- Design
- Single-centre randomised controlled trial, 48 weeks
- Population
- 74 treatment-naive Indian patients with diabetic macular oedema
- Primary outcome
- Change in BCVA and central macular thickness at 48 weeks
- Effect
- BCVA −0.374 vs −0.366 logMAR (NS); dosing interval 12.86 vs 9.47 weeks (p < 0.001)
A single-centre randomised trial in India assigned 74 treatment-naive patients with diabetic macular oedema to faricimab 6.0 mg or aflibercept 2.0 mg (January 2024 to June 2025). Both arms had three monthly loading doses and then retreatment as needed.
At 48 weeks, visual acuity improved similarly (about −0.37 logMAR in both) and central macular thickness fell by 132 µm with faricimab and 119 µm with aflibercept, with no significant difference. Faricimab achieved longer mean dosing intervals (12.9 vs 9.5 weeks, p < 0.001) and needed fewer maintenance injections. Adverse events were mild and similar.
This was published in June 2026 and is small; it was not designed as a formal non-inferiority trial, and the as-needed regimen differs from the treat-and-extend approach used in the registration trials. But it is Indian data in an Indian population, and its findings align with international trials.
For patients who travel far for injections or pay out of pocket, fewer visits may outweigh a difference in drug price. Weigh total treatment cost, not cost per vial, when choosing.
- Consider faricimab where fewer injections would ease the burden of travel or cost.
- Compare total treatment cost over a year, not price per injection.
- Expect similar vision and thickness gains with either agent.
- Continue to manage glycaemia and blood pressure alongside injections.
Why it matters
In India, the number of visits often decides whether patients complete anti-VEGF treatment at all.
Don't overread it
A small single-centre trial, not designed to prove equivalence; similar outcomes do not mean identical ones.
The statistics, in plain English
A p value marked not significant for vision means the trial could not detect a difference, not that none exists; 74 patients can miss small differences. The dosing interval difference of over three weeks was clearly beyond chance.
Read the rest in the app
You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.
Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.
Tomorrow morning, before your first patient
One edition a day for ophthalmology, written by the desk, every claim tied to its paper. Six minutes.
Get the app — free