Reply

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for neovascular age-related macular degeneration

“…In all 12 trials, one eye per participant was randomized. The countries in which the trials were conducted spanned the globe: two studies were international (ANCHOR 2006; VISION 2004), four were conducted in the United States only (CATT 2011; MARINA 2006; PIER 2008; Subramanian 2010), two each in Austria (MANTA 2013; Sacu 2009) and the United Kingdom (ABC 2010; IVAN 2013), and one each in France (GEFAL 2013) and India (Biswas 2011). The 12 trials were similar in that they all enrolled both men and women 50 years of age or older who had subfoveal CNV secondary to AMD.…”

“…Among the included trials, there were variations in the types of eligible neovascular lesions (e.g., predominantly classic CNV, minimally classic CNV, or occult CNV), lesion sizes, and baseline visual acuities of participants. Although the majority of participants in most trials were women, all but one of the enrollees in one trial were men (Subramanian 2010). …”

“…The most common criterion was a BCVA of 20/40 to 20/320 (Snellen equivalent) in the study eye, which was specified in six studies (ABC 2010; ANCHOR 2006; MANTA 2013; MARINA 2006; PIER 2008; VISION 2004). BCVA eligibility ranges included participants with somewhat better visual acuity in the CATT 2011 (20/25 to 20/320), GEFAL 2013 (20/32 to 20/320), and IVAN 2013 (20/320 or better) trials, but potentially worse visual acuity in the Sacu 2009 (20/40 to 20/800) and Subramanian 2010 (20/400 or better) studies. In Biswas 2011, participants with a BCVA between 35 and 70 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters were eligible; however, the test distance was not reported.…”

“…The remaining seven trials allowed participants to have received previous therapy for AMD, with certain restrictions as to the type (e.g., verteporfin PDT, intravitreal injections, or surgery), location, and time interval since last treatment. Five trials enrolled participants with either primary or recurrent CNV in the study eye (ANCHOR 2006;MARINA 2006; PIER 2008; Subramanian 2010; VISION 2004) and one enrolled participants with primary CNV only (ABC 2010). …”

“…The distribution was similar in the IVAN 2013 study (628 participants) in which 54% participants had CNV in the foveal center, 29% had hemorrhage in the foveal center, and 13% had other foveal center involvement. The two smallest studies (Sacu 2009; Subramanian 2010), with 28 participants in each, and the GEFAL 2013 (501 participants) and MANTA 2013 (321 participants) studies did not describe the type of neovascularization or subfoveal component of the CNV lesion in the study population.…”