Figure 9. Efficacy of RG7716 in a laser‐induced CNV model using cynomolgus monkeys, comparing RG7716 to anti‐VEGF‐A (ranibizumab) and anti‐ANG‐2 (LC10), as well as an IgG control.

• A
  Schematic representation of the experimental setup including treatment, sampling, and efficacy readouts.
• B
  Inhibition of neovascularization measured in severity grades, change of severity from baseline is shown for each treatment; all treatment significantly reduced the severity grade compared to IgG control. In addition, efficacy of RG7716 (150‐kDa molecule at 90 μg/50 μl injected IVT) was significantly better at equal molar concentration of binding sites than anti‐VEGF‐A (ranibizumab, 50‐kDa molecule at 30 μg/50 μl injected IVT), anti‐ANG‐2, and the low dose of RG7716 (30 μg/50 ?l injected IVT). Error bars show SEM of n = 6 cynomolgus monkeys and nine spots per eye in the group; * denotes significance after one‐sided ANOVA and Tukey's multiple t‐test. IgG control is significantly different from anti‐VEGF‐A (****, P < 0.0001), anti‐ANG‐2 (***, P = 0.0003), RG7716, 30 μg (****, P < 0.0001), and RG7716, 90 μg (****, P < 0.0001). Furthermore, RG7716, 90 μg is significantly different from RG7716, 30 μg (****, P < 0.0001), anti‐ANG‐2 (***, P = 0.0003), and anti‐VEGF‐A (***, P < 0.0004).
• C–L
  (C–G) Representative figures of fluorescence fundus angiograms (H–L) of cross sections of a hematoxylin staining of a spot at the end of the experiment from eyes treated with IgG control, anti‐VEGF‐A, anti‐ANG‐2, and RG7716 at 30 and 90 μg, respectively.