4.4 Article

A prospective, observational, open-label, multicentre study to investigate the daily treatment practice of ranibizumab in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration

期刊

ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA
卷 93, 期 2, 页码 126-133

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aos.12610

关键词

daily practice; neovascular AMD; observational; quality of life; ranibizumab; visual acuity

资金

  1. Novartis Pharma B.V.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeThe HELIOS (Health Economics with Lucentis in Observational Settings) study was designed on request of the Dutch Health Authority for an observational study to assess the effectiveness and safety of ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (wet AMD) in daily practice. MethodsThe HELIOS study was a 2-year prospective, observational, open-label, multicentre study involving 14 sites. Patients with wet AMD were enrolled and observed for a period of 24months. The data were collected at baseline and at the visits closest around the time-points 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24months after inclusion. ResultsTreatment with ranibizumab resulted in prevention of vision loss. The mean ETDRS score increased from 45.1 letters at baseline to 48.5 letters at 24months. This was achieved with a mean of 7.8 injections over 24months. Stabilization of visual acuity was also reflected by the scores on the quality of life EQ-5D questionnaire, which did not significantly change over the study period. The more subjective EQ-VAS questionnaire showed an overall improvement. The VFQ-25 questionnaire was also mostly stable over time. After 24months, 32.2% of the patients gained 1 letter and 17.1% gained >15 letters. Patients completing the loading phase were better responders, as demonstrated by increased long-term visual acuity. In addition, ranibizumab was well tolerated and had a safety profile commonly seen in routine clinical practice. ConclusionThis study demonstrates that also in daily practice ranibizumab was effective in preventing vision loss over a period of 24months. No new safety findings were identified.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据