A Network Meta-Analysis of Success Rates following Low Dosage Anti-VEGF for Retinopathy of Prematurity.

Purpose: To search the low dosage of anti-VEGF best for primary therapies on retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in terms of success rate.

Methods: We searched Medline(Pubmed), Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases only for randomized controlled trials that had been reported as of March 3, 2023. We included studies that used bevacizumab, aflibercept and conbercept for ROP with comparable cohorts and treatment criteria. This study was performed according the pre-specified protocol registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021270077) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis checklist. Those with animal and cell experiments, non-randomized case-control, or single case report were excluded. Frequentist network meta-analyses determined the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) of the success rate of each dose range group and compared pairs of treatments STATA 15.

Result: Since non-RCT research were excluded, aflflibercept and conbercept studies were excluded. Therefore, only 6 bevacizumab studies were included in final meta-analysis: Inconsistency was not detected in this study global inconsistent model test, loop inconsistency and local inconsistent model test ( > 0.05). In addition, a consistent model test has been passed in this study ( > 0.05). Little bias was detected funnel plot. Since bevacizumab adult standard dose of single-injection is 1.25 mg, the concentration groups were converted according to the proportion of adult standard dose, such as 1/2, [1/5, 1/6.25], [1/10, 1/12.5], [1/19.8, 1/78.1], [1/156.3, 1/625]. The SUCRA of [1/10, 1/12.5] dose group were the best of largest probability to achieve success. However, [1/156.3, 1/625] dose group was the worst dose to achieve success in the five dose groups. The success rate ranking of league chart in this study is that [1/10, 1/12.5] > [1/5, 1/6.25] > 1/2 ≈ [1/19.8, 1/78.1] > [1/156.3, 1/625].

Conclusions: [1/10, 1/12.5] were the best dosage ranges to achieve maximal medicine success. [1/156.3, 1/625] was the worst ineffective in the five dose ranges.