PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Chen, Cheng-qun AU - Du, Li-ping AU - Liu, Qing AU - Ren, Qing-hua AU - Zhu, Zhen-feng AU - Sun, Gui-fang AU - Li, Yu-shen AU - Yang, Yang AU - Du, Shu-zhang AU - Qi, Yue-dong TI - Comprehensive evaluation of the use of intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs in patients with fundus lesions based on real-world data AID - 10.1101/2024.04.01.24305180 DP - 2024 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2024.04.01.24305180 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/03/2024.04.01.24305180.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/03/2024.04.01.24305180.full AB - The prevalence of fundus lesion-related diseases is increasing, which ophthalmic anti-VEGF drugs have become the drugs of choice for the treatment of fundus lesions diseases. To evaluate the clinical value of three ophthalmic anti-VEGF drugs in the treatment of fundus lesions diseases, to guide the rational use of the clinic. Inpatients with fundus lesions who had intravitreal injections of Aflibercept, Conbercept and Leizumab during 2020 were studied and six indicators were selected for a comprehensive evaluation. In terms of safety, Aflibercept, Conbercept, and Leizumab experienced adverse effects of elevated Intraocular Pressure (IOP). In terms of effectiveness, Leizumab was strong, that of Aflibercept was stronger and that of Conbercept was weaker. In terms of economic, there was no significant difference in the cost of Aflibercept, Conbercept and Leizumab and a significant difference in the total treatment cost and the cost of surgery. In terms of appropriateness, Aflibercept was more suitable than Conbercept, and there was no significant difference between Leizumab and Aflibercept. In terms of accessibility, Aflibercept, Conbercept and Leizumab were all accessible to urban residents in Henan Province. For rural people, these are unreachable. In terms of innovation, Aflibercep was the most innovative, followed by Leizumab and finally Conbercept. In terms of effectiveness and accessibility, Leizumab performed best compared to Aflibercept and Conbercept. In terms of accessibility and innovation, Aflibercept performed best compared to Conbercept and Leizumab. In terms of safety and economic, Aflibercept, Conbercept and Leizumab performed comparably.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementYesAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.Not ApplicableThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Ethics Review Committee of the Scientific Research Project of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University with the approval number 2020-ky-0392-033.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.Not ApplicableI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Not ApplicableI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.Not ApplicableThe data are owned by a third party and authors do not have permission to share the data.