MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036189901 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0234739

Real-world outcomes with ranibizumab in branch retinal vein occlusion: The prospective, global, LUMINOUS study

2020· article· en· W3036189901 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Pearce, Andreas Clemens, Michael H. Brent, Lin Lü, Roberto Gallego‐Pinazo, Angelo Maria Minnella, Catherine Creuzot‐Garcher, Georg Spital, Taiji Sakamoto, Cornelia Dunger‐Baldauf, Ian L. McAllister

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNovartis Pharma
KeywordsRanibizumabBranch retinal vein occlusionMedicineOphthalmologyRetinal VeinRetinalOptometryInternal medicineBevacizumabMacular edema

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and treatment patterns of ranibizumab 0.5 mg in treatment-naïve patients with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) enrolled in the LUMINOUS™ study. STUDY DESIGN: A 5-year, global, prospective, multicenter, observational, open-label study conducted in a clinical practice (real-world) setting at outpatient ophthalmology clinics that recruited 30,138 consenting adult patients from all approved indications for ranibizumab across 42 countries. Patients with BRVO were treated according to the local ranibizumab label of the participating countries. Mean change in visual acuity (VA) in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters from baseline to Year 1, treatment exposure during Year 1, and adverse events (AEs) over 5 years were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 1366 recruited BRVO patients, 405 were treatment-naïve at baseline with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of 67.9 (12.5) years, 57.5% were female, and 71.8% were White. At Year 1 (n = 189), the mean (SD) VA gain was 11.9 (17.66) letters from a baseline of 49.2 (±20.32) letters with a mean (SD) of 5.0 (2.34) injections. VA gains were higher in patients (n = 83) who received 6-9 injections (13.6 [20.16] letters) than in those who received 2-5 injections (n = 92, 11.7 [15.43] letters), or 1 injection (n = 14, 3.6 [13.72] letters). Patients with baseline VA <23 letters had numerically highest VA gains (n = 20, 31.1 [24.48] letters). Over 5 years, the rate of ocular/non-ocular AEs was 7.4%/9.1% and serious AEs was 0.3%/4.4% in treatment-naïve BRVO patients (n = 405). CONCLUSIONS: One year results from the LUMINOUS real-world study showed a clinically meaningful VA improvement with ranibizumab in treatment-naïve patients with BRVO; numerically higher VA gains were achieved in patients who received more injections and those with poor baseline VA. No new safety signals were observed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207