| Title |
Combination verteporfin photodynamic therapy ranibizumab-dexamethasone in choroidal neovascularization due to age-related macular degeneration: results of a phase II randomized trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s119510 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ron P Gallemore, Josh Wallsh, Henry L Hudson, Allen C Ho, Richard Chace, Joel Pearlman |
| Abstract |
To assess whether combination therapy (CT) reduces retreatments when compared to ranibizumab monotherapy (RM), while safely maintaining similar vision outcomes. In this 24-month trial, patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) were randomized to 1) quarter-fluence or 2) half-fluence triple therapy (verteporfin photodynamic therapy [vPDT] + ranibizumab + dexamethasone), 3) half-fluence double therapy (vPDT + ranibizumab), or 4) RM. The primary outcomes were number of retreatment visits and change from baseline in visual acuity (VA) at 12 months. One hundred sixty-two subjects enrolled. There were 4.0 (P=0.02), 3.2 (P<0.001), 4.1 (P=0.03), and 5.7 retreatment visits through month 12, and 5.9 (P=0.03), 4.3 (P<0.001), 5.9 (P=0.02) and 8.7 through month 24, in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively (P-value comparing with RM). Month 12 VA score change from baseline (95% confidence interval) was +3.6 (-0.9 to +8.1), +6.8 (+2.4 to +11.1), +5.0 (+0.6 to +9.3), and +6.5 (+1.7 to +11.4), respectively. CT resulted in significantly fewer retreatment visits than a RM regimen at months 12 and 24. VA results appeared similar although wide confidence intervals preclude conclusions regarding vision outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 12% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2017.
All research outputs
#16,722,913
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,551
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,106
of 421,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#21
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.