MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391930651 · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.02.014

TENAYA and LUCERNE

2024· article· en· W4391930651 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsRoche (Canada)
FundersF. Hoffmann-La RocheRoche
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PurposeTo evaluate 2-year efficacy, durability, and safety of the bispecific antibody faricimab, which inhibits both angiopoietin-2 and VEGF-A.DesignTENAYA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823287) and LUCERNE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823300) were identically designed, randomized, double-masked, active comparator-controlled phase 3 noninferiority trials.ParticipantsTreatment-naive patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) 50 years of age or older.MethodsPatients were randomized (1:1) to intravitreal faricimab 6.0 mg up to every 16 weeks (Q16W) or aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W). Faricimab fixed dosing based on protocol-defined disease activity at weeks 20 and 24 up to week 60, followed up to week 108 by a treat-and-extend personalized treatment interval regimen.Main Outcome MeasuresEfficacy analyses included change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline at 2 years (averaged over weeks 104, 108, and 112) and proportion of patients receiving Q16W, every 12 weeks (Q12W), and Q8W dosing at week 112 in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included ocular adverse events (AEs) in the study eye through study end at week 112.ResultsOf 1326 patients treated across TENAYA/LUCERNE, 1113 (83.9%) completed treatment (n = 555 faricimab; n = 558 aflibercept). The BCVA change from baseline at 2 years was comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (adjusted mean change, +3.7 letters [95% confidence interval (CI), +2.1 to +5.4] and +3.3 letters [95% CI, +1.7 to +4.9], respectively; mean difference, +0.4 letters [95% CI, −1.9 to +2.8]) and LUCERNE (adjusted mean change, +5.0 letters [95% CI, +3.4 to +6.6] and +5.2 letters [95% CI, +3.6 to +6.8], respectively; mean difference, −0.2 letters [95% CI, −2.4 to +2.1]). At week 112 in TENAYA and LUCERNE, 59.0% and 66.9%, respectively, achieved Q16W faricimab dosing, increasing from year 1, and 74.1% and 81.2%, achieved Q12W or longer dosing. Ocular AEs in the study eye were comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (55.0% and 56.5% of patients, respectively) and LUCERNE (52.9% and 47.5% of patients, respectively) through week 112.ConclusionsTreat-and-extend faricimab treatment based on nAMD disease activity maintained vision gains through year 2, with most patients achieving extended dosing intervals.Financial Disclosure(s)Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article. To evaluate 2-year efficacy, durability, and safety of the bispecific antibody faricimab, which inhibits both angiopoietin-2 and VEGF-A. TENAYA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823287) and LUCERNE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03823300) were identically designed, randomized, double-masked, active comparator-controlled phase 3 noninferiority trials. Treatment-naive patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) 50 years of age or older. Patients were randomized (1:1) to intravitreal faricimab 6.0 mg up to every 16 weeks (Q16W) or aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W). Faricimab fixed dosing based on protocol-defined disease activity at weeks 20 and 24 up to week 60, followed up to week 108 by a treat-and-extend personalized treatment interval regimen. Efficacy analyses included change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline at 2 years (averaged over weeks 104, 108, and 112) and proportion of patients receiving Q16W, every 12 weeks (Q12W), and Q8W dosing at week 112 in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included ocular adverse events (AEs) in the study eye through study end at week 112. Of 1326 patients treated across TENAYA/LUCERNE, 1113 (83.9%) completed treatment (n = 555 faricimab; n = 558 aflibercept). The BCVA change from baseline at 2 years was comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (adjusted mean change, +3.7 letters [95% confidence interval (CI), +2.1 to +5.4] and +3.3 letters [95% CI, +1.7 to +4.9], respectively; mean difference, +0.4 letters [95% CI, −1.9 to +2.8]) and LUCERNE (adjusted mean change, +5.0 letters [95% CI, +3.4 to +6.6] and +5.2 letters [95% CI, +3.6 to +6.8], respectively; mean difference, −0.2 letters [95% CI, −2.4 to +2.1]). At week 112 in TENAYA and LUCERNE, 59.0% and 66.9%, respectively, achieved Q16W faricimab dosing, increasing from year 1, and 74.1% and 81.2%, achieved Q12W or longer dosing. Ocular AEs in the study eye were comparable between faricimab and aflibercept groups in TENAYA (55.0% and 56.5% of patients, respectively) and LUCERNE (52.9% and 47.5% of patients, respectively) through week 112. Treat-and-extend faricimab treatment based on nAMD disease activity maintained vision gains through year 2, with most patients achieving extended dosing intervals.

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 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 score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.319 · 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