Article

IVAN, CATT studies assess efficacy of two AMD drugs

The 2-year results of the Comparison of AMD Treatment Trials (CATT) indicate that bevacizumab (Avastin, Genentech) is equivalent to ranibizumab (Lucentis, Genentech) for treating wet age-related macular degeneration when similar dosing regimens are compared. In addition, the 1-year results of the randomized controlled trial of alternative treatments to Inhibit VEGF in Age-related choroidal Neovascularisation (IVAN) were presented during a special session at the ARVO annual meeting.

Fort Lauderdale, FL-The 2-year results of the Comparison of AMD Treatment Trials (CATT) indicate that bevacizumab (Avastin, Genentech) is equivalent to ranibizumab (Lucentis, Genentech) for treating wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) when similar dosing regimens are compared. In addition, the 1-year results of the randomized controlled trial of alternative treatments to Inhibit VEGF in Age-related choroidal Neovascularisation (IVAN) were presented during a special session at the ARVO annual meeting.

The as-needed regimen was not quite as effective as monthly dosing of the two drugs, said Daniel Martin, MD, who presented the 2-year results of the CATT Study.

The main conclusion about the efficacy of the two anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs was based on the results of 1,107 of 1,185 patients who were followed during the second year of the study. Both drugs provided similar mean gains in visual acuity. The mean increase in visual acuity was slightly better with monthly dosing compared with as-needed dosing, regardless of whether the monthly dosing was started initially or at 1 year. The adverse events, such as stroke, heart attack, and death, did not differ between the drugs; however, during the second year there were more serious non-specific adverse events in patients randomly assigned to bevacizumab.

Usha Chakravarty, MD, presented the 1-year results of the randomized controlled trial of alternative treatments to Inhibit VEGF in Age-related choroidal Neovascularisation (IVAN), while also studying the safety and efficacy of the two drugs to determine if the number of treatments can be decreased. Investigators are comparing monthly treatments for 2 years with the two drugs and monthly treatments for 3 months with the two drugs in 600 patients.

Dr. Chakravarty said that for the primary endpoint comparison of visual acuity achieved with the two drugs at 1 year, the results indicated “that the confidence limits straddled both the noninferiority and the 0 line, with a mean difference of 1.99, which we concluded that the comparison was inconclusive. The comparison of the continuous and discontinuous regimens showed no difference between the two drugs.”

For more articles in this issue of Ophthalmology Times Conference Briefclick here.

Newsletter

Don’t miss out—get Ophthalmology Times updates on the latest clinical advancements and expert interviews, straight to your inbox.

Related Videos
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) ASCRS 2025: Parag Majmudar, MD, on bridging the gap between residency and real-world practice
Brett Bielory, MD, discusses his poster at the ASCRS annual meeting, which focuses on an under-diagnosed corneal pathology: neurotrophic keratitis.
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) Oluwatosin U. Smith talks Glaukomtecken
ASCRS 2025: Eva Kim, MD, discusses implantable collamer lenses and high myopia.
Abby Markward, MBA, and Hattie Hayes, editor of Ophthalmology Times Europe, discuss the ASCRS and ASOA meetings
Abby Markward discusses the ASCRS Foundation and the ASCRS Annual Meeting
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) Inside ASCRS 2025: Francis S. Mah, MD, takes the helm with a vision for research, education, and advocacy
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.