Cited by 1,715Retinal Diseases and TreatmentsRetinal and Macular SurgeryOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome

Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab for Treatment of Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration

Open access
Martin, Daniel F., Maguire, Maureen G., Fine, Stuart L., Ying, Gui-shuang, Jaffe, Glenn J., Grunwald, Juan E., Toth, Cynthia, Redford, Maryann +1 more·2012·Ophthalmology

Abstract

Objective To describe effects of ranibizumab and bevacizumab when administered monthly or as needed for 2 years and to describe the impact of switching to as-needed treatment after 1 year of monthly treatment.Design Multicenter, randomized clinical trial.Participants Patients (n = 1107) who were followed up during year 2 among 1185 patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration who were enrolled in the clinical trial.Interventions At enrollment, patients were assigned to 4 treatment groups defined by drug (ranibizumab or bevacizumab) and dosing regimen (monthly or as needed). At 1 year, patients initially assigned to monthly treatment were reassigned randomly to monthly or as-needed treatment, without changing the drug assignment.Main outcome measures Mean change in visual acuity.Results Among patients following the same regimen for 2 years, mean gain in visual acuity was similar for both drugs (bevacizumab-ranibizumab difference, -1.4 letters; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.7 to 0.8; P = 0.21). Mean gain was greater for monthly than for as-needed treatment (difference, -2.4 letters; 95% CI, -4.8 to -0.1; P = 0.046). The proportion without fluid ranged from 13.9% in the bevacizumab-as-needed group to 45.5% in the ranibizumab monthly group (drug, P = 0.0003; regimen, P < 0.0001). Switching from monthly to as-needed treatment resulted in greater mean decrease in vision during year 2 (-2.2 letters; P = 0.03) and a lower proportion without fluid (-19%; P < 0.0001). Rates of death and arteriothrombotic events were similar for both drugs (P > 0.60). The proportion of patients with 1 or more systemic serious adverse events was higher with bevacizumab than ranibizumab (39.9% vs. 31.7%; adjusted risk ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07-1.57; P = 0.009). Most of the excess events have not been associated previously with systemic therapy targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).Conclusions Ranibizumab and bevacizumab had similar effects on visual acuity over a 2-year period. Treatment as needed resulted in less gain in visual acuity, whether instituted at enrollment or after 1 year of monthly treatment. There were no differences between drugs in rates of death or arteriothrombotic events. The interpretation of the persistence of higher rates of serious adverse events with bevacizumab is uncertain because of the lack of specificity to conditions associated with inhibition of VEGF.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.03.053

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martin, D. F., Maguire, M. G., Fine, S. L., Ying, G.-S., Jaffe, G. J., Grunwald, J. E., Toth, C., Redford, M., & Ferris, F. L.
Affiliations
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Colorado Denver (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Maguire, Maureen G.
Venue
Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-07
Volume
119
Issue
7
Pages
1388-1398
ISSN
0161-6420 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1500728559
Cited by
1,715
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 90 · 2021: 155 · 2020: 133 · 2019: 109 · 2018: 106 · 2017: 123 · 2016: 163 · 2015: 193 · 2014: 204 · 2013: 161 · 2012: 41
FWCI
179.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Eye Institute (U10EY017825, U10EY017826, U10EY017823, U10EY017828)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal and Macular Surgery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Keywords
ranibizumab, bevacizumab, neovascular age-related macular degeneration, anti-VEGF therapy, monthly dosing, as-needed dosing, treatment switching, visual acuity, subretinal fluid, systemic adverse events, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Bevacizumab, Ranibizumab, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Fluorescein Angiography, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Visual Acuity, Treatment Outcome, Angiogenesis Inhibitors, Tomography, Optical Coherence, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A, Wet Macular Degeneration, Intravitreal Injections, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review