These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Implications of the comparisons of age-related macular degeneration treatments trials on clinical practice: what have we learned?
    Author: Do DV.
    Journal: Ophthalmology; 2013 May; 120(5 Suppl):S8-10. PubMed ID: 23642785.
    Abstract:
    TOPIC: Discussion of Comparisons of Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) Treatments Trials (CATT) results and the potential impact on neovascular AMD treatment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Ranibizumab and bevacizumab are most commonly used for treatment of neovascular AMD. Although bevacizumab costs less, its use primarily has been based on retrospective studies without level 1 medical evidence. Thus, there was an unmet need to determine whether there is any difference in efficacy and safety between the 2 agents when used monthly or as needed (pro re nata [PRN]). METHODS: Review of CATT (focusing on 1-year data because 2-year data were not released at the time of this symposium), a randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of monthly and PRN dosing of ranibizumab and bevacizumab. RESULTS: At the 1-year primary end point, eyes that received monthly ranibizumab gained an average of 8.5 letters; those that received monthly bevacizumab gained a mean of 8 letters. Eyes randomized to PRN ranibizumab gained an average of 6.8 letters; those randomized to PRN bevacizumab gained a mean of 5.9 letters. In the pairwise comparisons, PRN bevacizumab compared with monthly bevacizumab and PRN bevacizumab compared with monthly ranibizumab both were found to be inconclusive. At the 2-year end point, eyes that received monthly ranibizumab gained an average of 8.8 letters; those that received monthly bevacizumab gained a mean of 7.8 letters; those randomized to PRN ranibizumab gained an average of 6.7 letters; those randomized to PRN bevacizumab gained a mean of 5 letters. A higher rate of serious systemic adverse events also was detected among bevacizumab-treated subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The CATT demonstrated that PRN ranibizumab is equivalent to monthly ranibizumab at the 1-year primary outcome. Monthly bevacizumab also is equivalent to monthly ranibizumab at the 1-year end point. The 2-year data showed less visual acuity gain with PRN dosing of either drug than monthly dosing.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]