Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Dec 12:18:105-111.
doi: 10.33393/dti.2024.3213. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.

Faricimab versus the standard of care for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in Italy: an indirect treatment comparison

Carlotta Galeone  1   2 , Federica Turati  3 , Massimo Nicolò  4 , Mariacristina Parravano  5 , Stela Vujosevic  6   7 , Laura Bianchino  8 , Emilia Sicari  8 , Paolo Lanzetta  9   10
Affiliations

Faricimab versus the standard of care for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in Italy: an indirect treatment comparison

Carlotta Galeone et al. Drug Target Insights. .

Abstract

Objectives: To assess through an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) the potential benefit of faricimab over the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) real-life scenario, hereby defined standard of care (SoC), in Italy, that is, aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab, in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) naïve to any anti-VEGF treatment.

Methods: Individual patient-level data from the phase III clinical trials TENAYA and LUCERNE (faricimab cohort) and the real-world study RADIANCE (RADIANCE cohort) were used. Efficacy was evaluated with changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield thickness (CST) from baseline to 1 year (week 52 in the RADIANCE and week 48 in the faricimab cohorts, respectively). Propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting was utilized to balance cohorts and mitigate bias due to potential confounding. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate treatment differences adjusted for the number of injections.

Results: The ITC included 513 patients treated with faricimab and 263 patients treated with SoC. At 1 year, faricimab showed a greater mean BCVA gain (treatment difference +5.4 letters, p<0.001) and CST reduction (treatment difference -71.8 μm, p<0.001) compared to SoC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of results, showing a BCVA improvement of +4.0 letters and a CST reduction of -71.5 μm in favor of faricimab.

Conclusions: Despite the limitations due to the use of ITC and the comparison between clinical trials and real-world cohorts, the present analysis suggests potential benefits in terms of vision gain and CST reduction in naïve nAMD patients treated with faricimab compared with SoC in a real-world setting.

Keywords: Faricimab; Indirect treatment comparison; Vascular endothelial growth factor A; nAMD.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: CG Roche; FT None; MP Abbvie, Novartis, Bayer, Roche, Zeiss; FV Bayer, Novartis, Abbvie, Roche; MN Roche; SV Abbvie, Alimera, Apellis, Bayer. B&I, Novartis, Roche, Zeiss; LB is an employee at Roche; ES is an employee at Roche; GV is an employee at Roche; PL Aerie, Allergan, Annexon, Apellis, Bausch & Lomb, Bayer, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals, I-Care, Genentech, Novartis, Ocular Therapeutix, Outlook Therapeutics, and Roche

Figures

FIGURE 1 -
FIGURE 1 -
Difference in BCVA mean change (95% CI) from baseline to 1 year after IPTW. BCVA = best corrected visual acuity; CI = confidential interval; IPTW = inverse probability of treatment weighting; SoC = standard of care (aflibercept, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab).
FIGURE 2 -
FIGURE 2 -
Difference in CST mean change (95% CI) from baseline to 1 year after IPTW. CI = confidential interval; CST = central subfield thickness; IPTW = inverse probability of treatment weighting; SoC = standard of care (aflibercept, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Colijn JM, Buitendijk GHS, Prokofyeva E et al. EYE-RISK consortium; European Eye Epidemiology (E3) consortium. Prevalence of age-related macular degeneration in Europe: the past and the future. Ophthalmology. 2017;124(12):1753–1763. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.05.035. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Flaxman SR, Bourne RRA, Resnikoff S et al. Vision Loss Expert Group of the Global Burden of Disease Study. Global causes of blindness and distance vision impairment 1990-2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5(12):e1221–e1234. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30393-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Steinmetz JD, Bourne RRA, Briant PS et al. GBD 2019 Blindness and Vision Impairment Collaborators; Vision Loss Expert Group of the Global Burden of Disease Study. Causes of blindness and vision impairment in 2020 and trends over 30 years, and prevalence of avoidable blindness in relation to VISION 2020: the Right to Sight: an analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet Glob Health. 2021;9(2):e144–e160. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30489-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ambati J, Fowler BJ. Mechanisms of age-related macular degeneration. Neuron. 2012;75(1):26–39. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.018. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cheung LK, Eaton A. Age-related macular degeneration. Pharmacotherapy. 2013;33(8):838–855. doi: 10.1002/phar.1264. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources