Cited by 102Retinal Diseases and TreatmentsOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeRetinal and Macular Surgery

A systematic review of the efficacy and safety outcomes of anti-VEGF agents used for treating neovascular age-related macular degeneration: comparison of ranibizumab and bevacizumab

Mitchell, Paul·2011·Current Medical Research and Opinion

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review ocular and systemic events in treatment of wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies, ranibizumab and bevacizumab, and to provide a detailed perspective of their differences on clinical use, efficacy and safety. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This review was based on a 2010 PubMed literature search performed using two separate terms: 'lucentis' OR 'ranibizumab' AND 'age-related macular degeneration' OR 'AMD' or 'avastin' OR 'bevacizumab' AND 'age-related macular degeneration' OR 'AMD'. A clinical diagnosis of wet AMD was defined by the authors of the trial reports. Clinical studies that met Level I or Level II evidence criteria were considered for review. FINDINGS: Eight large, randomized, controlled trials of ranibizumab (Level I) included 1,485 patients (range 162-716) and four open-label studies of ranibizumab (Level II) included 4,484 patients (range 32-4,300). Six studies (one Level I, five Level II) of bevacizumab included 424 patients (range 28-165). All demonstrated improvements in visual acuity. Only one study (Level II) compared the efficacy of ranibizumab and bevacizumab. Adverse ocular and systemic safety events occurring during the study were prospectively recorded for ranibizumab, irrespective of their suspected relationship to study treatments. Only three of six bevacizumab studies reported details of adverse ocular or systemic events. There was extensive Level I and Level II evidence to support both the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab in wet AMD. Data suggest that bevacizumab provides efficacy in wet AMD, but the safety profile of intravitreal bevacizumab remains to be established. CONCLUSION: In contrast to ranibizumab, current safety data for bevacizumab are incomplete and not yet robust. If the medical community remains committed to using intravitreal bevacizumab, it is critical to establish that it has an acceptable safety profile, supported by evidence-based medicine. Considerable further research is warranted to achieve this.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1185/03007995.2011.585394

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mitchell, P.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Mitchell, Paul
Venue
Current Medical Research and Opinion
Published
2011-05-31
Volume
27
Issue
7
Pages
1465-1475
ISSN
  • 0300-7995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-4877
OpenAlex
W2157848273
Cited by
102
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 13
FWCI
2.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Medical Research and Opinion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Allergan
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal and Macular Surgery
Keywords
neovascular age-related macular degeneration, ranibizumab, bevacizumab, anti-VEGF therapy, intravitreal injection, visual acuity outcomes, drug safety, adverse events, treatment efficacy comparison
MeSH terms
Bevacizumab, Ranibizumab, Algorithms, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humans, Macular Degeneration, Neovascularization, Pathologic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Angiogenesis Inhibitors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A, 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