Emerging therapeutic strategies for unmet need in neovascular age-related macular degeneration
Khachigian LM., Liew G., Teo KYC., Wong TY., Mitchell P.
Narrative Review, published in J Transl Med (2023) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- J Transl Med (2023)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 36810060
- PMCID
- PMC9942398
- DOI
- 10.1186/s12967-023-03937-7
- Citations
- 75
Abstract (original English)
Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is a major cause of visual impairment and blindness. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents, such as ranibizumab, bevacizumab, aflibercept, brolucizumab and faricimab have revolutionized the clinical management of nAMD. However, there remains an unmet clinical need for new and improved therapies for nAMD, since many patients do not respond optimally, may lose response over time or exhibit sub-optimal durability, impacting on real world effectiveness. Evidence is emerging that targeting VEGF-A alone, as most agents have done until recently, may be insufficient and agents that target multiple pathways (e.g., aflibercept, faricimab and others in development) may be more efficacious. This article reviews issues and limitations that have arisen from the use of existing anti-VEGF agents, and argues that the future may lie in multi-targeted therapies including alternative agents and modalities that target both the VEGF ligand/receptor system as well as other pathways.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.