A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of Innovator vs. Biosimilar Ranibizumab in Treating Diabetic Macular Edema: A Multicenter Retrospective Study. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study compares the effects of innovator ranibizumab (iRBZ) and its biosimilar (bRBZ) on patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in India, focusing on visual acuity and retinal thickness over 6 months.
  • Data from patients receiving at least three injections of either treatment were analyzed, showing significant improvements in visual acuity and central macular thickness for both groups without significant differences between them.
  • The results indicate that the biosimilar ranibizumab is as effective as the innovator version in treating DME, suggesting it can be a viable alternative in clinical practice.

Article Abstract

Introduction: To compare the efficacy of innovator ranibizumab (iRBZ-Accentrix, Novartis, India) vs. biosimilar ranibizumab (bRBZ, Razumab-Intas, India) in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) in an Indian population.

Methods: Data of patients with DME who underwent at least three injections of iRBZ or bRBZ and had a minimum of 6 months follow-up were obtained from an electronic database. Choice of injection depended upon the patient. Pro re nata (PRN) protocol from baseline was used with reinjections advised if the central macular thickness (CMT) was at least 300 μm and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 20/40 or worse. Primary outcome measure was comparison of change in BCVA at 6 months between iRBZ and bRBZ.

Results: We included 264 eyes in the iRBZ group and 69 eyes in bRBZ group, which were comparable for baseline characteristics. Mean BCVA improved from 0.64 ± 0.39 logMAR to 0.47 ± 0.31 logMAR (p < 0.001) in the iRBZ group and from 0.71 ± 0.42 logMAR to 0.50 ± 0.29 logMAR in the bRBZ group (p < 0.001) at 6 months. There were no differences in BCVA between the two groups (p > 0.05 for all time points). The CMT reduction in the iRBZ group (120 ± 196 µm) was comparable to that in the bRBZ group at 6 months (105 ± 187 µm) (p = 0.69). There was no difference in the mean number of injections taken (3.81 ± 1.2 in iRBZ vs. 3.55 ± 1.2 in bRBZ) (p > 0.05) between groups. Vision at baseline was the only factor associated with vision at last follow-up after adjusting for CMT at baseline, type of injection, and number of injections.

Conclusions: Biosimilar RBZ is similar to innovator RBZ in improving vision and reducing CMT in eyes with DME in the short term.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8927574PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-022-00463-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

biosimilar ranibizumab
8
diabetic macular
8
macular edema
8
comparison innovator
4
innovator biosimilar
4
ranibizumab treating
4
treating diabetic
4
edema multicenter
4
multicenter retrospective
4
retrospective study
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!