A randomized controlled study to compare the efficacy of intravitreal faricimab 6.0 mg versus aflibercept 2.0 mg in management of treatment-naive diabetic macular edema in Indian populations.
Sanjay Mishra, Mrida Dutt, Pradeep Kumar et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This randomized controlled trial compared intravitreal faricimab 6.0 mg with aflibercept 2.0 mg in 74 treatment-naïve Indian patients with diabetic macular edema. After three loading doses and as-needed retreatment, both groups had similar visual acuity improvement and central macular thickness reduction at 48 weeks. Faricimab was associated with longer mean dosing intervals than aflibercept (12.86 vs. 9.47 weeks, p<0.001), with fewer maintenance-phase injections. Reported safety profiles were similar, with mild, transient adverse events.
Key findings
- At 48 weeks, mean BCVA improvement was similar: AFL: -0.366 logMAR; FAR: -0.374 logMAR, p=NS.
- CMT reduction was comparable: AFL: -119 µm; FAR: -132 µm, p=NS.
- Mean dosing intervals were longer with faricimab than aflibercept (12.86 vs. 9.47 weeks, p<0.001), with fewer maintenance-phase injections.
- Safety profiles were similar; only mild, transient adverse events were reported.
Why it matters
Treatment burden is an important consideration in diabetic macular edema. In this trial, faricimab provided visual and anatomical outcomes comparable to aflibercept while allowing longer mean intervals between doses. These findings offer comparative evidence from an Indian treatment-naïve population, although they do not establish that the same dosing advantage will apply across other populations or treatment settings.
What to keep in mind
The trial included 74 patients at a tertiary care institute, and follow-up was limited to 48 weeks.