Document is current

Article History

Received: 15 December 2025

Accepted: 30 January 2026

First Online: 26 February 2026

Declarations

:

: All authors received honoraria from Roche while undertaking this study. Roche commissioned Triducive Partners Limited to facilitate the project and analyse the responses to the consensus statements in line with the Delphi methodology. The authors state the following conflicts of interest: Christiana Dinah: Consultancy and Advisory boards: Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals, Ocular Therapeutix, Alimera Sciences, Astellas, Apellis. Speaker fees: Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Topcon Ltd, AbbVie, Apellis, Astellas. Travel and conference support: Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Apellis. Andrew Chang: Consultancy and Advisory boards: Roche, Bayer, Novartis, Alcon, Zeiss, Apellis, Astellas, Opthea. Pierre-Henry Gabrielle: Received travel expenses from AbbVie, Bayer, and Novartis, and is a medical consultant for Astellas, Novartis, Horus pharma, Roche, Allergan/Abbvie, and Bayer. Rishi Singh: Personal fees from Apellis, Iveric Bio, Eyepoint, Regenxbio, Genentech, Bausch & Lomb, Zeiss, Alcon, and Regeneron, and research grants from Janssen. Javier Zarranz-Ventura: Abbvie, Adverum, Alcon, Alimera Sciences, Bausch & Lomb, Bayer, Brill Pharma, DORC, Esteve, Novartis, Roche, Sandoz, Topcon, Zeiss. Insar Saffar: Personal fees from Apellis, Iveric Bio, Eyepoint, Regenxbio, Genentech, Bausch & Lomb, Zeiss, Alcon, and Regeneron, research grants from Janssen, employee of F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Marloes Bagijn: Employee of F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Aude Ambresin: Abbvie, Apellis, Astellas, Bayer, Novartis, Optovue, RetinAI, Roche.

: Ethics approval was not sought because neither the assigned interventions nor the outcomes assessed were related to the health of participants, and it was a non-interventional opinion-based Delphi process involving healthcare practitioners, with no collection of sensitive or personally identifiable data. In accordance with the UK Governance Arrangements for Research Ethics Committees (GAfREC) section 2.3, research involving clinical staff recruited by virtue of their professional role does not require research ethics committee review unless it involves access to confidential information or raises issues of professional performance. In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, all respondents involved in the survey within study were informed of the research purpose and that their data would remain anonymous. Their consent was assumed through the completion and submission of their survey responses.