Table 2 Network meta-analyses results comparing anti-VEGF agents
Treatment comparison | NMA estimate (95% CrI) (95% PrI) |
|---|---|
Proportion of patients experiencing vision gain (≥ 15 ETDRS letters) 34 RCTs, 8809 patients, 12 treatments + placebo No inconsistency was observed in the overall NMA (chi-square = 1.79, p = 0.41) Between-study variance: 0.02 (0.00–0.14) | |
Bevacizumab vs aflibercept | 0.96 [(0.64–1.39) (0.54–1.62)] |
Ranibizumab vs aflibercept | 1.09 [(0.78–1.47) (0.65–1.76)] |
Ranibizumab vs bevacizumab | 1.14 [(0.9–1.43) (0.73–1.8)] |
Brolucizumab vs aflibercept | 1.2 [(0.85–1.71) (0.71–2.03)] |
Brolucizumab vs bevacizumab | 1.26 [(0.76–2.14) (0.67–2.44)] |
Brolucizumab vs ranibizumab | 1.11 [(0.71–1.8) (0.61–2.07)] |
Conbercept vs aflibercept | 0.19 [(0.06–0.65) (0.05–0.68)]a |
Conbercept vs bevacizumab | 0.2 [(0.06–0.69) (0.06–0.73)]a |
Conbercept vs ranibizumab | 0.17 [(0.05–0.59) (0.05–0.63)]a |
Conbercept vs brolucizumab | 0.15 [(0.05–0.56) (0.04–0.59)]a |
Proportion of patients experiencing vision loss of ≥ 15 ETDRS letters 36 RCTs, 9081 patients, 13 treatments + placebo No inconsistency was observed in the overall NMA (chi-square = 0.25, p = 0.88) Between-study variance: 0.02 (0.00–0.13) | |
Bevacizumab vs aflibercept | 0.94 [(0.51–1.67) (0.47–1.81)] |
Ranibizumab vs aflibercept | 0.9 [(0.55–1.43) (0.5–1.59)] |
Ranibizumab vs bevacizumab | 0.96 [(0.69–1.35) (0.6–1.57)] |
Brolucizumab vs aflibercept | 0.96 [(0.57–1.63) (0.51–1.79)] |
Brolucizumab vs bevacizumab | 1.03 [(0.47–2.27) (0.44–2.43)] |
Brolucizumab vs ranibizumab | 1.08 [(0.53–2.19) (0.49–2.36)] |
Conbercept vs aflibercept | 0.24 [(0–4.29) (0–4.4)] |
Conbercept vs bevacizumab | 0.26 [(0–4.65) (0–4.67)] |
Conbercept vs ranibizumab | 0.27 [(0–4.67) (0–4.79)] |
Conbercept vs brolucizumab | 0.24 [(0–4.71) (0–4.85)] |
Mortality 24 RCTs, 10 treatments + placebo, 8875 patients No inconsistency in the network (chi-squared = 0.69, p-value = 0.71) Between study variance: 0.01 (0.00-0.17) | |
Bevacizumab vs aflibercept | 0.58 [(0.15–1.98) (0.15–2.09)] |
Ranibizumab vs aflibercept | 0.59 [(0.17–1.8) (0.16–1.9)] |
Ranibizumab vs bevacizumab | 1.02 [(0.6–1.73) (0.54–1.94)] |
Brolucizumab vs aflibercept | 0.7 [(0.24–1.91) (0.23–2558)] |
Brolucizumab vs bevacizumab | 1.21 [(0.24–6.49) (0.23–2558)] |
Brolucizumab vs ranibizumab | 1.19 [(0.25–5.98) (0.24–2558)] |
Difference in mean change in BCVA 26 RCTs, 10 treatments + placebo, 5916 patients No inconsistency in the network (chi-squared = 2.62, p-value = 0.27) Between-study variance: 6.29 (3.28–11.27) | |
bevacizumab vs aflibercept | 2.21 [(− 1.1 to 5.42) (− 3.96 to 8.22)] |
ranibizumab vs aflibercept | 1.09 [(− 1.53 to 3.7) (− 4.62 to 6.81)] |
ranibizumab vs bevacizumab | − 1.11 [(− 3.07 to 0.92) (− 6.5 to 4.28)] |
brolucizumab vs aflibercept | − 0.46 [(− 4.26 to 3.33) (− 6.84 to 5.81)] |
brolucizumab vs bevacizumab | − 2.68 [(− 7.69 to 2.43) (− 9.72 to 4.54)] |
brolucizumab vs ranibizumab | − 1.57 [(− 6.12 to 3.07) (− 8.34 to 5.32)] |
conbercept vs aflibercept | − 15.17 [(− 23.8 to − 6.5) (− 25.35 to − 4.89)] a |
conbercept vs bevacizumab | − 17.35 [(− 25.84 to − 8.57) (− 27.14 to − 7.16)] a |
conbercept vs ranibizumab | − 16.23 [(− 24.57 to − 7.74) (− 25.97 to − 6.25)] a |
conbercept vs brolucizumab | − 14.68 [(− 24.01 to − 5.17) (− 25.48 to − 3.94)] a |
Adverse events (AEs) 15 RCTs, 8 treatments + placebo, 5785 patients No inconsistency in the network (chi-squared = 0.01, p-value = 0.93) Between-study variance: 0.01 (0.00–0.15) | |
Bevacizumab vs aflibercept | 1.11 [(0.53–2.1) (0.49–2.25)] |
Ranibizumab vs aflibercept | 1.23 [(0.76–1.93) (0.67–2.16)] |
Ranibizumab vs bevacizumab | 1.11 [(0.71–1.87) (0.63–2.12)] |
Brolucizumab vs aflibercept | 1.07 [(0.77–1.46) (0.67–1.69)] |
Brolucizumab vs bevacizumab | 0.97 [(0.48–2.14) (0.45–2.34)] |
Brolucizumab vs ranibizumab | 0.87 [(0.5–1.55) (0.46–1.72)] |
Conbercept vs aflibercept | 0.74 [(0.28–2) (0.26–2.09)] |
Conbercept vs bevacizumab | 0.67 [(0.22–2.15) (0.21–2.3)] |
Conbercept vs ranibizumab | 0.61 [(0.22–1.68) (0.21–1.77)] |
Conbercept vs brolucizumab | 0.69 [(0.25–1.96) (0.23–2.08)] |
Arterial thromboembolic events (ATE) 15 RCTs, 8 treatments + placebo, 6365 patients No source of inconsistency in the network (no closed loops) Between-study variance: 0.03 (0.00–0.48) | |
Bevacizumab vs aflibercept | 1.13 [(0.31–4.32) (0.29–4.78)] |
Ranibizumab vs aflibercept | 1.81 [(0.61–5.86) (0.54–6.68)] |
Ranibizumab vs bevacizumab | 1.6 [(0.85–3.15) (0.7–3.85)] |
Brolucizumab vs aflibercept | 0.66 [(0.28–1.52) (0.24–1.82)] |
Brolucizumab vs bevacizumab | 0.58 [(0.12–2.61) (0.11–2.93)] |
Brolucizumab vs ranibizumab | 0.36 [(0.09–1.42) (0.08–1.57)] |
Conbercept vs aflibercept | 0.73 [(0.01–38.5) (0.01–39.9)] |
Conbercept vs bevacizumab | 0.66 [(0.01–31.63) (0.01–32.15)] |
Conbercept vs ranibizumab | 0.41 [(0.01–19.15) (0.01–20.03)] |
Conbercept vs brolucizumab | 1.1 [(0.02–62.85) (0.02–64.99)] |