Comparison of Loading Dose between Aflibercept and Faricimab for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.
J Clin Med 2024;
13:385. [PMID:
38256517 PMCID:
PMC10816479 DOI:
10.3390/jcm13020385]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2023] [Revised: 01/05/2024] [Accepted: 01/09/2024] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Recently, faricimab was approved as the new drug for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). We lack the knowledge to choose between the existing drug and this new drug to use for treatment-naïve nAMD cases. In this study, we compared the functional and morphologic effects in loading dose between patients with treatment-naïve nAMD treated with either intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) or intravitreal faricimab (IVF) injection in a clinical setting.
METHOD
This retrospective study included 30 eyes of 28 patients who started treatment with IVA between June and September 2022 and 30 eyes of 29 patients who were administered IVF between October 2022 and March 2023. All patients received three monthly IVA or IVF. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), and the proportion of eyes with residual exudative change at baseline and 1,2, and 3 months after initial treatment were compared between the groups.
RESULTS
The mean BCVA significantly improved from pre-treatment after the loading dose in the IVA group (0.46 ± 0.46-0.36 ± 0.37, p = 0.0047) but not in the IVF group (0.46 ± 0.41-0.44 ± 0.45, p = 0.60). The mean CRT significantly improved in both groups. The proportion of eyes with residual exudative change was greater in the IVF group than in the IVA group 2 months after the first treatment (p = 0.026). The analysis of cases that achieved complete resolution of exudative changes after the loading dose showed that the IVA group had a significant improvement in the BCVA, whereas the IVF group did not (p = 0.0047 and 0.20, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Although both IVA and IVF significantly improved CRT, the BCVA improved significantly in the IVA group but not in the IVF group.
Collapse