Sharon D Solomon1, Kristina B Lindsley2, Magdalena G Krzystolik3, Satyanarayana S Vedula4, Barbara S Hawkins5. 1. Wilmer Eye Institute, School of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Bloomberg School of Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Retina Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Providence, Rhode Island. 4. The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 5. Wilmer Eye Institute, School of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Epidemiology, Bloomberg School of Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. Electronic address: bhawkins@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
TOPIC: To summarize the relative effects of bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA) and ranibizumab (Lucentis; Genentech, Inc.), using findings from a Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group systematic review. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD) is the most common cause of uncorrectable vision loss among the elderly in developed countries. Bevacizumab and ranibizumab are the most frequently used anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents injected intravitreally to treat NVAMD. METHODS: For this systematic review, we included only randomized controlled trials in which the 2 anti-VEGF agents had been compared directly. The primary outcome was 1-year gain in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of ≥15 letters. We followed Cochrane methods for trial selection, data extraction, and data analyses. Relative effects of bevacizumab versus ranibizumab are presented as estimated risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We identified 6 eligible randomized controlled trials with 2809 participants. The proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters of BCVA by 1 year was similar for the 2 agents when the same regimens were compared (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11). The mean change in BCVA from baseline also was similar (MD, -0.5 letter; 95% CI, -1.6 to +0.6). Other BCVA and quality of life outcomes were similar for the 2 agents. One-year treatment cost with ranibizumab was 5.1 and 25.5 times the cost for bevacizumab in the 2 largest trials. Ocular adverse events were uncommon (<1%), and rates were similar for the 2 agents. CONCLUSIONS: We found no important difference in effectiveness or safety between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for NVAMD treatment, but there was a large cost difference.
TOPIC: To summarize the relative effects of bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA) and ranibizumab (Lucentis; Genentech, Inc.), using findings from a Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group systematic review. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD) is the most common cause of uncorrectable vision loss among the elderly in developed countries. Bevacizumab and ranibizumab are the most frequently used anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents injected intravitreally to treat NVAMD. METHODS: For this systematic review, we included only randomized controlled trials in which the 2 anti-VEGF agents had been compared directly. The primary outcome was 1-year gain in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of ≥15 letters. We followed Cochrane methods for trial selection, data extraction, and data analyses. Relative effects of bevacizumab versus ranibizumab are presented as estimated risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We identified 6 eligible randomized controlled trials with 2809 participants. The proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters of BCVA by 1 year was similar for the 2 agents when the same regimens were compared (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11). The mean change in BCVA from baseline also was similar (MD, -0.5 letter; 95% CI, -1.6 to +0.6). Other BCVA and quality of life outcomes were similar for the 2 agents. One-year treatment cost with ranibizumab was 5.1 and 25.5 times the cost for bevacizumab in the 2 largest trials. Ocular adverse events were uncommon (<1%), and rates were similar for the 2 agents. CONCLUSIONS: We found no important difference in effectiveness or safety between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for NVAMD treatment, but there was a large cost difference.
Authors: David M Brown; Peter K Kaiser; Mark Michels; Gisele Soubrane; Jeffrey S Heier; Robert Y Kim; Judy P Sy; Susan Schneider Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Philip J Rosenfeld; David M Brown; Jeffrey S Heier; David S Boyer; Peter K Kaiser; Carol Y Chung; Robert Y Kim Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Daniel F Martin; Maureen G Maguire; Stuart L Fine; Gui-shuang Ying; Glenn J Jaffe; Juan E Grunwald; Cynthia Toth; Maryann Redford; Frederick L Ferris Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: M L Subramanian; G Abedi; S Ness; E Ahmed; M Fenberg; M K Daly; A Houranieh; E B Feinberg Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2010-10-01 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Evangelos S Gragoudas; Anthony P Adamis; Emmett T Cunningham; Matthew Feinsod; David R Guyer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-12-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Daniel F Martin; Maureen G Maguire; Gui-shuang Ying; Juan E Grunwald; Stuart L Fine; Glenn J Jaffe Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-04-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael Mimouni; Amit Meshi; Igor Vainer; Assaf Gershoni; Tal Koren; Noa Geffen; Arie Y Nemet; Ori Segal Journal: Jpn J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-09-29 Impact factor: 2.447
Authors: Maureen G Maguire; Daniel F Martin; Gui-Shuang Ying; Glenn J Jaffe; Ebenezer Daniel; Juan E Grunwald; Cynthia A Toth; Frederick L Ferris; Stuart L Fine Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Sharon D Solomon; Kristina Lindsley; Satyanarayana S Vedula; Magdalena G Krzystolik; Barbara S Hawkins Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-03-04