Single vs Double Bevacizumab Injections Compared for Macular Degeneration Treatment
A Phase 4 RCT tests whether one bevacizumab injection matches two combined doses for neovascular AMD outcomes over 12 months.
Summary
This completed Phase 4 clinical trial from the University Hospital of Ferrara compared two treatment strategies for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NV-AMD). Patients were randomized to receive either a single intravitreal bevacizumab injection (IVIBx1) or two combined injections spaced about 30 days apart (IVIBx2), both given on a pro-re-nata (as-needed) basis. The trial aimed to determine whether the simpler single-injection regimen was non-inferior to the combined approach in terms of safety, visual outcomes, number of injections required, patient compliance, and vision-related quality of life over 12 months. This research has practical implications for reducing treatment burden on patients and healthcare systems while maintaining therapeutic effectiveness for a leading cause of vision loss in older adults.
Detailed Summary
Age-related macular degeneration is the leading cause of irreversible vision loss in adults over 50, and its neovascular form — driven by abnormal blood vessel growth stimulated by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) — requires ongoing intravitreal injections to preserve sight. Bevacizumab, an anti-VEGF agent originally developed for cancer, is widely used off-label for this condition due to its cost-effectiveness compared to approved alternatives like ranibizumab or aflibercept.
This Phase 4 randomized controlled trial, sponsored by the University Hospital of Ferrara and supported by the Emilia-Romagna Regional Healthcare Fund, enrolled patients with NV-AMD who were either treatment-naive or already receiving pro-re-nata (PRN) anti-VEGF therapy. Participants were randomized 1:1 to a single bevacizumab injection per treatment cycle (IVIBx1) or two injections spaced 30 ± 10 days apart per cycle (IVIBx2), with retreatment triggered by signs of persistent neovascular activity.
The primary objective was to establish non-inferiority of the single-injection regimen versus the combined protocol across measures of clinical safety, therapeutic efficacy, total injection burden, patient compliance, and vision-related quality of life over 12 months of follow-up. The open-label parallel-arm design reflects real-world clinical practice at the Ferrara Eye Clinic.
If the single-injection protocol proves non-inferior, it could meaningfully reduce the treatment burden for patients — fewer clinic visits, lower procedural risk, and reduced healthcare costs — without compromising visual outcomes. This is particularly relevant given the chronic, lifelong nature of NV-AMD management.
However, the trial's open-label design introduces potential bias, and results are not yet published in peer-reviewed literature. The summary here is based solely on the registry abstract, so key outcome data, statistical results, and adverse event profiles remain unavailable for evaluation.
Key Findings
- Trial tests whether single bevacizumab injections are non-inferior to double injections for NV-AMD over 12 months.
- Both arms used pro-re-nata dosing, retreating only when neovascular activity persisted on monitoring.
- Outcomes assessed include visual acuity, injection frequency, safety, compliance, and quality of life.
- Reducing injections per cycle could lower procedural risk and healthcare costs without sacrificing efficacy.
- Trial is completed but peer-reviewed results have not yet been published based on available information.
Methodology
This is a Phase 4 randomized controlled open-label trial with parallel arms and 1:1 allocation, conducted at the University Hospital of Ferrara Eye Clinic. Patients with NV-AMD were randomized to single (IVIBx1) or combined double (IVIBx2) intravitreal bevacizumab injections on a pro-re-nata schedule, with 12 months of follow-up. The primary statistical framework is non-inferiority comparison of the single-injection regimen versus the combined regimen.
Study Limitations
This summary is based on the clinical trial registry abstract only, as the full study results and peer-reviewed publication are not available, so no outcome data can be assessed. The open-label design introduces potential performance and detection bias. The trial was conducted at a single Italian center, which may limit generalizability to other populations and healthcare systems.
Enjoyed this summary?
Get the latest longevity research delivered to your inbox every week.