MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415424521 · doi:10.1016/j.oret.2025.10.013

Brolucizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema in Participants with/without prior Anti-VEGF Exposure

2025· article· en· W4415424521 on OpenAlexaff
Michael S. Ip, Varun Chaudhary, Fanyin He, Emmanuel Bouillaud, Yong‐Soo Kim, Franklin Igwe, Michael Singer

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology Retina · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNovartis PharmaNovartis
KeywordsDiabetic macular edemaMacular edemaDiabetes mellitusDiabetic retinopathyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate visual and anatomical outcomes of brolucizumab 6 mg versus aflibercept 2 mg in subgroups of participants with/without prior anti-VEGF treatment for diabetic macular edema in the KINGFISHER study. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of the KINGFISHER study. PARTICIPANTS: Of 517 participants randomized, 370 (71.6%) were treatment-naive (brolucizumab 6 mg [n = 251]; aflibercept 2 mg [n = 119]), and 147 (28.4%) prior-treated (brolucizumab 6 mg [n = 95]; aflibercept 2 mg [n = 52]) participants were included. METHODS: Visual and anatomical outcomes were analyzed, and descriptive statistics were provided for outcome measures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessment of the changes (least squares mean [standard error]) from baseline to week 52 in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield thickness, proportion of study eyes with absence of both subretinal fluid and intraretinal fluid at week 52, proportion of participants with ≥2-step improvement from baseline to week 52 in Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score, and incidence of intraocular inflammation (IOI)-related adverse events. RESULTS: The mean BCVA changes from baseline to week 52 in the prior-treated and treatment-naive subgroups were brolucizumab 6 mg (+11.0 [1.00] letters) versus aflibercept 2 mg (+8.6 [1.35] letters) and brolucizumab 6 mg (+12.6 [0.58] letters) versus aflibercept 2 mg (+12.2 [0.85] letters), respectively. Central subfield thickness reductions from baseline to week 52 in the prior-treated subgroup were brolucizumab 6 mg (-255.3 [11.27] μm) versus aflibercept 2 mg (-189.6 [15.32] μm) and in the treatment-naive subgroup were brolucizumab 6 mg (-231.4 [5.65] μm) versus aflibercept 2 mg (-199.0 [8.21] μm). A higher proportion of participants treated with brolucizumab 6 mg had a fluid-free macula at week 52 in both subgroups. The proportion of participants with ≥2-step improvement from baseline in DRSS at week 52 was comparable between the 2 subgroups and trended higher in the brolucizumab 6 mg arm. The incidence of IOI was brolucizumab 6 mg (4.2%) versus aflibercept 2 mg (5.8%) in the prior-treated subgroup and was brolucizumab 6 mg (4.0%) versus aflibercept 2 mg (1.7%) in the treatment-naive subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the effectiveness of brolucizumab 6 mg irrespective of the prior treatment status of the participants. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): 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 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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