ArticleEye (London, England)2026
Real world experience with faricimab in switched neovascular AMD and evaluation of reloading versus interval matching regimes.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA subset of eyes with neovascular AMD experience sub-optimal response to anti-VEGF therapy resulting in frequent injections. Faricimab has been used in this cohort due to reputed increased durability. Dosing strategies when switching vary, particularly regarding the need for a reloading phase. Our aim is to share our real-world experience of switching to faricimab with a clinician-directed dosing strategy.
methodsRetrospective analysis of eyes with neovascular AMD switched to faricimab from a previous anti-VEGF agent in Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, South Wales. Outcomes were evaluated at one year.
results173 eyes from 134 patients were analysed. Mean visual acuity remained stable at one year (-0.1 letters). There was a statistically significant reduction in central subfield thickness of 30.0 μm (95% CI - 41.1 to -18.9; p < 0.001) and an increase in injection interval of 2 weeks (95% CI 1.5 to 2.4; p < 0.001). Within these parameters, the 'Reloaded' subgroup (n = 102) showed no clear advantage over the 'Not reloaded' (interval matched ± 2 weeks) subgroup (n = 71). The 'Reloaded' subgroup had received fewer prior injections and had shorter baseline injection intervals before switching.
conclusionsSwitching to faricimab was associated with stable vision, reduced macular oedema and increased injection intervals at one year. A clinician-directed dosing strategy at switching yielded comparable outcomes between subgroups, suggesting a reloading phase may not be required for all eyes. This has potential benefits for reducing demand on service capacity.
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.