MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126975289 · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2021.01.027

Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Aflibercept Treat-and-Extend for Macular Edema in Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: the CENTERA Study

2021· article· en· W3126975289 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐François Korobelnik, Michael Larsen, Nicole Eter, Clare Bailey, Sebastián Wolf, Thomas Schmelter, Helmut Allmeier, Varun Chaudhary

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
FundersAllerganHeidelberg EngineeringBayer HealthCareEuropean CommissionNovartisRochePharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America FoundationBayerEuropean Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations
KeywordsAfliberceptMedicineCentral retinal vein occlusionMacular edemaVisual acuityOphthalmologyConfidence intervalRetinalRegimenSurgeryBevacizumabInternal medicineChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

•From baseline to week 76, 65.6% of patients gained ≥15 letters.•In the treat-and-extend phase, 45.0% of patients achieved a mean treatment interval of ≥8 weeks.•A last actual treatment interval of ≥8 weeks was achieved by 63.1% of patients.•Mean BCVA was 51.9 letters at baseline and 72.3 letters at week 76 (+20.3 letters).•Mean central retinal thickness decreased from 759.9 µm at baseline to 265.4 µm at week 76 (−496.1 µm). PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) treat-and-extend dosing in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO).DesignCENTERA (Evaluation of a Treat and Extend Regimen of Intravitreal Aflibercept for Macular Edema Secondary to CRVO; NCT02800642) was an open-label, Phase 4 clinical study.MethodsPatients received 2 mg of IVT-AFL at baseline and every 4 weeks thereafter, until disease stability criteria were met (or until week 20), at which point treatment intervals were adjusted in 2-week increments based on functional and anatomic outcomes.ResultsFrom baseline to week 76, 105 patients (65.6%) (P <.0001 [test against threshold of 40%]) gained ≥15 letters; and, during the treat-and-extend phase, 72 patients (45.0%) (P = 0.8822 [test against threshold of 50%]) achieved a mean treatment interval of ≥8 weeks. A last and next planned treatment interval of ≥8 weeks was achieved by 101 patients (63.1%) and by 108 patients (67.5%), respectively. Mean ± SD best-corrected visual acuity increased from 51.9 ± 16.8 letters at baseline to 72.3 ± 18.5 letters at week 76 (mean change: +20.3 ± 19.5 letters), and central retinal thickness decreased from 759.9 ± 246.0 µm at baseline to 265.4 ± 57.9 µm at week 76 (mean change: −496.1 ± 252.4 µm). The safety profile of IVT-AFL was consistent with that of previous studies.ConclusionsClinically meaningful improvements in functional and anatomic outcomes were achieved with IVT-AFL treat-and-extend dosing. Most patients achieved a last actual and last intended treatment interval of ≥8 weeks; therefore, treatment intervals may have been extended even further with a longer study duration. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) treat-and-extend dosing in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). CENTERA (Evaluation of a Treat and Extend Regimen of Intravitreal Aflibercept for Macular Edema Secondary to CRVO; NCT02800642) was an open-label, Phase 4 clinical study. Patients received 2 mg of IVT-AFL at baseline and every 4 weeks thereafter, until disease stability criteria were met (or until week 20), at which point treatment intervals were adjusted in 2-week increments based on functional and anatomic outcomes. From baseline to week 76, 105 patients (65.6%) (P <.0001 [test against threshold of 40%]) gained ≥15 letters; and, during the treat-and-extend phase, 72 patients (45.0%) (P = 0.8822 [test against threshold of 50%]) achieved a mean treatment interval of ≥8 weeks. A last and next planned treatment interval of ≥8 weeks was achieved by 101 patients (63.1%) and by 108 patients (67.5%), respectively. Mean ± SD best-corrected visual acuity increased from 51.9 ± 16.8 letters at baseline to 72.3 ± 18.5 letters at week 76 (mean change: +20.3 ± 19.5 letters), and central retinal thickness decreased from 759.9 ± 246.0 µm at baseline to 265.4 ± 57.9 µm at week 76 (mean change: −496.1 ± 252.4 µm). The safety profile of IVT-AFL was consistent with that of previous studies. Clinically meaningful improvements in functional and anatomic outcomes were achieved with IVT-AFL treat-and-extend dosing. Most patients achieved a last actual and last intended treatment interval of ≥8 weeks; therefore, treatment intervals may have been extended even further with a longer study duration.

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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations37
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of OphthalmologySame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207