Is anyone else on here a Doctor or Biomedical researcher (etc)?, page-25

Agreed. Great insights here.
But concerning the comparison of Cypass (an implanted MIGS device at varying depths) to intravitreal injection like OPT302, it probably is not a valid comparison...... By the way, "Fortunately, despite the losses of endothelial cells, all corneas remained clear and no eyes required corneal surgery at five years."Depth of the implant is very important.
https://www.reviewofophthalmology.com/article/ascrs-offers-guidance-following-cypass-withdrawalmore

More good Cypass info......if we really want to compare (which I don't think we should).
https://www.aao.org/eyenet/article/cypass-update-what-now

Not sure the motivation of the poster (with no position in the stock) to bring this up. Even though I appreciate the information/thoughts of the posters here on HC, most of the info/motivations on message boards in the US have to questioned. BTW, I am long since attending various medical meetings/CE/Retinal Specialists I work with who do various Retinal studies. Long since $.55 and still holding. The data looks very promising, but of course, unforeseen outcomes can happen. I like the odds.

Concerning long term AEs associated with Anti-VEGF (Lucentis etc) as a better comparison to OPT302... ..there are numerous article out there and just did a quick search. All treatments have risk but the benefits seem to outweigh the risks. I believe the same will be found out about OPT302."More than HALF of patients with nAMD treated with anti-VEGF injections for 4 years developed new MA (Macular Atrophy)."https://www.ophthalmologyretina.org/article/S2468-6530(17)30405-0/pdf