IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0358699.html

OphthoEvidence Report: Comparative effects of treatments for geographic atrophy secondary to age-related macular degeneration: A protocol for a living systematic review and network meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Maryam Ghadimi
  • Housne Begum
  • Dena Zeraatkar
  • Jinhui Ma
  • Sobha Sivaprasad
  • Enrico Borrelli
  • Peter Kaiser
  • David H Steel
  • Tien Yin Wong
  • Robyn Guymer
  • Charles C Wykoff
  • Varun Chaudhary

Abstract

Background: Geographic atrophy (GA), an advanced form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD), leads to legal blindness in approximately 16% of affected individuals within 6 years. Numerous trials have evaluated interventions to slow GA progression, and many studies are ongoing. However, the comparative benefits and harms of treatments within this rapidly evolving therapeutic landscape have not yet been systematically synthesized. Objectives: To present a protocol for a living systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) addressing the effects of available interventions for the management of GA. Methods: We systematically searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception for randomized controlled trials comparing any pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic treatment versus another, placebo, sham, or standard care in adults with unilateral or bilateral GA secondary to AMD. Paired reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data, and assess risk of bias. Outcomes of interest include best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), untransformed and square root-transformed total GA lesion area, vision-related quality of life, low luminance BCVA, reading speed, mean macular sensitivity, adverse events leading to discontinuation, macular neovascularization, need for rescue treatment, ischemic optic neuropathy, serious ocular adverse events, and serious non-ocular adverse events. For each outcome, if feasible, we will conduct frequentist random-effects NMAs. We will assess the certainty of evidence and interpret findings using the GRADE approach. To maintain this review as a living systematic review, we will conduct updates every six months. Discussion: This review will provide a comprehensive, trustworthy, and up-to-date summary of evidence on treatments for GA secondary to AMD. Registration: Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W4JHR).

Suggested Citation

  • Maryam Ghadimi & Housne Begum & Dena Zeraatkar & Jinhui Ma & Sobha Sivaprasad & Enrico Borrelli & Peter Kaiser & David H Steel & Tien Yin Wong & Robyn Guymer & Charles C Wykoff & Varun Chaudhary, 2026. "OphthoEvidence Report: Comparative effects of treatments for geographic atrophy secondary to age-related macular degeneration: A protocol for a living systematic review and network meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(9), pages 1-11, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0358699
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0358699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358699
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358699&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0358699?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0358699. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.