Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To analyze the efficacy and safety profile of the intravitreal ranibizumab biosimilar molecule, Razumab(®) (Intas Pharmaceuticals, Ahmedabad, India; BRm; Razumab(®)) and the innovator ranibizumab drug (IRm; LUCENTIS(®)) in Indian patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) under real-world conditions. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of treatment-naïve and previously treated PCV eyes undergoing intravitreal therapy with either BRm or IRm from January 2019 to September 2020 as three loading doses followed by a pro-re-nata (PRN) regimen. Changes in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), subretinal fluid (SRF), intraretinal fluid (IRF), SRF height, and subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) and the safety profiles were assessed at weeks 12, 24, and 52, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 22 eyes received IRm and 19 eyes underwent BRm therapy, respectively. Both the groups were comparable in age (P = 0.41) and gender distribution, although the BRm arm had significantly more eyes that were previously treated (P < 0.00001) with a greater median number of injections (P < 0.0001). At week 52, both groups had similar gains in visual acuity (P = 0.19), SRF resolution (P = 0.8), IRF resolution (P = 0.47), and SRF height (P = 0.71). The IRm eyes exhibited a significant improvement in BCVA (P = 0.001) at all visits with a greater mean number of injections (IRm: 5.41 ± 0.94; BRm: 4 ± 1.45; P = 0.0004), while the BRm eyes showed a similar increase in BCVA but did not reach statistical significance until week 52. The SFCT decreased significantly in the BRm arm at week 52 (P = 0.045). One eye (5.26%) in the BRm arm experienced mild anterior uveitis, which was treated with topical corticosteroids. In either arm, no other ocular or systemic adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world data demonstrated the ranibizumab biosimilar Razumab to have comparable visual acuity outcomes to the innovator ranibizumab molecule with an adequate safety profile in the management of PCV. Although these encouraging results support its use as a viable alternative to the innovator molecule, further prospective studies in a diverse patient population are needed to validate our findings.