Subconjunctival Bevacizumab Injection for Corneal Neovascularization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report on the clinical use of subconjunctival bevacizumab in patients with corneal neovascularization. METHODS: The charts of 10 consecutive patients with corneal neovascularization who received subconjunctival injections of bevacizumab (2.5 mg/0.1 mL) were reviewed. Digital photographs of the cornea were graded by 2 masked observers for density, extent, and centricity of corneal vascularization. Image analysis was used to determine the area of cornea covered by neovascularization as a percentage of the total corneal area. RESULTS: No significant ocular or systemic adverse events were observed during 3.5 +/- 1.1 months of follow-up. Seven patients showed partial regression of vessels. The extent decreased from 6.0 +/- 1.2 (SD) clock hours before the injection to 4.6 +/- 1.0 clock hours after bevacizumab injection (P = 0.008). Density decreased from 2.7 +/- 0.2 to 1.9 +/- 0.3, respectively. (P = 0.007). No change was noticed in the centricity of corneal vessels. Corneal neovascularization covered, on average, 14.8% +/- 2.5% (SD) of the corneal surface before the injections, compared with 10.5% +/- 2.8% (P = 0.36, t test) after bevacizumab injection. Therefore, bevacizumab decreased corneal neovascularization by 29%. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term results suggest that subconjunctival bevacizumab is well tolerated and associated with a partial regression of corneal neovascularization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it