MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407821154 · doi:10.1016/j.xops.2025.100744

Real-World Evidence for Faricimab in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Diabetic Macular Edema: A Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4407821154 on OpenAlexaff
Varun Chaudhary, Robyn H. Guymer, Audrey Artignan, Amanda E. Downey, Rishi P. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology Science · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsRoche (Canada)McMaster University
FundersJanssen BiotechGenentechF. Hoffmann-La RocheRoche
KeywordsMacular degenerationDiabetic macular edemaMedicineOphthalmologyDiabetic retinopathyMacular edemaDiabetes mellitusOptometryVisual acuity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Since faricimab (Vabysmo) was approved for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME), a growing body of real-world data has been reported, forming an important source of evidence for faricimab in a heterogeneous population. Scoping reviews are an effective approach to comprehensively assess the state of evidence on areas yet to be well characterized, allowing for the inclusion of a wide range of study designs and methodologies. This scoping review aimed to assess the current breadth and nature of real-world evidence (RWE) for faricimab and describe its safety and effectiveness in routine clinical practice. Design: Scoping review of published articles and grey literature. Participants: Eligible records included primary research reporting on any real-world data from ≥5 participants treated with faricimab in its licensed indications, published in English since 2022. This review did not involve novel data collection in human participants. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched on February 16, 2024, and the results were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers. Manual searches of proceedings from major relevant conferences, ClinicalTrials.gov, and bibliographies of relevant systematic literature reviews were also conducted. Findings were summarized descriptively. Main Outcome Measures: Data of interest included study design, population characteristics, treatment history, visual function and anatomic outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, safety, and economic outcomes. Results: A total of 63 studies reporting RWE for faricimab in patients with nAMD or DME (n = 6-12 119 eyes) were identified, including a majority of studies in previously treated patients. Studies spanned 10 countries, with a predominance of retrospective observational studies. Results across the majority of studies suggested that faricimab was associated with improved visual acuity, reduced central choroidal/subfield macular thickness, and reduced/resolved retinal fluid and pigment epithelial detachment in both conditions, even over longer study periods (≥6 months). Adverse events reported were similar to the findings within the registration trials. Conclusions: Outcomes of faricimab in routine practice align with reports from clinical trials, supporting the effectiveness and safety of faricimab in heterogeneous populations. Further high-quality studies using prospective, multicenter designs are required to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the long-term outcomes associated with faricimab. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.132
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.132
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.008
Bibliometrics0.0240.019
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0050.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmology ScienceSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207