4.6 Article

Bevacizumab vs ranibizumab for age-related macular degeneration: 1-year outcomes of a prospective, double-masked randomised clinical trial

Journal

EYE
Volume 24, Issue 11, Pages 1708-1715

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/eye.2010.147

Keywords

bevacizumab; ranibizumab; Avastin; Lucentis; macular degeneration

Categories

Funding

  1. Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Jamaica Plain, MA, USA
  2. VA Boston

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To report 1-year visual and anatomic outcomes of a prospective, double-masked randomised clinical trial comparing bevacizumab with ranibizumab for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods Patients who met inclusion criteria were randomised 2 : 1 to bevacizumab or ranibizumab. All subjects and investigators (except for the pharmacist responsible for study assignments) were masked to treatment arms. Visual acuity was taken on Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart. Patients were given either bevacizumab or ranibizumab every month for the first 3 months, followed by an optical coherence tomography-guided, variable-dosing treatment schedule. Main outcomes measured included visual acuity, foveal thickness, and total number of injections over the 1-year treatment period. Results In total, 15 patients received bevacizumab and 7 patients received ranibizumab. The average pre-operative visual acuity was 34.9 letters in the bevacizumab group, and 32.7 letters in the ranibizumab group. At 1-year follow-up, mean vision was 42.5 letters in the bevacizumab group, and 39.0 letters in the ranibizumab group. Two-tailed t-test failed to showed statistical significance between the two groups (P = 0.5). Patients in the bevacizumab group underwent an average of eight injections, whereas patients in the ranibizumab group underwent a mean of four injections (P = 0.001). Conclusion The 1-year outcomes of a prospective, double-masked, randomised clinical trial comparing bevacizumab with ranibizumab failed to show a difference in visual and anatomic outcomes between the two treatments for choroidal neovascularisation in AMD. Total injections given over the treatment period were significantly different between the two groups. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted. Eye (2010) 24, 1708-1715; doi: 10.1038/eye.2010.147; published online 1 October 2010

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available