Skip to content

Comparison of bevacizumab (Avastin) and ranibizumab (Lucentis) in exudative age-related macular degeneration.

Comparing the effectiveness and costs of bevacizumab to ranibizumab in patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration.

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON21233
Enrollment
306
Registered
2009-03-10
Start date
2009-01-26
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-02-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

eye

Interventions

The included patient is randomized to receive either 1.25 mg bevacizumab or 0.5 mg ranibizumab. Both investigational treatments will be administered by monthly intravitreal injection for one year (12

Sponsors

Prof. Dr. R.O. Schlingemann Department of Ophthalmology, Room A2-122 Academisch Medisch Centrum Meibergdreef 9 1105 AZ Amsterdam Tel +31205663616 e-mail: r.schlingemann@amc.uva.nl
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Patients 60 years of age or higher; 2. Patients with primary or recurrent sub-, juxta- or extrafoveal CNV secondary to AMD, including those with RAP, that may benefit from anti-VEGF treatment in the opinion of the investigator; 3. The total area of CNV (including both classic and occult components) encompassed within the lesion must be more or equal to 30% of the total lesion area; 4. The total lesion area should be < 12 disc areas; 5. A best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) score between 78 and 20 letters (approximately 0,63-0,05 Snellen equivalent) in the study eye.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Ocular treatment with anti-angiogenic drugs in the last 2 months or Triamcinolone in the last 6 months; 2. Laser photocoagulation (juxtafoveal or extrafoveal) in the study eye within one month preceding Baseline; 3. Patients with angioid streaks or precursors of CNV in either eye due to other causes, such as ocular histoplasmosis, trauma, or pathologic myopia; 4. Spherical equivalent of refractive error in the study eye demonstrating more than ¡V 8 dioptres of myopia; 5. Cataract extraction within three months preceding Baseline; 6. IOP >25 mm Hg; 7. Active intraocular inflammation in the study eye; 8. Vitreous haemorrhage obscuring view of the posterior pole in the study eye; 9. Presence of a retinal pigment epithelial tear involving the macula in the study eye; 10. Subretinal haemorrhage in the study eye if the size of the haemorrhage is > 70% of the lesion; 11. Subfoveal fibrosis or atrophy in the study eye; 12. History of hypersensitivity or allergy to fluorescein; 13. Inability to obtain fundus photographs, fluorescein angiograms or OCT¡¦s of sufficient quality to be analyzed and graded by the Central Reading Centre; 14. Systemic disease with a life expectancy shorter than the duration of the study; 15. Inability to adhere to the protocol with regard to injection and follow-up visits; 16. Legally incompetent adult; 17. Refusal to give written informed consent.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
The primary outcome is the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in the study eye from Baseline to Month 12 assessed with ETDRS-like VA charts at an initial distance of four meter.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1. The proportion of patients with a loss of BVCA less than 15 letters from Baseline at 12 months (responders); 2. The proportion of patients with a loss or gain of BVCA less than 15 letters from Baseline at 12 months (stabilizers); 3. The proportion of patients with 15 letters loss or more of BCVA from Baseline at 12 months (losers); 4. The proportion of patients with 15 letters gain or more of BCVA from Baseline at 12 months (gainers); 5. The incidence of fluorescein leakage at 4 and 12 months as well as the change in total area of CNV, total area of leakage from CNV, and total lesion area from baseline at 12 months as determined by the reading centre; 6. Absolute and percent change in retinal thickness, as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 4 and 12 months as determined by the reading centre; 7. Proportion of dropouts before the final 12 months assessments; 8. Proportion of non-responders at the 4 month assessment; 9. The occurrence of (serious) adverse events during the 12 months of the study; 10. Costs of the two treatments.

Contacts

Public ContactR.O. Schlingemann
r.schlingemann@amc.uva.nl+31 (0)20 5663616/ +31 (0)20 5663682

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)