A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.

<h4>Background</h4>We set out a systemic review to evaluate whether off-label bevacizumab is as safe as licensed ranibizumab, and whether bevacizumab can be justifiably offered to patients as a treatment for age-related macular degeneration with robust evidence of no differential risk.&l...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Christine Schmucker, Christoph Ehlken, Hansjuergen T Agostini, Gerd Antes, Gerta Ruecker, Monika Lelgemann, Yoon K Loke
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042701&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849682883107618816
author Christine Schmucker
Christoph Ehlken
Hansjuergen T Agostini
Gerd Antes
Gerta Ruecker
Monika Lelgemann
Yoon K Loke
author_facet Christine Schmucker
Christoph Ehlken
Hansjuergen T Agostini
Gerd Antes
Gerta Ruecker
Monika Lelgemann
Yoon K Loke
author_sort Christine Schmucker
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Background</h4>We set out a systemic review to evaluate whether off-label bevacizumab is as safe as licensed ranibizumab, and whether bevacizumab can be justifiably offered to patients as a treatment for age-related macular degeneration with robust evidence of no differential risk.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched with no limitations of language and year of publication. We included RCTs with a minimum follow-up of one year which investigated bevacizumab or ranibizumab in direct comparison or against any other control group (indirect comparison). Direct comparison (3 trials, 1333 patients): The one year data show a significantly higher rate of ocular adverse effects (AE) with bevacizumab compared to ranibizumab (RR = 2.8; 95% CI 1.2-6.5). The proportion of patients with serious infections and gastrointestinal disorders was also higher with bevacizumab than with ranibizumab (RR = 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.7). Arterial thromboembolic events were equally distributed among the groups. Indirect comparison: Ranibizumab versus any control (5 trials, 4054 patients): The two year results of three landmark trials showed that while absolute rates of serious ocular AE were low (≤ 2.1%), relative harm was significantly raised (RR = 3.1; 95% CI 1.1-8.9). A significant increase in nonocular haemorrhage was also observed with ranibizumab (RR = 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7). Bevacizumab versus any control (3 trials, 244 patients): We were unable to judge the safety profile of bevacizumab due to the poor quality of AE monitoring and reporting in the trials.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Evidence from head-to-head trials raises concern about an increased risk of ocular and multiple systemic AE with bevacizumab. Therefore, clinicians and patients should continue to carefully weight up the benefits and harms when choosing between the two treatment options. We also emphasize the need for studies that are powered not just for efficacy, but for defined safety outcomes based on the signals detected in this systematic review.
format Article
id doaj-art-c5e008556eeb4130b932c3f8d52cf1c0
institution DOAJ
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2012-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-c5e008556eeb4130b932c3f8d52cf1c02025-08-20T03:24:03ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032012-01-0178e4270110.1371/journal.pone.0042701A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.Christine SchmuckerChristoph EhlkenHansjuergen T AgostiniGerd AntesGerta RueckerMonika LelgemannYoon K Loke<h4>Background</h4>We set out a systemic review to evaluate whether off-label bevacizumab is as safe as licensed ranibizumab, and whether bevacizumab can be justifiably offered to patients as a treatment for age-related macular degeneration with robust evidence of no differential risk.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched with no limitations of language and year of publication. We included RCTs with a minimum follow-up of one year which investigated bevacizumab or ranibizumab in direct comparison or against any other control group (indirect comparison). Direct comparison (3 trials, 1333 patients): The one year data show a significantly higher rate of ocular adverse effects (AE) with bevacizumab compared to ranibizumab (RR = 2.8; 95% CI 1.2-6.5). The proportion of patients with serious infections and gastrointestinal disorders was also higher with bevacizumab than with ranibizumab (RR = 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.7). Arterial thromboembolic events were equally distributed among the groups. Indirect comparison: Ranibizumab versus any control (5 trials, 4054 patients): The two year results of three landmark trials showed that while absolute rates of serious ocular AE were low (≤ 2.1%), relative harm was significantly raised (RR = 3.1; 95% CI 1.1-8.9). A significant increase in nonocular haemorrhage was also observed with ranibizumab (RR = 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7). Bevacizumab versus any control (3 trials, 244 patients): We were unable to judge the safety profile of bevacizumab due to the poor quality of AE monitoring and reporting in the trials.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Evidence from head-to-head trials raises concern about an increased risk of ocular and multiple systemic AE with bevacizumab. Therefore, clinicians and patients should continue to carefully weight up the benefits and harms when choosing between the two treatment options. We also emphasize the need for studies that are powered not just for efficacy, but for defined safety outcomes based on the signals detected in this systematic review.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042701&type=printable
spellingShingle Christine Schmucker
Christoph Ehlken
Hansjuergen T Agostini
Gerd Antes
Gerta Ruecker
Monika Lelgemann
Yoon K Loke
A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.
PLoS ONE
title A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.
title_full A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.
title_fullStr A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.
title_full_unstemmed A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.
title_short A safety review and meta-analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab: off-label versus goldstandard.
title_sort safety review and meta analyses of bevacizumab and ranibizumab off label versus goldstandard
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042701&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT christineschmucker asafetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT christophehlken asafetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT hansjuergentagostini asafetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT gerdantes asafetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT gertaruecker asafetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT monikalelgemann asafetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT yoonkloke asafetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT christineschmucker safetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT christophehlken safetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT hansjuergentagostini safetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT gerdantes safetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT gertaruecker safetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT monikalelgemann safetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard
AT yoonkloke safetyreviewandmetaanalysesofbevacizumabandranibizumabofflabelversusgoldstandard