4.3 Review

Anti-VEGF therapy for the treatment of glaucoma: a focus on ranibizumab and bevacizumab

Journal

EXPERT OPINION ON BIOLOGICAL THERAPY
Volume 12, Issue 12, Pages 1641-1647

Publisher

INFORMA HEALTHCARE
DOI: 10.1517/14712598.2012.721772

Keywords

anti-VEGF; bevacizumab; glaucoma filtration surgery; neovascular glaucoma; ranibizumab; trabeculectomy; vascular endothelial growth factor; wound healing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Anti-VEGF therapy has been widely used in the treatment of ocular neovascular diseases. Because of their anti-angiogenic and anti-fibrotic properties, anti-VEGF antibodies such as bevacizumab and ranibizumab have emerged as an adjunctive treatment modality in glaucoma to improve success of conventional treatments. Areas covered: Ranibizumab is an anti-VEGF-A antigen binding fragment currently indicated in neovascular age-related macular degeneration as well as macular edema following retinal vein occlusion. Several off-label uses include the treatment of neovascular glaucoma to regress/suppress iris and iridocorneal angle neovascularization and the modulation of wound healing after glaucoma filtration surgery. Bevacizumab is a full-length anti-VEGF antibody, which is also being used in aforementioned eye conditions off-label. An overview of these anti-VEGF antibodies and the results of preclinical and clinical studies regarding their use in the treatment of glaucoma are presented. Expert opinion: Early studies on the utility of both bevacizumab and ranibizumab in neovascular glaucoma and filtration surgery reported promising results. However, a large-scale randomized clinical trial as well as comparative studies between the two anti-VEGF antibodies are currently lacking. A single dose of ranibizumab costs approximately 40 times as much as a single dose of bevacizumab. Clinicians should take this into account, in addition to their differences in the efficacy and safety, when treating patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available