-
1.
Intravitreal bevacizumab versus intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema-Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Abdel-Maboud, M, Menshawy, E, Bahbah, EI, Outani, O, Menshawy, A
PloS one. 2021;(1):e0245010
Abstract
BACKGROUND The most frequent cause of vision loss from diabetic retinopathy is diabetic macular edema (DME). Earlier clinical trials tried to examine the role of intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) and intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) in DME; they either qualified IVT over IVB or IVB over IVT or did not exhibit a significant difference. OBJECTIVE This paper aims to compare the efficacy and safety of IVB versus IVT alone or combined IVB+IVT in the treatment of DME. METHODS We systematically searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, Science Direct, OVID, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials of IVB versus IVT alone or combined IVB+IVT and IVT versus the combined IVB+IVT in DME patients. RESULTS A total of 1243 eyes of 17 trials were included in our meta-analysis and regression. Repeated injections of IVB were superior at improving VA comparing with those of IVT at 12, 24, 48-weeks, and IVB+IVT at 12, 24, 48-weeks. Single injections were comparable across the three arms regarding BCVA improvement. CMT reductions were also comparable across the three arms. Meanwhile, the overall safety regarding intraocular pressure and intraocular hypertension significantly favored the IVB group. Improvement in VA was best modified with CMT reduction from 480 um to 320um. This association was significant at 12-weeks in the three arms and persisted till 24-weeks and 48-weeks exclusively in the IVB group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Our analysis reveals that repeated successive injections associate with better BCVA compared to single injection. Current evidence affirms that IVB is superior to IVT and IVB+IVT at improving BCVA, comparable at reducing CMT, and presents a better safety profile in the treatment of DME.
-
2.
Systematic ultrastructural comparison of swept-source and full-depth spectral domain optical coherence tomography imaging of diabetic macular oedema.
Mitsch, C, Lammer, J, Karst, S, Scholda, C, Pablik, E, Schmidt-Erfurth, UM
The British journal of ophthalmology. 2020;(6):868-873
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is commonly used to diagnose and assess diabetic macular oedema (DME). Swept-source OCT (SS-OCT) promises improved imaging depth and more independence from media opacities. Heidelberg Spectralis full-depth imaging (FDI) combines details at different depths to one representation. The aim of this study was to determine the comparability of the imaging methods concerning DME ultrastructure. METHODS Two graders assessed the presence of typical DME phenomena in eyes with centre-involving DME on Topcon Atlantis SS-OCT and Heidelberg Spectralis FDI spectral-domain OCT (SD-OCT) B-scans. Retinal layer segmentation was corrected and choroidal layers were manually segmented. Graders measured cyst and subretinal fluid (SRF) diameters and counted hyper-reflective foci (HRF). Findings were recorded and statistically analysed. RESULTS Statistically significant systematic biases (Spectralis-Atlantis) were found for the HRF count (outside the central mm, -6.39, p=0.0338), chorioretinal thickness (central mm: -35.45 µm, p=0.00034), choroidal thickness (central mm: -60.97 µm, p=0.00004) and Sattler's layer thickness (-42.69 µm, p=0.0001). Intergrader agreement was excellent or very good for posterior vitreous detachment, vitreomacular attachment (central mm) and SRF presence in both devices. Manually delineated Sattler's layer thickness showed an intraclass correlation of 0.85 with FDI SD-OCT but 0.26 with SS-OCT (p=0.003). CONCLUSION Prominent aspects such as cysts in the outer nuclear layer and SRF can be identified with comparable confidence, while a significant systematic bias underlies chorioretinal, choroidal and Sattler's layer thickness and HRF count. Specialists should use the same device at every examination during longitudinal clinical consideration or cross-sectional evaluation of these ultrastructural biomarkers.
-
3.
Intravitreal corticosteroid implant vs intravitreal ranibizumab for the treatment of macular edema: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Wei, Q, Chen, R, Lou, Q, Yu, J
Drug design, development and therapy. 2019;:301-307
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid implant and intravitreal ranibizumab for the treatment of macular edema (ME). MATERIALS AND METHODS PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were comprehensively searched for studies comparing dexamethasone implant with ranibizumab in patients with ME. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and adverse events were extracted from the final eligible studies. RevMan 5.3 software was used to analyze the data, and the modified Jadad assessment tool was used to access the quality of outcomes. RESULTS Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in our analysis. The types of causes of ME include central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO), branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO), and diabetic retinopathy (DR). The ranibizumab treatment group had significantly better BCVA compared with the corticosteroid treatment group (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.80; 95% CI -1.08, -0.53; P<0.00001). The ranibizumab treatment group also had higher CST reduction compared with the corticosteroid treatment group, and there was a significant difference (weighted mean difference [WMD] 167.58; 95% CI 125.21-209.95; P<0.00001). There was no significant difference in serious adverse effects between the two groups (SMD 1.67; 95% CI 0.69, 4.05; P=0.26). However, the use of corticosteroid implant had a higher risk of intraocular pressure (IOP) (OR 6.88; 95% CI 4.53-10.44; P<0.00001) elevation and cataract (OR 3.98; 95% CI 1.89-8.37; P=0.0003) than ranibizumab treatment and fewer injections. CONCLUSIONS Compared with ranibizumab, corticosteroid implant did not have greater improved BCVA, but corticosteroid implant had less CST reduction. The advantages of corticosteroids are fewer injections, while the advantages of ranibizumab include fewer side effects.
-
4.
Randomized controlled European multicenter trial on the prevention of cystoid macular edema after cataract surgery in diabetics: ESCRS PREMED Study Report 2.
Wielders, LHP, Schouten, JSAG, Winkens, B, van den Biggelaar, FJHM, Veldhuizen, CA, Murta, JCN, Goslings, WRO, Kohnen, T, Tassignon, MJ, Joosse, MV, et al
Journal of cataract and refractive surgery. 2018;(7):836-847
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the efficacy of perioperative treatment strategies, in addition to topical bromfenac 0.09% and dexamethasone 0.1%, to reduce the risk for developing cystoid macular edema (CME) after uneventful cataract surgery in diabetic patients. SETTING Twelve European study centers. DESIGN Randomized clinical trial. METHODS Diabetic patients having phacoemulsification cataract surgery were randomly allocated to receive no additional treatment, a subconjunctival injection with 40 mg triamcinolone acetonide, an intravitreal injection with 1.25 mg bevacizumab, or a combination of both. The main outcomes were the difference in central subfield mean macular thickness, corrected distance visual acuity, and the incidence of CME and clinically significant macular edema within 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS The study comprised 213 patients. At 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively, the central subfield mean macular thickness was 12.3 μm and 9.7 μm lower, respectively, in patients who received subconjunctival triamcinolone acetonide than patients who did not (P = .007 and P = .014, respectively). No patient who received subconjunctival triamcinolone acetonide developed CME. Intravitreal bevacizumab had no significant effect on macular thickness. CONCLUSIONS Diabetic patients who received a subconjunctival injection with triamcinolone acetonide at the end of cataract surgery had a lower macular thickness and macular volume at 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively than patients who did not. Intravitreal bevacizumab had no significant effect.
-
5.
A CCR2/5 Inhibitor, PF-04634817, Is Inferior to Monthly Ranibizumab in the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema.
Gale, JD, Berger, B, Gilbert, S, Popa, S, Sultan, MB, Schachar, RA, Girgenti, D, Perros-Huguet, C
Investigative ophthalmology & visual science. 2018;(6):2659-2669
Abstract
PURPOSE Ligands for the proinflammatory C-C chemokine receptor types 2 and 5 (CCR2 and CCR5) are elevated in the eyes of patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of PF-04634817, an oral CCR2/5 dual antagonist, versus intravitreal ranibizumab, in adult subjects with DME. METHODS In this phase II, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked study, eligible subjects (≥18 years of age) had type 1 or 2 diabetes and DME with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 20/32 or worse (letter score ≤ 78), and up to 20/320 or better (≥24 letter score), in the study eye. Subjects were assigned randomly 1:1 to once-daily (QD) oral PF-04634817 200 mg plus masked sham therapy as placebo or monthly intravitreal ranibizumab 0.3/0.5 mg plus QD oral placebo. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of PF-04634817 compared with ranibizumab in change from baseline in BCVA after 12 weeks in a noninferiority design. Noninferiority was based on BCVA 80% confidence interval (CI): there had to be a less than three letter loss in the PF-04634817 arm compared with the ranibizumab arm. RESULTS A total of 199 subjects were randomized. Least squares mean difference in change in BCVA from baseline to week 12 in the study eye for the PF-04634817 arm was -2.41 letters (80% CI: -3.91, -0.91; P = 0.04) compared with ranibizumab. PF-04634817 was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS Treatment with oral CCR2/5 receptor dual antagonist PF-04634817 was associated with a modest improvement in BCVA, but did not meet the predefined noninferiority criteria compared with intravitreal ranibizumab.
-
6.
[Switching the Treatment Regime from PRN (pro re nata, as needed) to T&E (Treat and Extend) for Intravitreal Therapy with Anti-VEGF Agents in Private Practice or Small Institutions].
Imesch, P, Sarra, GM
Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde. 2018;(1):39-46
Abstract
In everyday practice, intravitreal therapy in an "as needed" regimen (pro re nata, PRN) is less predictable and requires more visits (monitoring and injections taken together) with poorer functional results than with the treat and extend (T&E) regimen. Current literature supports the benefit of a switch. However, practical advice is still missing. This article provides "best practice" recommendations for private practice or smaller institutions for the change from PRN to T&E. The requirements are organisational adjustments, staff training, definition of the scenario triggering the switch (A - functional or anatomical deterioration; B - general switch at a predefined date), counselling of the patients, defining benchmarks for the follow-up of the switch and preparing for higher capacity utilisation during the transition (shorter treatment intervals during the switching phase). Guidance is provided for each phase (a, preparation; b, transition; and c, follow-up).
-
7.
Panretinal Photocoagulation Versus Ranibizumab for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: Factors Associated with Vision and Edema Outcomes.
Bressler, SB, Beaulieu, WT, Glassman, AR, Gross, JG, Melia, M, Chen, E, Pavlica, MR, Jampol, LM, ,
Ophthalmology. 2018;(11):1776-1783
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify baseline factors associated with change in visual acuity or development of vision-impairing central-involved diabetic macular edema (DME) over 2 years when treating proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) with ranibizumab or panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). DESIGN Post hoc analyses of randomized, multicenter clinical trial data. PARTICIPANTS Eyes completing the 2-year visit (n = 328) or without vision-impairing central-involved DME at baseline (n = 302) in Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network Protocol S. METHODS Intravitreous ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 ml) or PRP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Change in visual acuity (area under the curve) and development of vision-impairing (20/32 or worse) central-involved DME over 2 years. RESULTS After multivariable model selection with adjustment for baseline visual acuity and central subfield thickness, no factors were identified as associated with change in visual acuity or development of vision-impairing central-involved DME within the ranibizumab group. In the PRP group, worse change in visual acuity was more likely with higher hemoglobin A1c level (-0.6 letters per 1% increase; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.2 to -0.1 letters; continuous P = 0.03), more severe diabetic retinopathy (difference between high-risk PDR or worse vs. moderate PDR or better, -2.8 letters [95% CI, -5.5 to -0.2 letters]; continuous P = 0.003), and higher mean arterial pressure (difference between ≥100 mmHg vs. <100 mmHg, -2.0 letters [95% CI, -4.6 to 0.5 letters]; continuous P = 0.009). Development of vision-impairing central-involved DME was more likely with higher hemoglobin A1c level (hazard ratio [HR] per 1% increase, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.13-1.52]; continuous P < 0.001), more severe diabetic retinopathy (HR for high-risk PDR or worse vs. moderate PDR or better, 1.46 [95% CI, 0.73-2.92]; continuous P = 0.03), and the presence of cystoid abnormalities within 500 μm of the macula center (HR, 2.90 [95% CI, 1.35-6.24]; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS For eyes managed with PRP, higher hemoglobin A1c level and more severe diabetic retinopathy were associated with less vision improvement and an increased risk of vision-impairing central-involved DME developing. When managing PDR with ranibizumab, eyes gained vision, on average, with no baseline characteristics identified as associated with visual acuity or central-involved DME outcomes.
-
8.
Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison of intravitreal aflibercept with other therapies for diabetic macular edema (DME).
Korobelnik, JF, Kleijnen, J, Lang, SH, Birnie, R, Leadley, RM, Misso, K, Worthy, G, Muston, D, Do, DV
BMC ophthalmology. 2015;:52
Abstract
BACKGROUND This was an indirect comparison of the effectiveness of intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 initial monthly doses (or if different periods, after an initial monthly dosing period) (2q8) and other diabetic macular edema (DME) therapies at doses licensed outside the USA. METHODS A comprehensive search was undertaken to source relevant studies. Feasibility networks were prepared to identify viable comparisons of 12-month outcomes between IVT-AFL 2q8 and therapies licensed outside the USA, which were assessed for clinical and statistical homogeneity. Pooled effect sizes (mean difference [MD] and relative risk/risk ratio [RR]) were calculated using fixed- and random-effects models. Indirect comparisons were performed using Bucher analysis. If at least one 'head-to-head' study was found then a mixed treatment comparison (MTC) was performed using Bayesian methods. Two 12-month comparisons could be undertaken based on indirect analyses: IVT-AFL 2q8 versus intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) 0.5 mg as needed (PRN) (10 studies) and IVT-AFL 2q8 versus dexamethasone 0.7 mg implants (three studies). RESULTS There was an increase in mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) with IVT-AFL 2q8 over IVR 0.5 mg PRN by 4.67 letters [95% credible interval (CrI): 2.45-6.87] in the fixed-effect MTC model (10 studies) and by 4.82 letters [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.52-7.11] in the Bucher indirect analysis (four studies). IVT-AFL 2q8 doubled the proportion of patients gaining ≥ 10 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters at 12 months compared with dexamethasone 0.7 mg implants (RR = 2.10 [95% CI: 1.29-3.40]) in the fixed-effect model. There were no significant differences in safety outcomes between IVT-AFL 2q8 and IVR 0.5 mg PRN or dexamethasone 0.7 mg implants. CONCLUSIONS Studies of IVT-AFL 2q8 showed improved 12-month visual acuity measures compared with studies of IVR 0.5 mg PRN and dexamethasone 0.7 mg implants based on indirect comparisons. These analyses are subject to a number of limitations which are inherent in indirect data comparisons.
-
9.
Comparison of evaluation parameters in the retinal layer between diabetic cystoid macular edema and postoperative cystoid macular edema after cataract surgery based on a hierarchical approach.
Jo, EB, Lee, JH, Hwang, YN, Kim, SM
Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine. 2015;:S59-68
Abstract
In this study, several variables related to the thickness of the retinal layer were measured via optical coherence tomography (OCT), and the clinical applicability of such measurements was evaluated to differentiate between diabetic cystoid macular edema (DCME) and postoperative cystoid macular edema (PCME). To this end, a total of 120 subjects (30 healthy individuals, 60 DCME patients, and 30 PCME patients) were selected as the experimental subjects. The six risk factors included the thicknesses for the total retina (TR), the inner retina (IR), the photoreceptor outer segments (POS), the outer retina (OR), the ganglion cell (GC), and the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), and these were estimated by using a hierarchical approach through observations from OCT image scans. All of the risk factors were obtained from the OCT images captured within a 6-mm diameter from the center of the macula. The results of the experiment indicated that the proposed method can reliably differentiate between DCME and PCME. Moreover, as DCME and PCME progressed, the most significant deterioration was found in the central macular region. These results suggest that the proposed method has clinical applicability for the diagnosis of DCME and PCME from OCT images.
-
10.
Reproducibility of spectral-domain optical coherence tomography retinal thickness measurements and conversion to equivalent time-domain metrics in diabetic macular edema.
, , Bressler, SB, Edwards, AR, Chalam, KV, Bressler, NM, Glassman, AR, Jaffe, GJ, Melia, M, Saggau, DD, Plous, OZ
JAMA ophthalmology. 2014;(9):1113-22
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Understanding measurement variability and relationships between measurements obtained on different optical coherence tomography (OCT) machines is critical for clinical trials and clinical settings. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the reproducibility of retinal thickness measurements from OCT images obtained by time-domain (TD) (Stratus; Carl Zeiss Meditec) and spectral-domain (SD) (Cirrus; Carl Zeiss Meditec, and Spectralis; Heidelberg Engineering) instruments and formulate equations to convert retinal thickness measurements from SD-OCT to equivalent values on TD-OCT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in private and institutional practices. Persons with diabetes mellitus who had at least 1 eye with central-involved diabetic macular edema, defined as Stratus central subfield thickness (CST) of 250 μm or greater, participated. An additional normative cohort (individuals with diabetes but without diabetic macular edema) was enrolled. Each study eye underwent 2 replicate Stratus scans followed by 2 replicate Cirrus or Spectralis scans (real-time image registration used) centered on the fovea. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Optical coherence tomography CST and macular volume. RESULTS The Bland-Altman coefficient of repeatability for relative change in CST (the degree of change that could be expected from measurement variability) was lower with Spectralis (7%) compared with Cirrus (14%) and Stratus (12% and 15% within Cirrus/Stratus and Spectralis/Stratus groups, respectively). For each cohort, the initial Stratus CST was within 10% of the replicate Stratus measurement nearly all of the time; the conversion equations predicted a Stratus CST within 10% of the observed thickness 86% and 89% of the time for Cirrus/Stratus and Spectralis/Stratus groups, respectively, which is similar to the agreement on Stratus test-retest. The Bland-Altman limits of agreement for relative change in CST between machines (the degree of change that could be expected from measurement variability [combining within and between instrument variability]) were 21% for Cirrus and 19% for Spectralis when comparing predicted vs actual Stratus measurement. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Reproducibility appears to be better with Spectralis than with Cirrus and Stratus. Conversion equations to transform Cirrus or Spectralis measurements to Stratus-equivalent values, within 10% of the observed Stratus thickness values, appear feasible. Central subfield thickness changes beyond 10% when using the same machine or 20% when switching machines, after conversion to Stratus equivalents, are likely due to a change in retinal thickness rather than measurement error.