Journal of Ophthalmology

Review Article

The Efficacy of Conbercept in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy: A Systematic Review

Table 1

Summary of findings.


Bibliography

The efficacy of conbercept in polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy-conbercept vs aflibercept
Outcomes	Number of participants (studies) Follow-up	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Relative effect (95% CI)	Anticipated absolute effects
				Risk with aflibercept	Risk difference with conbercept (95% CI)
BCVA 12 months, Conbercept versus aflibercept logMAR	674 (17 studies) 12 months	⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW^{1, 2, 3} due to inconsistency, indirectness, large effect, plausible confounding would change the effect		The mean BCVA 12 months, conbercept versus aflibercept in the control groups was 0.665	The mean bcva 12 months, conbercept versus aflibercept in the intervention groups was 0.358 standard deviations lower (0.352 to 0.797 higher)
CRT 12 months, conbercept versus aflibercept oct	722 (19 studies) 12 months	⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW^{1, 2, 3} due to inconsistency, indirectness, large effect, plausible confounding would change the effect		The mean CRT 12 months, conbercept versus aflibercept in the control groups was 1.411	The mean crt 12 months, conbercept versus aflibercept in the intervention groups was 0.323 standard deviations lower (1.063 to 1.610 higher)
				Study population
Polyp regression rate 12 months, conbercept versus aflibercept ICGA	643 (14 studies) 12 months	⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW^{1, 2, 3} due to inconsistency, indirectness, large effect, plausible confounding would change the effect	0.186 1 (0.467 to 0.613)	476 pr12 per 1000	217 more pr12 per 1000 (from 184 more to 254 more)
				Moderate

The efficacy of conbercept in polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy-conbercept versus ranibizumab
Outcomes	Number of participants (studies) Follow-up	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Relative effect (95% CI)	Anticipated absolute effects
				Risk with ranibizumab	Risk difference with conbercept (95% CI)
BCVA 12 months, conbercept versus ranibizumab logMAR	442 (13 studies) 12 months	⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW^{1, 2, 3, 4} due to inconsistency, indirectness, large effect, plausible confounding would change the effect		The mean BCVA 12 months, conbercept versus ranibizumab in the control groups was 0.275	The mean bcva 12 months, conbercept versus ranibizumab in the intervention groups was 0.03 standard deviations higher (0.166 to 0.406 higher)
CRT 12 months, conbercept versus ranibizumab oct	336 (9 studies) 12 months	⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW^{1, 2, 3, 4} due to inconsistency, indirectness, large effect, plausible confounding would change the effect		The mean CRT 12 months, conbercept versus ranibizumab in the control groups was 0.781	The mean crt 12 months, conbercept versus ranibizumab in the intervention groups was 0.294 standard deviations higher (0.722 to 1.114 higher)
				Study population
Polyp regression rate 12 months, conbercept versus ranibizumab ICGA	482 (9 studies) 12 months	⊕⊕⊝⊝ LOW^{1, 2, 3, 4} due to inconsistency, indirectness, large effect, plausible confounding would change the effect	0.373 1 (0.372 to 0.501)	333 pr12 per 1000	383 more pr12 per 1000 (from 166 more to 209 more)³
				Moderate

The basis for the assumed risk (e.g., the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval. GRADE working group grades of evidence. High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate. ¹Heteorgeneity. ²Indirect comparation. ³No explanation was provided. ⁴Different dose in conbercept group.