-
1.
An Updated and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of Association between VEGA -634G > C, -460T > C, +405G > C and +936C > T Polymorphisms and Retinopathy of Prematurity Risk.
Gohari, M, Bahrami, R, Dastgheib, SA, Lookzadeh, MH, Noorishadkam, M, Mirjalili, SR, Zare-Shehneh, M, Neamatzadeh, H
Fetal and pediatric pathology. 2021;(3):233-249
Abstract
Previous studies have suggested an association between VEGF-A polymorphisms and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) risk. But the conclusions are still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the association between the VEGF-A polymorphisms and susceptibility of ROP. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, WanFang and CNKI databases for all eligible case-control studies published before September 30, 2019. Results: A total of 27 case-control studies with 5,748 ROP cases and 6,146 controls were selected. The results suggested that there was an association between VEGF-A -460T > C polymorphism and increased risk of ROP under the allele model (C vs. T: OR= 0.879, 95% CI 0.776-0.994, p = 0.040). However, VEGF-A -634G > C, +405G > C and +936C > T polymorphisms were not significantly associated with risk of ROP. The subgroup analysis demonstrated that VEGF-A +405G > C polymorphism was associated with ROP risk in Caucasians. Conclusions: This meta-analysis indicates that VEGF-A -460T > C polymorphism may contribute to the susceptibility for ROP.
-
2.
Associations between Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Gene Polymorphisms and Different Types of Diabetic Retinopathy Susceptibility: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Hu, L, Gong, C, Chen, X, Zhou, H, Yan, J, Hong, W
Journal of diabetes research. 2021;:7059139
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene polymorphisms have been shown to be associated with the risk of diabetic retinopathy (DR), but the results were inconsistent. The aim of this study was to systematically assess the associations between VEGF gene polymorphisms and different types of DR (nonproliferative DR and proliferative DR). METHODS Electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and WANFANG DATA were searched for articles on the associations between VEGF gene polymorphisms and different types of DR up to November 6, 2019. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and subgroup analyses were conducted by ethnicity. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the stability of the results. Publication bias was assessed by using the Egger regression asymmetry test and visualization of funnel plots. A systematic review was conducted for polymorphisms with a high degree of heterogeneity (I 2 > 75%) or studied in only one study. RESULTS A total of 13 and 18 studies analyzed the associations between VEGF SNPs and nonproliferative DR (NPDR) as well as proliferative DR (PDR), respectively. There were significant associations between rs2010963 and NPDR in Asian (dominant model: OR = 1.29, 95%CI = 1.04 - 1.60); and rs2010963 is associated with PDR in total population (dominant model: OR = 1.20, 95%CI = 1.03 - 1.41), either Asian (recessive model: OR = 1.57, 95%CI = 1.04 - 2.35) or Caucasian (recessive model: OR = 1.83, 95%CI = 1.28 - 2.63). Rs833061 is associated with PDR in Asian (recessive model: OR = 1.58, 95%CI = 1.11 - 2.26). Rs699947 is associated with NPDR in the total population (dominant model: OR = 2.04, 95%CI = 1.30 - 3.21) and associated with PDR in Asian (dominant model: OR = 1.72, 95%CI = 1.05 - 2.84). CONCLUSIONS Rs2010963, rs833061, and rs699947 are associated with NPDR or PDR, which may be involved in the occurrence and development of DR.
-
3.
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion.
Shalchi, Z, Mahroo, O, Bunce, C, Mitry, D
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;(7):CD009510
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is one of the most commonly occurring retinal vascular abnormalities. The most common cause of visual loss in people with BRVO is macular oedema (MO). Grid or focal laser photocoagulation has been shown to reduce the risk of visual loss. Limitations to this treatment exist, however, and newer modalities may have equal or improved efficacy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) has recently been used successfully to treat MO resulting from a variety of causes. OBJECTIVES To investigate the efficacy and gather evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the potential harms of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents for the treatment of macular oedema (MO) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2019, Issue 6); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the last search was 12 June 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating BRVO. Eligible trials had to have at least six months' follow-up where anti-VEGF treatment was compared with another treatment, no treatment, or placebo. We excluded trials where combination treatments (anti-VEGF plus other treatments) were used; and trials that investigated the dose and duration of treatment without a comparison group (other treatment/no treatment/sham). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted the data using standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with an improvement from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity of greater than or equal to 15 letters (3 lines) on the Early Treatment in Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart at six months and 12 months of follow-up. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of participants who lost greater than or equal to 15 ETDRS letters (3 lines) and the mean visual acuity (VA) change at six and 12 months, as well as the change in central retinal thickness (CRT) on optical coherence tomography from baseline at six and 12 months. We also collected data on adverse events and quality of life (QoL). MAIN RESULTS We found eight RCTs of 1631 participants that met the inclusion criteria after independent and duplicate review of the search results. These studies took place in Europe, North America, Eastern Mediterranean region and East Asia. Included participants were adults aged 18 or over with VA of 20/40 or worse. Studies varied by duration of disease but permitted previously treated eyes as long as there was sufficient treatment-free interval. All anti-VEGF agents (bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept) and steroids (triamcinolone and dexamethasone) were included. Overall, we judged the studies to be at moderate or unclear risk of bias. Four of the eight studies did not mask participants or outcome assessors, or both. One trial compared anti-VEGF to sham. At six months, eyes receiving anti-VEGF were significantly more likely to have a gain of 15 or more ETDRS letters (risk ratio (RR) 1.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 2.49; 283 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean VA was better in the anti-VEGF group at six months compared with control (mean difference (MD) 7.50 letters, 95% CI 5.29 to 9.71; 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Anti-VEGF also proved more effective at reducing CRT at six months (MD -57.50 microns, 95% CI -108.63 to -6.37; 281 participants; lower CRT is better; moderate-certainty evidence). There was only very low-certainty evidence on adverse effects. There were no reports of endophthalmitis. Mean change in QoL (measured using the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire VFQ-25) was better in people treated with anti-VEGF compared with people treated with sham (MD 7.6 higher score, 95% CI 4.3 to 10.9; 281 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Three RCTs compared anti-VEGF with macular laser (total participants = 473). The proportion of eyes gaining 15 or more letters was greater in the anti-VEGF group at six months (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.05; 2 studies, 201 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean VA in the anti-VEGF groups was better than the laser groups at six months (MD 9.63 letters, 95% CI 7.23 to 12.03; 3 studies, 473 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was a greater reduction in CRT in the anti-VEGF group compared with the laser group at six months (MD -147.47 microns, 95% CI -200.19 to -94.75; 2 studies, 201 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was only very low-certainty evidence on adverse events. There were no reports of endophthalmitis. QoL outcomes were not reported. Four studies compared anti-VEGF with intravitreal steroid (875 participants). The proportion of eyes gaining 15 or more ETDRS letters was greater in the anti-VEGF group at six months (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.10; 2 studies, 330 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 12 months (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.28; 1 study, 307 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mean VA was better in the anti-VEGF group at six months (MD 8.22 letters, 95% CI 5.69 to 10.76; 2 studies, 330 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 12 months (MD 9.15 letters, 95% CI 6.32 to 11.97; 2 studies, 343 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mean CRT also showed a greater reduction in the anti-VEGF arm at 12 months compared with intravitreal steroid (MD -26.92 microns, 95% CI -65.88 to 12.04; 2 studies, 343 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). People receiving anti-VEGF showed a greater improvement in QoL at 12 months compared to those receiving steroid (MD 3.10, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.98; 1 study, 307 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Moderate-certainty evidence suggested increased risk of cataract and raised IOP with steroids. There was only very low-certainty evidence on APTC events. No cases of endophthalmitis were observed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The available RCT evidence suggests that treatment of MO secondary to BRVO with anti-VEGF improves visual and anatomical outcomes at six and 12 months.
-
4.
Intravitreal conbercept improves outcome in patients undergoing vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Pranata, R, Vania, A
Journal of evidence-based medicine. 2020;(2):116-124
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the latest evidence concerning the efficacy of conbercept on vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and its efficacy compared to control and other antivascular endothelial growth factor. METHODS We performed a systematic literature search on topics that assess the role of conbercept in patients undergoing vitrectomy for PDR from inception to November 2019, using PubMed, EuropePMC, Cochrane Central Database, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Two researchers independently searched literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. RevMan 5.3 and StataMP 16 software were used to perform data analysis. RESULTS There were 699 cases (eyes) from eight studies. Baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was better in the control group compared to conbercept group (mean difference [MD] = 0.13, I2 = 0%). A greater BCVA improvement was observed in the conbercept group after 1-month (MD = -0.27, I2 = 1%), 3-month (MD = -0.28, I2 = 0%), and 6-month (MD = -0.20, I2 = 78%) follow-up. The need for endodiathermy (odds ratio [OR] = 0.20, I2 = 0%) and silicone oil tamponade use (OR = 0.59, I2 = 72%) and intraoperative bleeding (OR = 0.11, I2 = 33%) was lower in conbercept group. Postoperative early (OR = 0.22, I2 = 0%) and late (OR = 0.47, I2 = 0%) vitreous hemorrhage was lower in conbercept group. There was no significant difference in BCVA improvement and intraoperative outcome between conbercept and ranibizumab. CONCLUSIONS Intravitreal conbercept was associated with a more significant BCVA improvement, better intraoperative outcome, and less postoperative vitreous hemorrhage compared to no conbercept.
-
5.
Association of VEGF Gene Polymorphisms with Susceptibility to Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Yang, Q, Zhang, Y, Zhang, X, Li, X, Liu, J
Hormone and metabolic research = Hormon- und Stoffwechselforschung = Hormones et metabolisme. 2020;(5):264-279
Abstract
The associations between vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene polymorphisms and risk of type 2 diabetic retinopathy (DR) - proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), and nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) - remain unclear. A systematic search and meta-analysis using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was performed to evaluate the association. Our study concluded 26 studies containing 10 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). In Asian populations, rs3025039 polymorphism was associated with DR risk, while in overall populations and Caucasians, the DR risk was increased by association with rs2010963. There was a significant association between rs25648 and rs833061 and DR risk in Caucasians. DR risks were found to be significantly associated between rs3025021, rs13207351, and rs2146323 in either overall populations, Caucasians or Asians. Besides, in overall and Asian populations, rs699947 and rs3025039 were associated with PDR risk. rs1570360, rs3025039, and rs833061 played a key role in PDR etiology in Caucasians. rs2010963 was associated with increased risk of PDR in overall populations. A significant association between rs699947, rs3025039, and rs833061 and NPDR risk in overall populations and Asians was found. A significant association was observed between rs2010963 and increased NPDR risk in overall and Caucasian populations. This study provides a new insight into the parthenogenesis of diabetic retinopathy. Targeting VEGF SNPs may be a potential of therapeutic approach for the treatment of DR, PDR, and NPDR.
-
6.
Clinicohistopathological implications of MMP/VEGF expression in retinoblastoma: a combined meta-analysis and bioinformatics analysis.
Zhu, J, Zhang, X, Ai, L, Yuan, R, Ye, J
Journal of translational medicine. 2019;(1):226
Abstract
BACKGROUND No in-depth systematic evidence is available for assessing retinoblastoma malignancy and eligibility for subsequent treatment. METHODS The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and China Biology Medicine databases were searched, and 16 studies comprising 718 retinoblastoma patients were included. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and summary correlation coefficients (r) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in random-effects, fixed-effects or quality-effects models were calculated using Review Manager 5.3 and MetaXL. GO functional annotation and KEGG pathway analysis were performed using the GO and STRING databases. RESULTS We observed significant associations between high levels of MMP-1 (OR, 4.21; 95% CI 1.86-9.54), MMP-2 (OR, 11.18; 95% CI 4.26-29.30), MMP-9 (OR, 10.41, 95% CI 4.26-25.47), and VEGF (OR, 8.09; 95% CI 4.03-16.20) with tumor invasion; high levels of MMP-1 (OR, 3.58; 95% CI 1.48-8.71), MMP-2 (OR, 2.96; 95% CI 1.32-6.64), MMP-9 (OR, 5.49; 95% CI 3.55-8.48) and VEGF (OR, 5.30; 95% CI 2.93-9.60) with poor differentiation; and overexpression of MMP-9 (OR, 5.17; 95% CI 2.85-9.38) with advanced clinical stages. Moreover, MMP-9 and VEGF expression were positively correlated (r, 0.61; 95% CI 0.38-0.77). Multiple GO terms were enriched associated with MMP-1, MMP-2, MMP-9 and VEGF, and they are closely associated with pathways, proteoglycans and microRNAs related to cancer. CONCLUSIONS MMP-1, MMP-2, MMP-9 and VEGF play important roles in the development and progression of retinoblastoma. High levels of MMP-1, MMP-2, MMP-9 and VEGF are credible implications for increased malignancy, thus the need for more aggressive treatments.
-
7.
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for retinal conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Pham, B, Thomas, SM, Lillie, E, Lee, T, Hamid, J, Richter, T, Janoudi, G, Agarwal, A, Sharpe, JP, Scott, A, et al
BMJ open. 2019;(5):e022031
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of intravitreal bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept for patients with choroidal neovascular age-related macular degeneration (cn-AMD), diabetic macular oedema (DMO), macular oedema due to retinal vein occlusion (RVO-MO) and myopic choroidal neovascularisation (m-CNV). DESIGN Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis. METHODS Multiple databases were searched from inception to 17 August 2017. Eligible head-to-head randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the (anti-VEGF) drugs in adult patients aged ≥18 years with the retinal conditions of interest. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. RESULTS 19 RCTs involving 7459 patients with cn-AMD (n=12), DMO (n=3), RVO-MO (n=2) and m-CNV (n=2) were included. Vision gain was not significantly different in patients with cn-AMD, DMO, RVO-MO and m-CNV treated with bevacizumab versus ranibizumab. Similarly, vision gain was not significantly different between cn-AMD patients treated with aflibercept versus ranibizumab. Patients with DMO treated with aflibercept experienced significantly higher vision gain at 12 months than patients receiving ranibizumab or bevacizumab; however, this difference was not significant at 24 months. Rates of systemic serious harms were similar across anti-VEGF agents. Posthoc analyses revealed that an as-needed treatment regimen (6-9 injections per year) was associated with a mortality increase of 1.8% (risk ratio: 2.0 [1.2 to 3.5], 2 RCTs, 1795 patients) compared with monthly treatment in cn-AMD patients. CONCLUSIONS Intravitreal bevacizumab was a reasonable alternative to ranibizumab and aflibercept in patients with cn-AMD, DMO, RVO-MO and m-CNV. The only exception was for patients with DME and low visual acuity (<69 early treatment diabetic retinopathy study [ETDRS] letters), where treatment with aflibercept was associated with significantly higher vision gain (≥15 ETDRS letters) than bevacizumab or ranibizumab at 12 months; but the significant effects were not maintained at 24 months. The choice of anti-VEGF drugs may depend on the specific retinal condition, baseline visual acuity and treatment regimen. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42015022041.
-
8.
Serum Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Levels Correlate with Severity of Retinopathy in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Zhou, Z, Ju, H, Sun, M, Chen, H
Disease markers. 2019;:9401628
Abstract
BACKGROUND Investigations regarding serum and plasma vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels in patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) are conflicting. This meta-analysis is aimed at determining whether serum and plasma VEGF levels are associated with DR and its severity in diabetic patients. METHODS PubMed and EMBASE were used to search for published studies, and serum and plasma VEGF levels were compared among DR, nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), and nondiabetic retinopathy (NDR) patients. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled using a random effects model. RESULTS A total of 29 studies comprising 1805 DR (or NPDR or PDR) patients and 1699 NDR patients were included. ELISA was used to evaluate serum or plasma VEGF levels in all except for two studies included in this meta-analysis. Overall, serum VEGF levels were significantly higher in DR patients (SMD: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.44-1.03) than those in NDR patients, while plasma VEGF levels were not in the comparison (SMD: 0.40, 95% CI: -0.13-0.92). Similarly, NPDR (SMD: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.22-0.80) and PDR (SMD: 1.32, 95% CI: 0.79-1.85) patients had higher serum VEGF levels compared with NDR patients, but the difference was not significant in plasma samples (SMD: 0.24, 95% CI: -0.47-0.95; SMD: 0.37, 95% CI: -0.30-1.05). In addition, serum VEGF levels were higher in PDR patients than those in NPDR patients (SMD: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.41-1.33), but plasma VEGF levels were not (SMD: -0.00, 95% CI: -0.31-0.31). The subgroup and metaregression analysis revealed that the study location, study design, and publication year of a study have certain influence on heterogeneity between studies in serum or plasma samples. CONCLUSIONS VEGF levels in the serum instead of those in the plasma correlate to the presence and severity of DR in diabetic patients. Further large-scale studies are required to confirm these findings.
-
9.
Comparison of efficacy between anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and laser treatment in Type-1 and threshold retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).
Li, Z, Zhang, Y, Liao, Y, Zeng, R, Zeng, P, Lan, Y
BMC ophthalmology. 2018;(1):19
Abstract
BACKGROUND Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) is one of the most common causes of childhood blindness worldwide. Comparisons of anti-VEGF and laser treatments in ROP are relatively lacking, and the data are scattered and limited. The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of both treatments in type-1 and threshold ROP. METHODS A comprehensive literature search on ROP treatment was conducted using PubMed and Embase up to March 2017 in all languages. Major evaluation indexes were extracted from the included studies by two authors. The fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to measure the pooled estimates. The test of heterogeneity was performed using the Q statistic. RESULTS Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. Retreatment incidence was significantly increased for anti-VEGF (OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.37 to 4.66; P = 0.003) compared to the laser treatment, while the incidences of eye complications (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.82; P = 0.02) and myopia were significantly decreased with anti-VEGF compared to the laser treatment. However, there was no difference in the recurrence incidence (OR 1.86; 95% CI 0.37 to 9.40; P = 0.45) and time between treatment and retreatment (WMD 7.54 weeks; 95% CI 2.00 to 17.08; P = 0.12). CONCLUSION This meta-analysis indicates that laser treatment may be more efficacious than anti-VEGF treatment. However, the results of this meta-analysis also suggest that laser treatment may cause more eye complications and increase myopia. Large-scale prospective RCTs should be performed to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF versus laser treatment in the future.
-
10.
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular oedema: a network meta-analysis.
Virgili, G, Parravano, M, Evans, JR, Gordon, I, Lucenteforte, E
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2018;(10):CD007419
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) can reduce oedema, improve vision and prevent further visual loss. These drugs have replaced laser photocoagulation as the standard of care for people with DMO. OBJECTIVES The 2014 update of this review found high-quality evidence of benefit with anti-VEGF modalities, compared to laser photocoagulation, for the treatment of DMO. The objective of this updated review is to compare the effectiveness and safety of the different anti-VEGF drugs using network meta-analysis methods. SEARCH METHODS We searched various electronic databases on 26 April 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any anti-angiogenic drug with an anti-VEGF mechanism of action versus another anti-VEGF drug, another treatment, sham or no treatment in people with DMO. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard Cochrane methods for pair-wise meta-analysis and we augmented this evidence using network meta-analysis methods. We focused on the relative efficacy and safety of the three most commonly used drugs as interventions of direct interest for practice: aflibercept and ranibizumab, used on-label; and off-label bevacizumab.We collected data on three efficacy outcomes (gain of 15 or more Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters; mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA); mean change in central retinal thickness (CRT)), three safety outcomes (all severe systemic adverse events (SSAEs); all-cause death; arterial thromboembolic events) and quality of life.We used Stata 'network' meta-analysis package for all analyses. We investigated the risk of bias of mixed comparisons based on the variance contribution of each study, having assigned an overall risk of bias to each study. MAIN RESULTS Twenty-four studies included 6007 participants with DMO and moderate vision loss, of which two studies randomised 265 eyes of 230 participants and one was a cross-over study on 56 participants (62 eyes) that was treated as a parallel-arm trial. Data were collected on drugs of direct interest from three studies on aflibercept (975 eyes), eight studies on bevacizumab (515 eyes), and 14 studies on ranibizumab (1518 eyes). As treatments of indirect interest or legacy treatment we included three studies on pegaptanib (541 eyes), five studies on ranibizumab plus prompt laser (557 eyes), one study on ranibizumab plus deferred laser (188 eyes), 13 studies on laser photocoagulation (936 eyes) and six studies on sham treatment (793 eyes).Aflibercept, bevacizumab and ranibizumab were all more effective than laser for improving vision by 3 or more lines after one year (high-certainty evidence). Approximately one in 10 people improve vision with laser, and about three in 10 people improve with anti-VEGF treatment: risk ratio (RR) versus laser 3.66 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.79 to 4.79) for aflibercept; RR 2.47 (95% CI 1.81 to 3.37) for bevacizumab; RR 2.76 (95% CI 2.12 to 3.59) for ranibizumab. On average there was no change in visual acuity (VA) with laser after one year, compared with a gain of 1 or 2 lines with anti-VEGF treatment: laser versus aflibercept mean difference (MD) -0.20 (95% CI -0.22 to -0.17) logMAR; versus bevacizumab MD -0.12 (95% CI -0.15 to -0.09) logMAR; versus ranibizumab MD -0.12 (95% CI -0.14 to -0.10) logMAR. The certainty of the evidence was high for the comparison of aflibercept and ranibizumab with laser and moderate for bevacizumab comparison with laser due to inconsistency between the indirect and direct evidence.People receiving ranibizumab were less likely to gain 3 or more lines of VA at one year compared with aflibercept: RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.94), moderate-certainty evidence. For every 1000 people treated with aflibercept, 92 fewer would gain 3 or more lines of VA at one year if treated with ranibizumab (22 to 148 fewer). On average people receiving ranibizumab had worse VA at one year (MD 0.08 logMAR units, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11), moderate-certainty evidence; and higher CRT (MD 39 µm, 95% CI 2 µm to 76 µm; low-certainty evidence). Ranibizumab and bevacizumab were comparable with respect to aflibercept and did not differ in terms of VA: RR of gain of 3 or more lines of VA at one year 1.11 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.43), moderate-certainty evidence, and difference in change in VA was 0.00 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.03) logMAR, moderate-certainty evidence. CRT reduction favoured ranibizumab by -29 µm (95% CI -58 µm to -1 µm, low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of overall statistical inconsistency in our analyses.The previous version of this review found moderate-certainty evidence of good safety of antiangiogenic drugs versus control. This update used data at the longest available follow-up (one or two years) and found that aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab do not differ regarding systemic serious adverse events (SSAEs) (moderate- or high-certainty evidence). However, risk of bias was variable, loop inconsistency could be found and estimates were not precise enough on relative safety regarding less frequent events such as arterial thromboembolic events or death (low- or very low-certainty evidence).Two-year data were available and reported in only four RCTs in this review. Most industry-sponsored studies were open-label after one year. One large publicly-funded study compared the three drugs at two years and found no difference. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Anti-VEGF drugs are effective at improving vision in people with DMO with three to four in every 10 people likely to experience an improvement of 3 or more lines VA at one year. Aflibercept may confer some advantage over ranibizumab and bevacizumab in people with DMO at one year in visual and anatomic terms but it is unclear whether this applies to the long-term. There is a need for more evidence on the long-term (greater than two years) comparative effects of these anti-VEGF agents. Evidence from RCTs may not apply to real-world practice, where people in need of antiangiogenic treatment are often under-treated and under-monitored.We found no signals of differences in overall safety between the three antiangiogenic drugs that are currently available to treat DMO, but our estimates are imprecise for cardiovascular events and death.