Cheung Chui Ming Gemmy, Lim Jennifer I, Priglinger Siegfried, Querques Giuseppe, Margaron Philippe, Patel Shriji, Souverain Audrey, Willis Jeffrey R, Yang Ming, Guymer Robyn
Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Ophthalmology. 2025 May;132(5):519-526. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.11.023. Epub 2024 Nov 30.
To compare early anatomic outcomes after treatment with faricimab versus aflibercept in a pooled analysis of the head-to-head dosing phase of the TENAYA/LUCERNE trials in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).
TENAYA/LUCERNE (NCT03823287/NCT03823300) were identical, randomized, double-masked, active comparator-controlled phase 3 noninferiority trials.
Patients aged ≥ 50 years with treatment-naïve nAMD.
Patients were randomized (1:1) to intravitreal faricimab 6.0 mg up to every 16 weeks (Q16W) after 4 initial doses every 4 weeks (Q4W) or aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W) after 3 initial doses given Q4W.
Post hoc analyses comparing faricimab with aflibercept in terms of change in central subfield thickness (CST) from baseline and proportion of patients with an absence of subretinal fluid (SRF) and intraretinal fluid (IRF) during initial 12-week head-to-head dosing phase, when both arms received 3 injections, and time to first absence of IRF and SRF.
A total of 1329 patients were enrolled across TENAYA/LUCERNE (n = 665 faricimab; n = 664 aflibercept). There were greater (nominal P < 0.0001) reductions in adjusted mean CST from baseline with faricimab versus aflibercept at weeks 4, 8, and 12, with comparable vision outcomes. At week 12, more patients (95% confidence interval) achieved an absence of SRF (87.9% [85.4%-90.4%] vs. 79.0% [76.0%-82.1%]) and both IRF and SRF (77.2% [74.0%-80.4%] vs. 66.5% [62.9%-70.0%]) but not IRF (88.4% [86.0%-90.8%] vs. 85.0% [82.3%-87.6%]), with faricimab versus aflibercept, respectively. In patients with IRF or SRF at baseline (n = 581 faricimab; n = 591 aflibercept), the 75th percentile of time to first absence of IRF and SRF was reached at week 8 with faricimab and week 12 with aflibercept. At week 12, cumulative incidence of first-time absence of IRF and SRF was 85.5% (82.3%-88.1%) with faricimab and 75.0% (71.3%-78.3%) with aflibercept.
Faricimab resulted in greater improvement in anatomic outcomes than aflibercept during the head-to-head dosing phase and a faster time to first absence of retinal fluid.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.
在一项针对新生血管性年龄相关性黄斑变性(nAMD)的TENAYA/LUCERNE试验的头对头给药阶段的汇总分析中,比较法西单抗与阿柏西普治疗后的早期解剖学结果。
TENAYA/LUCERNE(NCT03823287/NCT03823300)是相同的、随机、双盲、活性对照药对照的3期非劣效性试验。
年龄≥50岁、未经治疗的nAMD患者。
患者被随机分组(1:1),在每4周(Q4W)给予4次初始剂量后,每16周(Q16W)玻璃体内注射6.0 mg法西单抗,或在Q4W给予3次初始剂量后,每8周(Q8W)注射2.0 mg阿柏西普。
在初始12周的头对头给药阶段(此时两组均接受3次注射),进行事后分析,比较法西单抗与阿柏西普在中心子场厚度(CST)相对于基线的变化、无视网膜下液(SRF)和视网膜内液(IRF)的患者比例,以及首次无IRF和SRF的时间。
TENAYA/LUCERNE共纳入1329例患者(法西单抗组n = 665;阿柏西普组n = 664)。在第4、8和12周时,法西单抗组相对于基线的调整后平均CST降低幅度大于阿柏西普组(名义P < 0.0001),视力结果相当。在第12周时,更多患者(95%置信区间)实现无SRF(87.9% [85.4%-90.4%] 对79.0% [76.0%-82.1%])以及无IRF和SRF(77.2% [74.0%-80.4%] 对66.5% [62.9%-70.0%]),但无IRF的比例两组相当(88.4% [86.0%-90.8%] 对85.0% [82.3%-87.6%]),法西单抗组和阿柏西普组分别如此。在基线时有IRF或SRF的患者中(法西单抗组n = 581;阿柏西普组n = 591),法西单抗组在第8周达到首次无IRF和SRF时间的第75百分位数,阿柏西普组在第12周达到。在第12周时,法西单抗组首次无IRF和SRF的累积发生率为85.5%(82.3%-88.1%),阿柏西普组为75.0%(71.3%-78.3%)。
在头对头给药阶段,法西单抗在解剖学结果方面比阿柏西普有更大改善,且首次无视网膜液的时间更快。
在参考文献之后可能会有专利或商业披露信息。