Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

<h4>Background</h4>Bevacizumab is believed to be as effective and safe as ranibizumab for ophthalmic diseases; however, its magnitude of effectiveness and safety profile remain controversial. Thus, a meta-analysis and systematic review appears necessary.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Bin Wu, Haixiang Wu, Xiaoyan Liu, Houwen Lin, Jin Li
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101253
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849728314908868608
author Bin Wu
Haixiang Wu
Xiaoyan Liu
Houwen Lin
Jin Li
author_facet Bin Wu
Haixiang Wu
Xiaoyan Liu
Houwen Lin
Jin Li
author_sort Bin Wu
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Background</h4>Bevacizumab is believed to be as effective and safe as ranibizumab for ophthalmic diseases; however, its magnitude of effectiveness and safety profile remain controversial. Thus, a meta-analysis and systematic review appears necessary.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched with no restrictions. All relevant citations comparing ranibizumab and bevacizumab were considered for inclusion. Pooled effect estimates were obtained using a fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis.<h4>Results</h4>Nine independent randomised-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) involving 2,289 participants were identified. Compared with bevacizumab, the overall combined weighted mean difference (WMD) of the mean change in visual acuity for ranibizumab was 0.52 letters (95% CI -0.11-1.14). The odds ratios (ORs) of gaining ≥15, gaining 5-14, losing 5-14 and losing ≤15 letters were 1.10 (95% CI 0.90-1.33), 0.93 (95% CI 0.77-1.11), 0.89 (95% CI 0.65-1.22) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.73-1.25), respectively. The risk of serious systemic events increased by 17% (95% CI 6%-27%, p = 0.0042) for bevacizumab treatment in comparison with ranibizumab. No statistically significant differences between the two treatments were found for the nonfatal arterial thrombotic events, ocular serious adverse, death from vascular and all causes events.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Bevacizumab is not inferior to ranibizumab as a treatment for achieving visual acuity. The use of bevacizumab was associated with an increased risk of developing serious systemic events. Weighing the costs and health outcomes is necessary when selecting between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for ophthalmic diseases. Due to the limitations of the available data, further research is needed.
format Article
id doaj-art-44adcc61f9ef4e6cbf3eb90b9a1a988c
institution DOAJ
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2014-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-44adcc61f9ef4e6cbf3eb90b9a1a988c2025-08-20T03:09:35ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0197e10125310.1371/journal.pone.0101253Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Bin WuHaixiang WuXiaoyan LiuHouwen LinJin Li<h4>Background</h4>Bevacizumab is believed to be as effective and safe as ranibizumab for ophthalmic diseases; however, its magnitude of effectiveness and safety profile remain controversial. Thus, a meta-analysis and systematic review appears necessary.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched with no restrictions. All relevant citations comparing ranibizumab and bevacizumab were considered for inclusion. Pooled effect estimates were obtained using a fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis.<h4>Results</h4>Nine independent randomised-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) involving 2,289 participants were identified. Compared with bevacizumab, the overall combined weighted mean difference (WMD) of the mean change in visual acuity for ranibizumab was 0.52 letters (95% CI -0.11-1.14). The odds ratios (ORs) of gaining ≥15, gaining 5-14, losing 5-14 and losing ≤15 letters were 1.10 (95% CI 0.90-1.33), 0.93 (95% CI 0.77-1.11), 0.89 (95% CI 0.65-1.22) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.73-1.25), respectively. The risk of serious systemic events increased by 17% (95% CI 6%-27%, p = 0.0042) for bevacizumab treatment in comparison with ranibizumab. No statistically significant differences between the two treatments were found for the nonfatal arterial thrombotic events, ocular serious adverse, death from vascular and all causes events.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Bevacizumab is not inferior to ranibizumab as a treatment for achieving visual acuity. The use of bevacizumab was associated with an increased risk of developing serious systemic events. Weighing the costs and health outcomes is necessary when selecting between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for ophthalmic diseases. Due to the limitations of the available data, further research is needed.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101253
spellingShingle Bin Wu
Haixiang Wu
Xiaoyan Liu
Houwen Lin
Jin Li
Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
PLoS ONE
title Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
title_full Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
title_fullStr Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
title_full_unstemmed Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
title_short Ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
title_sort ranibizumab versus bevacizumab for ophthalmic diseases related to neovascularisation a meta analysis of randomised controlled trials
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101253
work_keys_str_mv AT binwu ranibizumabversusbevacizumabforophthalmicdiseasesrelatedtoneovascularisationametaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT haixiangwu ranibizumabversusbevacizumabforophthalmicdiseasesrelatedtoneovascularisationametaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT xiaoyanliu ranibizumabversusbevacizumabforophthalmicdiseasesrelatedtoneovascularisationametaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT houwenlin ranibizumabversusbevacizumabforophthalmicdiseasesrelatedtoneovascularisationametaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT jinli ranibizumabversusbevacizumabforophthalmicdiseasesrelatedtoneovascularisationametaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials