Intravitreal Aflibercept vs Laser Therapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Prospective long-term data after retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections vs laser therapy are scarce. The FIREFLEYE (Aflibercept for ROP IVT Injection vs Laser Therapy) next trial is prospectively evaluating the long-term efficacy and safety outcomes following ROP treatment with intravitreal aflibercept vs laser therapy. Objective: To evaluate 2-year ophthalmic and safety outcomes after 0.4-mg aflibercept injection or laser therapy in the 24-week randomized (2:1) FIREFLEYE trial (FIREFLEYE outcomes previously reported). Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective nonrandomized controlled trial performed in 24 countries in Asia, Europe, and South America (2020-2025) follows up participants treated in the FIREFLEYE randomized clinical trial (2019-2021) through 5 years of age. Participants included children born very or extremely preterm (gestational age ≤32 weeks) or with very or extremely low birth weight (≤1500 g) who were previously treated with a 0.4-mg injection of aflibercept compared with laser therapy for severe acute-phase ROP. Data for the present interim analysis were acquired from March 18, 2020, to July 25, 2022. Interventions: Complications of ROP treated at investigator discretion (no study treatment). Main Outcomes and Measures: Efficacy end points included ROP status, unfavorable structural outcomes, ROP recurrence, treatment for ROP complications, completion of vascularization, and visual function. Safety end points included adverse events and growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Results: Overall, 100 children were enrolled (median gestational age, 26 [range, 23-31] weeks; 53 boys and 47 girls). Of these, 21 were Asian, 2 were Black, 75 were White, and 2 were of more than 1 race. At 2 years of age, 61 of 63 children (96.8%) in the aflibercept group vs 30 of 32 (93.8%) in the laser group had no ROP. Through 2 years of age, 62 of 66 (93.9%) in the aflibercept group and 32 of 34 (94.1%) in the laser group had no unfavorable structural outcomes. No new retinal detachment occurred during the study. Four children in the aflibercept group (6.1%) were treated for ROP complications before 1 year of age (2 had preexisting end-stage disease and total retinal detachment; 1 had reactivated plus disease; and 1 had recurrent retinal neovascularization not further specified). Most children were able to fix and follow a 5-cm toy (aflibercept group, 118 of 122 eyes [96.7%] among 63 children; laser group, 62 of 63 eyes [98.4%] among 33 children). High myopia was present in 9 of 115 eyes (7.8%) among 5 children in the aflibercept group and 13 of 60 eyes (21.7%) among 9 children in the laser group. No relevant differences in growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: In this nonrandomized follow-up of a randomized clinical trial comparing treatment of severe acute-phase ROP with 0.4-mg injection of aflibercept and laser, disease control was stable and visual function was appropriate in children through 2 years of age. No adverse effects on safety, including growth and neurodevelopment, were identified. These findings provide clinically relevant long-term information on intravitreal aflibercept injection therapy for ROP. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04015180.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».