4.6 Article

Switch of anti-VEGF agents is an option for nonresponders in the treatment of AMD

期刊

EYE
卷 28, 期 5, 页码 538-545

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/eye.2014.64

关键词

-

资金

  1. Novartis
  2. Novartis Pharma GmBH
  3. Bayer HealthCare
  4. GlaxoSmithKline
  5. Pfizer
  6. Alcon
  7. Accovion
  8. Genentech

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Although anti-VEGF therapy of exudative AMD with bevacizumab and ranibizumab proved efficacious in the majority of patients, CNV activity does not respond to continued treatment after repeated injections in a considerable amount of patients. These are referred to as nonresponders. A change of the drug to bevacizumab or ranibizumab could possibly offer an alternative option for the treatment of nonresponding exudative AMD. Methods and materials A total of 138 nonresponders who switched therapy from bevacizumab to ranibizumab (n = 114) or vice versa (n = 24) were included in a retrospective study. Visual acuity (VA) and foveal thickness before and after the switch of therapy were compared. By means of linear regression analysis, we analyzed possible prognostic factors associated with a favorable outcome for visual acuity. Results Linear regression analysis revealed a statistically significant benefit for nonresponders when treatment was changed to a different anti-VEGF drug (bevacizumab or ranibizumab). VA at the time of the switch was positively correlated with a beneficial development of VA after changing the drug. There was no significant correlation with age, macular thickness, number of injections before the switch, or the development of VA under treatment before the switch. Both patients switching to Avastin and Lucentis benefitted without statistically significant differences. Conclusions An exchange of bevacizumab with ranibizumab or vice versa should be considered in nonresponders in the treatment of exudative AMD. Further prognostic factors may help to identify patients who might benefit from a switch. These factors should be investigated in further studies.

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

4.6
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