Clinical efficacy and safety of aflibercept biosimilars in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
meta_analysis · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42236129.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1136/bjo-2025-328196.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of aflibercept biosimilars compared with reference aflibercept in the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered on PROSPERO (CRD4201069147). Phase 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing aflibercept biosimilars to reference aflibercept in treatment-naïve nAMD were included. All included studies employed a standardised on-label aflibercept dosing regimen consisting of three initial monthly loading doses followed by injections every 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the mean difference (MD) in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at week 8. Secondary outcomes included BCVA at week 52, proportion of patients gaining ≥15 letters or maintaining vision (<15-letter loss), central subfield thickness (CST) and adverse events (AEs). Six RCTs (2022-2024) were included, comprising 2029 eyes (1020 biosimilar; 1009 reference). BCVA at week 8 did not differ significantly between groups (MD -0.34 letters; 95% CI -1.12 to 0.44; I²=0%; p=0.39), as was BCVA at week 52 (MD -0.04; 95% CI -1.18 to 1.10; I²=1%; p=0.94). No differences were observed in the proportion of patients gaining ≥15 letters, maintaining vision, CST changes or AEs. Aflibercept biosimilars demonstrated no significant difference in efficacy at 8 weeks and 52 weeks as well as safety relative to reference aflibercept in eyes with treatment-naïve nAMD following an on-label aflibercept treatment protocol; however, real-world extended durability remains untested. These findings were supported by a low risk of bias and a high-certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations tool.