ArticleEye (London, England)2025
One-year outcomes of faricimab versus aflibercept treatment for polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy: a comparative study.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Outcomes of Faricimab for Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy in a Multi-ethnic Cohort: A 12-Month Retrospective Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Advances in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy (PCV) Management: Emerging Evidence for Faricimab and Aflibercept 8 mg.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
- Review
- Comparison of Choroidal Morphological Changes Between Aflibercept 8 mg and Faricimab-svoa in Treatment-Naïve Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy and Pachychoroid Neovasculopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Visual Gains with Faricimab vs Aflibercept 8 mg in Naïve Retinovascular Disease: Global Real-World Cases and Literature Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of intravitreal faricimab and aflibercept injections in patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV).
methodsThis retrospective study analysed 111 treatment-naïve eyes (111 patients) with PCV who received intravitreal injections of either faricimab (30 eyes) or aflibercept (81 eyes). All patients were treated with three initial monthly loading injections. Visual and anatomical outcomes were compared between the two treatment groups after 12 months.
resultsAfter 12 months of treatment, mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved significantly in both the faricimab-treated and aflibercept groups (P < 0.05), with no significant difference in the extent of improvement between the two groups. Similarly, no significant differences were found in the reduction of central retinal thickness or subfoveal choroidal thickness, nor in the proportion of eyes with dry macula after treatment. However, the faricimab group showed a significantly greater reduction in maximum pigment epithelial detachment (PED) thickness from baseline than the aflibercept group (48.2% vs. 38.7%; P = 0.015). A higher proportion of eyes in the faricimab group also showed a PED thickness reduction >50% (66.7% vs. 42.0%; P = 0.021). The rate of polypoidal lesion regression did not differ significantly between the groups (50.0% vs. 38.3%; P = 0.256).
conclusionIntravitreal faricimab injections resulted in visual and anatomical improvements comparable to aflibercept in patients with PCV over 12 months of treatment, including a similar rate of polyp regression. In addition, faricimab was more effective in reducing PED thickness.
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.