MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4391930651 · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.02.014

TENAYA and LUCERNE

2024· article· en· W4391930651 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueOphthalmology · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Établissements canadiensRoche (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesF. Hoffmann-La RocheRoche
Mots-clésMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

PurposeTo evaluate 2-year efficacy, durability, and safety of the bispecific antibody faricimab, which inhibits both angiopoietin-2 and VEGF-A.DesignTENAYA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823287) and LUCERNE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823300) were identically designed, randomized, double-masked, active comparator-controlled phase 3 noninferiority trials.ParticipantsTreatment-naive patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) 50 years of age or older.MethodsPatients were randomized (1:1) to intravitreal faricimab 6.0 mg up to every 16 weeks (Q16W) or aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W). Faricimab fixed dosing based on protocol-defined disease activity at weeks 20 and 24 up to week 60, followed up to week 108 by a treat-and-extend personalized treatment interval regimen.Main Outcome MeasuresEfficacy analyses included change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline at 2 years (averaged over weeks 104, 108, and 112) and proportion of patients receiving Q16W, every 12 weeks (Q12W), and Q8W dosing at week 112 in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included ocular adverse events (AEs) in the study eye through study end at week 112.ResultsOf 1326 patients treated across TENAYA/LUCERNE, 1113 (83.9%) completed treatment (n = 555 faricimab; n = 558 aflibercept). The BCVA change from baseline at 2 years was comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (adjusted mean change, +3.7 letters [95% confidence interval (CI), +2.1 to +5.4] and +3.3 letters [95% CI, +1.7 to +4.9], respectively; mean difference, +0.4 letters [95% CI, −1.9 to +2.8]) and LUCERNE (adjusted mean change, +5.0 letters [95% CI, +3.4 to +6.6] and +5.2 letters [95% CI, +3.6 to +6.8], respectively; mean difference, −0.2 letters [95% CI, −2.4 to +2.1]). At week 112 in TENAYA and LUCERNE, 59.0% and 66.9%, respectively, achieved Q16W faricimab dosing, increasing from year 1, and 74.1% and 81.2%, achieved Q12W or longer dosing. Ocular AEs in the study eye were comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (55.0% and 56.5% of patients, respectively) and LUCERNE (52.9% and 47.5% of patients, respectively) through week 112.ConclusionsTreat-and-extend faricimab treatment based on nAMD disease activity maintained vision gains through year 2, with most patients achieving extended dosing intervals.Financial Disclosure(s)Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article. To evaluate 2-year efficacy, durability, and safety of the bispecific antibody faricimab, which inhibits both angiopoietin-2 and VEGF-A. TENAYA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823287) and LUCERNE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823300) were identically designed, randomized, double-masked, active comparator-controlled phase 3 noninferiority trials. Treatment-naive patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) 50 years of age or older. Patients were randomized (1:1) to intravitreal faricimab 6.0 mg up to every 16 weeks (Q16W) or aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W). Faricimab fixed dosing based on protocol-defined disease activity at weeks 20 and 24 up to week 60, followed up to week 108 by a treat-and-extend personalized treatment interval regimen. Efficacy analyses included change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline at 2 years (averaged over weeks 104, 108, and 112) and proportion of patients receiving Q16W, every 12 weeks (Q12W), and Q8W dosing at week 112 in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included ocular adverse events (AEs) in the study eye through study end at week 112. Of 1326 patients treated across TENAYA/LUCERNE, 1113 (83.9%) completed treatment (n = 555 faricimab; n = 558 aflibercept). The BCVA change from baseline at 2 years was comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (adjusted mean change, +3.7 letters [95% confidence interval (CI), +2.1 to +5.4] and +3.3 letters [95% CI, +1.7 to +4.9], respectively; mean difference, +0.4 letters [95% CI, −1.9 to +2.8]) and LUCERNE (adjusted mean change, +5.0 letters [95% CI, +3.4 to +6.6] and +5.2 letters [95% CI, +3.6 to +6.8], respectively; mean difference, −0.2 letters [95% CI, −2.4 to +2.1]). At week 112 in TENAYA and LUCERNE, 59.0% and 66.9%, respectively, achieved Q16W faricimab dosing, increasing from year 1, and 74.1% and 81.2%, achieved Q12W or longer dosing. Ocular AEs in the study eye were comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (55.0% and 56.5% of patients, respectively) and LUCERNE (52.9% and 47.5% of patients, respectively) through week 112. Treat-and-extend faricimab treatment based on nAMD disease activity maintained vision gains through year 2, with most patients achieving extended dosing intervals.

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,112
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,772

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,336
Écart entre enseignants0,319 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle