ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2025
Prospective and dichotomous study of biomarkers with swept-source OCT and OCT-angiography in naive patients with diabetic macular edema.
Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correlations between SS-OCT and OCT angiography biomarkers in treatment-naïve neovascular AMD during aflibercept therapy: a prospective study.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Spectral Domain OCT Changes Following Anti-VEGF Therapy in Diabetic Macular Edema.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2026Article
- Region-Specific Retinal and Choroidal Biomarkers Associated with Visual Outcomes After Anti-VEGF Treatment in Center-Involved Diabetic Macular Edema.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Analysis of correlations between biomarkers assessed with swept-source OCT and OCT angiography in naïve patients with diabetic macular edema treated with aflibercept: a prospective study.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe used state-of-the-art high-resolution retinal imaging to explore the treatment (loading dose of aflibercept) of diabetic macular edema (DME) among treatment-naive patients. Swept-source (SS) OCT and OCT-Angiography (SS-OCTA) were performed, and a dichotomous analysis was conducted to compare responders and treatment-resistant patients (responsive and resistant). Furthermore, treatment responses were evaluated based on the subdivision of choroidal thickness. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective, noncomparative, interventional case series study examined the following biomarkers: best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), central choroidal thickness (CCT), avascular area of the superficial plexus (AASP), avascular area of the deep plexus (AADP), and vessel density (VD). Data from the baseline and 4-month examinations were compared.
resultsTwenty-eight eyes from 25 patients were included. Significant improvements were observed in BCVA (0.7250 ± 0.23 to 0.3957 ± 0.21; p < 0.000), CMT µm (339.04 ± 66.19 to 265.21 ± 55.75; p < 0.000), CCT µm (221.71 ± 69.69 to 209.07 ± 70.92; p < 0.000), VD (17.90 ± 7.82 to 15.35 ± 5.80; p < 0.038), AASP µm
conclusionBCVA, CMT, CCT, AASP, AADP and VD were improved after treatment. The pretreatment biomarkers did not predict treatment response between the responsive and resistant. Regarding choroidal stratification, values within the normal range of CCT showed the greatest reductions, indicating that these values may be more responsive to treatment. Notably, this is the first study to analyze biomarkers provided by SS OCT and OCTA, stratify the choroid, and perform a dichotomous analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.