• Users Online: 547
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

Ziv-aflibercept and bevacizumab for exudative age-related macular degeneration: A retrospective comparison of clinical outcomes and cost at 1 year


1 Smt Kanuri Santhamma Centre for Vitreoretinal Diseases, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India
2 Vitreous Retina Macula Consultants of New York; Lu Esther T. Mertz Retinal Research Center New York, NY, USA
3 Vitreous Retina Macula Consultants of New York; Lu Esther T. Mertz Retinal Research Center New York, NY; Retina Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear/Harvard Medical School, Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Yamanashi University, Yamanashi, Japan
4 Department of Ophthalmology, Rafic Hariri Medical University Beirut, Lebanon
5 Department of Ophthalmology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, USA

Correspondence Address:
Jay Chhablani,
L. V. Prasad Eye Institute, Kallam Anji Reddy Campus, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034, Telangana
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/tjo.tjo_3_20

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare intravitreal ziv-aflibercept (IVZ) monotherapy to intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) monotherapy in patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration (eAMD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve eAMD treated with pro re nata (PRN) monotherapy of IVZ (1.25 mg/0.05 ml) or IVB (1.25 mg/0.05 ml) with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were retrospectively analyzed. Study outcomes included change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness, mean number of injections, and total medication cost in both the groups at 12 months. RESULTS: Forty-seven eyes (IVZ, 18/47 [38.3%] and IVB, 29/47 [61.7%]) from 47 treatment-naive patients were included. The change in BCVA for patients receiving IVZ was from 0.61 ± 0.33 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (Snellen 20/81; range: 20/38–20/174) to 0.45 ± 0.31 (Snellen 20/56; range: 20/27–20/115) at 1 year (P = 0.02). The total number of injections needed to achieve the resolution of intraretinal or subretinal fluid was 2.6 ± 1.4 and 3.5 ± 1.3 for IVZ and IVB, respectively (P = 0.029). Direct medication cost of IVZ and IVB in our cohort on PRN basis was an average of US$78 (2.6 × US$30) and US$175 (3.5 × US$50), respectively, through 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: IVZ-PRN monotherapy resulted in improved visual acuity, reduced treatment burden, and reduced direct medication cost in comparison to IVB-PRN monotherapy through 1 year.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Singh SR
    -  Parikh R
    -  Sakurada Y
    -  Uplanchiwar B
    -  Mansour A
    -  Goud A
    -  Modi YS
    -  Chhablani J
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed55    
    PDF Downloaded2    

Recommend this journal