Gurkaran S. ; Sivaprasad, Sobha ; Wykoff, Charles C. ; Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy ; Sarraf, David ; Bakri, Sophie J. ; Chaudhary, Varun</creator><creatorcontrib>Rosenberg, Daniel ; Deonarain, Deven M. ; Gould, Jonah ; Sothivannan, Amirthan ; Phillips, Mark R. ; Sarohia, Gurkaran S. ; Sivaprasad, Sobha ; Wykoff, Charles C. ; Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy ; Sarraf, David ; Bakri, Sophie J. ; Chaudhary, Varun</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[This study aimed to compare efficacy and treatment burden of treat-and-extend (T&E) anti-VEGF against fixed and pro re nata (PRN) regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched. Randomized-controlled trials and observational studies comparing T&E to PRN or fixed dosing for treatment-naïve AMD patients were included. Mean difference (MD) for visual acuity (VA) and number of injections are presented. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. Methodology was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). VA improvement was similar with T&E and fixed dosing at one (MD −0.08 letters,
p
= 0.95) and two years (MD 0.58 letters,
p
= 0.62). In contrast, VA improvements were significantly greater for T&E when compared against a PRN regimen at one (MD 3.95 letters,
p
< 0.0001) and two years (MD 4.08 letters,
p
< 0.001). Significantly fewer ranibizumab injections were administered in the T&E arm at one (MD –2.42 injections,
p
< 0.0001) and two years (MD –6.06 injections,
p
< 0.00001) relative to fixed dosing. Fewer aflibercept injections were likewise administered to patients on a T&E regimen versus fixed dosing at one year (MD –0.78 injections,
p
< 0.0001). Low-certainty evidence from the present synthesis implies that T&E preserves VA similar to fixed schedules with significantly fewer injections at one and two years. Also, patients with T&E dosing achieved better VA outcomes than those on PRN regimen but T&E dosing was associated with more injections.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-222X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1476-5454</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5454</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/s41433-022-02020-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35396574</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group UK</publisher><subject>692/699/3161/1626 ; 692/699/3161/3175 ; Acuity ; Age ; Angiogenesis Inhibitors - therapeutic use ; Citations ; Clinical Protocols ; Clinical trials ; Consultants ; Dosage ; Drug dosages ; Humans ; Intravitreal Injections ; Laboratory Medicine ; Macular degeneration ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meta-analysis ; Observational studies ; Ophthalmology ; Patients ; Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Ranibizumab ; Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor ; Recombinant Fusion Proteins - therapeutic use ; Remission (Medicine) ; Review ; Review Article ; Surgery ; Surgical Oncology ; Systematic review ; Treatment Outcome ; Vascular endothelial growth factor ; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A ; Visual acuity ; Wet Macular Degeneration - drug therapy</subject><ispartof>Eye (London), 2023-01, Vol.37 (1), p.6-16</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists 2022</rights><rights>2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists.</rights><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists 2022.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-5680e3a6d5200ebc61081f6dbb778b610e7b5bb8a36646f9a02e6985a1e2be373</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-5680e3a6d5200ebc61081f6dbb778b610e7b5bb8a36646f9a02e6985a1e2be373</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9988-4146 ; 0000-0003-1994-4039 ; 0000-0003-3358-3516 ; 0000-0003-2102-9518</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9829919/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9829919/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35396574$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rosenberg, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deonarain, Deven M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gould, Jonah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sothivannan, Amirthan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Mark R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarohia, Gurkaran S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sivaprasad, Sobha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wykoff, Charles C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarraf, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bakri, Sophie J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chaudhary, Varun</creatorcontrib><title>Efficacy, safety, and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus alternative anti-VEGF regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Eye (London)</title><addtitle>Eye</addtitle><addtitle>Eye (Lond)</addtitle><description><![CDATA[This study aimed to compare efficacy and treatment burden of treat-and-extend (T&E) anti-VEGF against fixed and pro re nata (PRN) regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched. Randomized-controlled trials and observational studies comparing T&E to PRN or fixed dosing for treatment-naïve AMD patients were included. Mean difference (MD) for visual acuity (VA) and number of injections are presented. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. Methodology was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). VA improvement was similar with T&E and fixed dosing at one (MD −0.08 letters,
p
= 0.95) and two years (MD 0.58 letters,
p
= 0.62). In contrast, VA improvements were significantly greater for T&E when compared against a PRN regimen at one (MD 3.95 letters,
p
< 0.0001) and two years (MD 4.08 letters,
p
< 0.001). Significantly fewer ranibizumab injections were administered in the T&E arm at one (MD –2.42 injections,
p
< 0.0001) and two years (MD –6.06 injections,
p
< 0.00001) relative to fixed dosing. Fewer aflibercept injections were likewise administered to patients on a T&E regimen versus fixed dosing at one year (MD –0.78 injections,
p
< 0.0001). Low-certainty evidence from the present synthesis implies that T&E preserves VA similar to fixed schedules with significantly fewer injections at one and two years. Also, patients with T&E dosing achieved better VA outcomes than those on PRN regimen but T&E dosing was associated with more injections.]]></description><subject>692/699/3161/1626</subject><subject>692/699/3161/3175</subject><subject>Acuity</subject><subject>Age</subject><subject>Angiogenesis Inhibitors - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Citations</subject><subject>Clinical Protocols</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Consultants</subject><subject>Dosage</subject><subject>Drug dosages</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intravitreal Injections</subject><subject>Laboratory Medicine</subject><subject>Macular degeneration</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Observational studies</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Ranibizumab</subject><subject>Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor</subject><subject>Recombinant Fusion Proteins - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Remission (Medicine)</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Review Article</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Vascular endothelial growth factor</subject><subject>Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A</subject><subject>Visual acuity</subject><subject>Wet Macular Degeneration - drug therapy</subject><issn>0950-222X</issn><issn>1476-5454</issn><issn>1476-5454</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1vFSEUhonR2Gv1D7gwJG5ciPIxMIwLk6beVpMaN2rcEZh75kozHy0wV--_8Cd72qn1Y2EIIfA-54XDS8hjwV8IruzLXIlKKcalxImD1XfISlS1YbrS1V2y4o3mTEr55YA8yPmccxRrfp8cKK0ao-tqRX6suy62vt0_p9l3UHD144aWBL4MMBYa5rSBkU7dcsZQZfC9AEI7SHnO1PcF0uhL3AHWlsg-r09PaIJtRINMuynR8ej9m1fU07zPBQZEW9R3Eb5dXzZA8ejr-32O-SG51_k-w6Ob9ZB8Oll_PH7Lzj6cvjs-OmNtpXhh2lgOypuNlpxDaI3gVnRmE0Jd24A7qIMOwXplTGW6xnMJprHaC5ABVK0OyevF92IOA2xa7DX53l2kOPi0d5OP7m9ljF_ddtq5xsqmEQ0aPLsxSNPlDLm4IeYW-t6PMM3ZSVNZ2ygtFKJP_0HPpxm_rEeqNlJrKyxHSi5Um6acE3S3jxHcXQXulsAdBu6uA3dXbTz5s43bkl8JI6AWIKM0biH9vvs_tj8BG9u4ZA</recordid><startdate>20230101</startdate><enddate>20230101</enddate><creator>Rosenberg, Daniel</creator><creator>Deonarain, Deven M.</creator><creator>Gould, Jonah</creator><creator>Sothivannan, Amirthan</creator><creator>Phillips, Mark R.</creator><creator>Sarohia, Gurkaran S.</creator><creator>Sivaprasad, Sobha</creator><creator>Wykoff, Charles C.</creator><creator>Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy</creator><creator>Sarraf, David</creator><creator>Bakri, Sophie J.</creator><creator>Chaudhary, Varun</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group UK</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9988-4146</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1994-4039</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3358-3516</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2102-9518</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230101</creationdate><title>Efficacy, safety, and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus alternative anti-VEGF regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Rosenberg, Daniel ; Deonarain, Deven M. ; Gould, Jonah ; Sothivannan, Amirthan ; Phillips, Mark R. ; Sarohia, Gurkaran S. ; Sivaprasad, Sobha ; Wykoff, Charles C. ; Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy ; Sarraf, David ; Bakri, Sophie J. ; Chaudhary, Varun</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-5680e3a6d5200ebc61081f6dbb778b610e7b5bb8a36646f9a02e6985a1e2be373</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>692/699/3161/1626</topic><topic>692/699/3161/3175</topic><topic>Acuity</topic><topic>Age</topic><topic>Angiogenesis Inhibitors - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Citations</topic><topic>Clinical Protocols</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Consultants</topic><topic>Dosage</topic><topic>Drug dosages</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intravitreal Injections</topic><topic>Laboratory Medicine</topic><topic>Macular degeneration</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Observational studies</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Ranibizumab</topic><topic>Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor</topic><topic>Recombinant Fusion Proteins - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Remission (Medicine)</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Review Article</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Vascular endothelial growth factor</topic><topic>Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A</topic><topic>Visual acuity</topic><topic>Wet Macular Degeneration - drug therapy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rosenberg, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deonarain, Deven M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gould, Jonah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sothivannan, Amirthan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Mark R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarohia, Gurkaran S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sivaprasad, Sobha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wykoff, Charles C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarraf, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bakri, Sophie J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chaudhary, Varun</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Eye (London)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rosenberg, Daniel</au><au>Deonarain, Deven M.</au><au>Gould, Jonah</au><au>Sothivannan, Amirthan</au><au>Phillips, Mark R.</au><au>Sarohia, Gurkaran S.</au><au>Sivaprasad, Sobha</au><au>Wykoff, Charles C.</au><au>Cheung, Chui Ming Gemmy</au><au>Sarraf, David</au><au>Bakri, Sophie J.</au><au>Chaudhary, Varun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Efficacy, safety, and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus alternative anti-VEGF regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Eye (London)</jtitle><stitle>Eye</stitle><addtitle>Eye (Lond)</addtitle><date>2023-01-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>6</spage><epage>16</epage><pages>6-16</pages><issn>0950-222X</issn><issn>1476-5454</issn><eissn>1476-5454</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[This study aimed to compare efficacy and treatment burden of treat-and-extend (T&E) anti-VEGF against fixed and pro re nata (PRN) regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched. Randomized-controlled trials and observational studies comparing T&E to PRN or fixed dosing for treatment-naïve AMD patients were included. Mean difference (MD) for visual acuity (VA) and number of injections are presented. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. Methodology was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). VA improvement was similar with T&E and fixed dosing at one (MD −0.08 letters,
p
= 0.95) and two years (MD 0.58 letters,
p
= 0.62). In contrast, VA improvements were significantly greater for T&E when compared against a PRN regimen at one (MD 3.95 letters,
p
< 0.0001) and two years (MD 4.08 letters,
p
< 0.001). Significantly fewer ranibizumab injections were administered in the T&E arm at one (MD –2.42 injections,
p
< 0.0001) and two years (MD –6.06 injections,
p
< 0.00001) relative to fixed dosing. Fewer aflibercept injections were likewise administered to patients on a T&E regimen versus fixed dosing at one year (MD –0.78 injections,
p
< 0.0001). Low-certainty evidence from the present synthesis implies that T&E preserves VA similar to fixed schedules with significantly fewer injections at one and two years. Also, patients with T&E dosing achieved better VA outcomes than those on PRN regimen but T&E dosing was associated with more injections.]]></abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group UK</pub><pmid>35396574</pmid><doi>10.1038/s41433-022-02020-7</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9988-4146</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1994-4039</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3358-3516</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2102-9518</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0950-222X |
| ispartof | Eye (London), 2023-01, Vol.37 (1), p.6-16 |
| issn | 0950-222X 1476-5454 1476-5454 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9829919 |
| source | MEDLINE; PubMed Central; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | 692/699/3161/1626 692/699/3161/3175 Acuity Age Angiogenesis Inhibitors - therapeutic use Citations Clinical Protocols Clinical trials Consultants Dosage Drug dosages Humans Intravitreal Injections Laboratory Medicine Macular degeneration Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meta-analysis Observational studies Ophthalmology Patients Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Ranibizumab Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Recombinant Fusion Proteins - therapeutic use Remission (Medicine) Review Review Article Surgery Surgical Oncology Systematic review Treatment Outcome Vascular endothelial growth factor Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A Visual acuity Wet Macular Degeneration - drug therapy |
| title | Efficacy, safety, and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus alternative anti-VEGF regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T18%3A12%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficacy,%20safety,%20and%20treatment%20burden%20of%20treat-and-extend%20versus%20alternative%20anti-VEGF%20regimens%20for%20nAMD:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Eye%20(London)&rft.au=Rosenberg,%20Daniel&rft.date=2023-01-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=6&rft.epage=16&rft.pages=6-16&rft.issn=0950-222X&rft.eissn=1476-5454&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/s41433-022-02020-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2762558180%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2762558180&rft_id=info:pmid/35396574&rfr_iscdi=true |