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: Comparison of ranibizumab and bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration according to LUCAS treat-and-extend protocol.
    Author: Berg K, Pedersen TR, Sandvik L, Bragadóttir R.
    Journal: Ophthalmology; 2015 Jan; 122(1):146-52. PubMed ID: 25227499.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab versus ranibizumab when administered according to a treat-and-extend protocol for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial with a noninferiority limit of 5 letters. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥ 50 years with previously untreated neovascular AMD in 1 eye and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between 20/25 and 20/320. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive ranibizumab 0.5 mg or bevacizumab 1.25 mg intravitreal injections. Monthly injections were given until inactive disease was achieved. The patients were then followed with a gradual extension of treatment interval by 2 weeks at a time up to a maximum of 12 weeks. If signs of recurrent disease appeared, the treatment interval was shortened by 2 weeks at a time. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in visual acuity at 1 year. RESULTS: Between March 2009 and July 2012, 441 patients were randomized at 10 ophthalmological centers in Norway. The 1-year visit was completed by 371 patients. In the per protocol analysis at 1 year, bevacizumab was equivalent to ranibizumab, with 7.9 and 8.2 mean letters gained, respectively (95% confidence interval [CI] of mean difference, -2.4 to 2.9; P = 0.845). The intention-to-treat analysis was concordant. There was no significant difference in measured central retinal thickness (CRT), with a mean decrease of -112 μm for bevacizumab and -120 μm for ranibizumab (95% CI of mean difference, -13 to 28; P = 0.460). There was a statistically significant difference (P = 0.001) between the drugs regarding the number of treatments: 8.9 for bevacizumab and 8.0 for ranibizumab. There were fewer arteriothrombotic events in the bevacizumab group (1.4%) than in the ranibizumab group (4.5%) (P = 0.050) and significantly more cardiac events in the ranibizumab group (P = 0.036). However, patients treated with ranibizumab more often had a history of myocardial infarction (P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab and ranibizumab had equivalent effects on visual acuity at 1 year when administered according to a treat-and-extend protocol. The visual acuity results at 1 year were comparable to those of other clinical trials with monthly treatment. The numbers of serious adverse events were small.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]