The Efficacy, Safety, and Efficiency of the Off-Label Use of Bevacizumab in Patients Diagnosed With Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is recognized as the leading cause of vision loss in older people. Considering the phenomenon of aging societies worldwide, the prevalence of AMD is expected to increase gradually in the future. AMD can be divided into early, intermediate, and late stages, with the early and intermediate stages being mainly asymptomatic, and the late stage being classified as geographic atrophy, neovascular AMD, or both. Current pharmacological treatments for neovascular AMD include anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents, such as ranibizumab, pegaptanib, and aflibercept. Additionally, it has been reported that the off-label use of intravitreally administered bevacizumab is effective. It is also lower cost than other agents, which makes it an interesting pharmacological approach. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and efficiency of bevacizumab for the treatment of neovascular AMD. METHODS: This review will only consider randomized controlled clinical trials that compare the use of bevacizumab with another pharmacological agent or a placebo in patients aged 50 years and older who are diagnosed with vascular AMD. It will exclude studies that include participants diagnosed with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy or retinal angiomatous proliferation. To identify and select relevant articles, we will develop a highly sensitive search strategy and apply it in MEDLINE via the PubMed platform. Upon selection of the studies and analysis of the titles, abstracts, and full texts, the results will be presented according to the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The analysis and extraction of the data will be performed by 2 independent reviewers. Risk of bias will be evaluated with the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. Finally, the same reviewers will also perform a quality assessment of the included studies with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. RESULTS: The search strategy, after the application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, identified 15 randomized clinical trials, which are currently being analyzed. This project has no funding and it has been developed by a multidisciplinary research team of pharmacologists and orthoptists. The study was initiated in May 2021 and it is expected to conclude by the end of 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This review will provide a synthesis of current information and underlying evidence about the off-label use of bevacizumab in neovascular AMD. It will provide a clearer vision of a possible new pharmacological approach, as well as the most suitable treatment designs, for the treatment of neovascular AMD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021244931; https://tinyurl.com/p6m5ycpk. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/38658.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,030 | 0,039 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,022 | 0,031 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,024 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».