MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417535452 · doi:10.1159/000550160

Comparative Real-World Efficacy of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Agents in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

2025· article· en· W4417535452 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmologica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAfliberceptRanibizumabBevacizumabRetrospective cohort studyMacular degenerationVascular endothelial growth factorGrowth factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: This study directly compared the real-world effectiveness of bevacizumab, aflibercept 2 mg, and ranibizumab as first-line treatments for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD). METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort of treatment-naïve nvAMD eyes managed with a treat-and-extend regimen in Israel and Canada. Primary outcomes were changes in visual acuity (VA) and central retinal thickness (CRT). Secondary outcomes included treatment burden (total injections and final maintained interval), non-response (persistent/worsening exudation or functional decline despite adequate treatment), non-extension (final interval of 4 weeks), and absence of active exudation. RESULTS: A total of 322 eyes received bevacizumab (n = 174), aflibercept (n = 110), or ranibizumab (n = 38) over a mean follow-up of 16.75 ± 12.66 months. Mean VA improved from 0.77 ± 0.47-0.60 ± 0.45 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution following an average of 10.5 ± 6.3 injections. Aflibercept produced greater CRT reduction (-51.94 μm; p < 0.001), fewer injections (-2.35; p = 0.001), longer final intervals (+2.14 weeks; p < 0.001), and lower odds of non-response (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.016; p < 0.001) and non-extension (aOR 0.128, p < 0.001) versus bevacizumab. It showed the largest mean VA gain, just short of significance on multivariable analysis (p = 0.059). Ranibizumab showed greater CRT reduction (-44.53 μm; p = 0.012) and lower non-extension odds (aOR 0.079; p = 0.001) than bevacizumab but did not significantly reduce treatment burden or improve VA. CONCLUSION: In this first real-world, head-to-head comparison, aflibercept and ranibizumab outperformed bevacizumab in key anatomic and treatment-efficiency outcomes, with aflibercept showing the most consistent advantages. These findings highlight clinically relevant differences among anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents and underscore the importance of real-world data to guide nvAMD management. .

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmologicaSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207