Avastin vs. Lucentis: Bevacizumab vs Ranibizumab for age-related macular degeneration
Overview Avastin / Lucentis
Eye advance online publication 1 October 2010; doi: 10.1038/eye.2010.147
Bevacizumab vs ranibizumab for age-related macular degeneration:
1-year outcomes of a prospective, double-masked randomised clinical trial
Meeting Presentation: Previously presented as a poster at the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) on 2 May 2010.
M L Subramanian¹'², G Abedi¹'², S Ness¹'², E Ahmed¹'², M Fenberg¹'², M K Daly¹'², A Houranieh¹ and E B Feinberg¹'²
¹ Surgical Service, Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Jamaica Plain, MA, USA
² Department of Ophthalmology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
Correspondence: M Subramanian, Vitreoretinal Disease and Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, 85 East Concord Street, 8826, Boston, MA 02118, USA Tel: +1 617 414 2020; Fax: +1 617 414 2929. E-mail: email@example.com
Received 12 August 2010; Revised 9 September 2010; Accepted 9 September 2010; Published online 1 October 2010.
Purpose To report 1-year visual and anatomic outcomes of a prospective, double-masked randomised clinical trial comparing bevacizumab with ranibizumab for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration (AMD).
Methods Patients who met inclusion criteria were randomised 2 : 1 to bevacizumab or ranibizumab. All subjects and investigators (except for the pharmacist responsible for study assignments) were masked to treatment arms. Visual acuity was taken on Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart. Patients were given either bevacizumab or ranibizumab every month for the first 3 months, followed by an optical coherence tomography-guided, variable-dosing treatment schedule. Main outcomes measured included visual acuity, foveal thickness, and total number of injections over the 1-year treatment period.
Results In total, 15 patients received bevacizumab and 7 patients received ranibizumab. The average pre-operative visual acuity was 34.9 letters in the bevacizumab group, and 32.7 letters in the ranibizumab group. At 1-year follow-up, mean vision was 42.5 letters in the bevacizumab group, and 39.0 letters in the ranibizumab group. Two-tailed t-test failed to showed statistical significance between the two groups (P=0.5). Patients in the bevacizumab group underwent an average of eight injections, whereas patients in the ranibizumab group underwent a mean of four injections (P=0.001).
Conclusion The 1-year outcomes of a prospective, double-masked, randomised clinical trial comparing bevacizumab with ranibizumab failed to show a difference in visual and anatomic outcomes between the two treatments for choroidal neovascularisation in AMD. Total injections given over the treatment period were significantly different between the two groups. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.