MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801065673 · doi:10.1111/aos.13751

Predictors of visual outcomes in patients with neovascular age‐related macular degeneration treated with anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy: <i>post hoc</i> analysis of the <scp>VIEW</scp> studies

2018· article· en· W2801065673 on OpenAlexaff
Paolo Lanzetta, Alan F. Cruess, Salomon Y. Cohen, Jason S. Slakter, Todd A. Katz, Olaf Sowade, Oliver Zeitz, Christiane Ahlers, Paul Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Ophthalmologica · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersRegeneron PharmaceuticalsBayer
KeywordsRanibizumabMedicineMacular degenerationAfliberceptOphthalmologyVisual acuityChoroidal neovascularizationDiabetic retinopathyPost-hoc analysisRetinalRetrospective cohort studyBevacizumabSurgeryDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineChemotherapyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Identify predictors for response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy in patients with neovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). METHODS: Retrospective, post hoc analysis of VIEW 1/2. Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 0.5 mg intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) injection every 4 weeks (0.5q4); 2 mg IVT-AFL every 4 weeks (2q4); 2 mg IVT-AFL every 8 weeks (2q8) after an initial three injections at weeks 0, 4 and 8 or 0.5 mg intravitreal ranibizumab every 4 weeks (0.5q4). RESULTS: 1815 patients [IVT-AFL 2q4 (n = 613); IVT-AFL 2q8 (n = 607); ranibizumab 0.5q4 (n = 595)] were included. Baseline demographics/characteristics were evenly balanced. Younger age (49-69 years), lower visual acuity (VA) [10.0-≤45.0 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters] and smaller choroidal neovascularization (CNV) size [0.0-≤3.1 disc areas (DA)] at baseline were associated with the most vision gain (≥15 letters) over 52 weeks (all nominal p < 0.0001).Younger age, higher baseline VA (>64.0-≤83.0 letters) and smaller CNV size were associated with a VA ≥20/40 at week 52. Predominantly classic CNV at baseline (nominal p = 0.0007), older age (≥90 years), lower baseline VA (10.0-≤ 45.0 ETDRS letters) and larger CNV size (>10.1-≤32.6 DA) were all associated with a VA ≤20/200 at week 52 (all nominal p < 0.0001). Along with treatment (nominal p < 0.0001), lower VA (p = 0.0166) and smaller central retinal thickness (both nominal p = 0.0190) were predictors for dry retina development. CONCLUSION: Younger age, lower VA and smaller CNV size at baseline were all associated with greater vision gains over 52 weeks while younger age, higher VA and smaller CNV size at treatment start were more likely to achieve best-corrected VA 20/40 or better after a year's treatment, suggesting the benefit of early anti-VEGF treatment.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa OphthalmologicaSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207