The CATT (Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments) trial compared the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab and bevacizumab for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The study was a multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority trial involving 1208 patients randomly assigned to receive intravitreal injections of either ranibizumab or bevacizumab on a monthly schedule or as needed with monthly evaluations. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity at 1 year, with a non-inferiority limit of 5 letters on the eye chart. Results showed that bevacizumab administered monthly was equivalent to ranibizumab administered monthly, with similar gains in visual acuity. Bevacizumab administered as needed was also equivalent to ranibizumab as needed. Ranibizumab as needed was equivalent to monthly ranibizumab. The mean decrease in central retinal thickness was greater in the ranibizumab-monthly group compared to other groups. Rates of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke were similar for patients receiving either drug. However, the proportion of patients with serious systemic adverse events was higher with bevacizumab than with ranibizumab. The study concluded that at 1 year, bevacizumab and ranibizumab had equivalent effects on visual acuity when administered according to the same schedule, but differences in rates of serious adverse events require further study.The CATT (Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments) trial compared the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab and bevacizumab for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The study was a multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority trial involving 1208 patients randomly assigned to receive intravitreal injections of either ranibizumab or bevacizumab on a monthly schedule or as needed with monthly evaluations. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity at 1 year, with a non-inferiority limit of 5 letters on the eye chart. Results showed that bevacizumab administered monthly was equivalent to ranibizumab administered monthly, with similar gains in visual acuity. Bevacizumab administered as needed was also equivalent to ranibizumab as needed. Ranibizumab as needed was equivalent to monthly ranibizumab. The mean decrease in central retinal thickness was greater in the ranibizumab-monthly group compared to other groups. Rates of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke were similar for patients receiving either drug. However, the proportion of patients with serious systemic adverse events was higher with bevacizumab than with ranibizumab. The study concluded that at 1 year, bevacizumab and ranibizumab had equivalent effects on visual acuity when administered according to the same schedule, but differences in rates of serious adverse events require further study.