Effect of Osocimab in Preventing Venous Thromboembolism Among Patients Undergoing Knee Arthroplasty: The FOXTROT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The efficacy of factor XIa inhibition for thromboprophylaxis is unknown. Osocimab is a long-acting, fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits factor XIa. Objective: To compare different doses of osocimab with enoxaparin and apixaban for thromboprophylaxis in patients who have undergone knee arthroplasty. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, phase 2 noninferiority trial with observer blinding for osocimab doses, conducted at 54 hospitals in 13 countries. Adult patients undergoing unilateral knee arthroplasty were randomized from October 2017 through August 2018 and followed up until January 2019. Interventions: Single intravenous osocimab postoperative doses of 0.3 mg/kg (n = 107), 0.6 mg/kg (n = 65), 1.2 mg/kg (n = 108), or 1.8 mg/kg (n = 106); preoperative doses of 0.3 mg/kg (n = 109) or 1.8 mg/kg (n = 108); or 40 mg of subcutaneous enoxaparin once daily (n = 105) or 2.5 mg of oral apixaban twice daily (n = 105) for at least 10 days or until venography. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was venous thromboembolism incidence between 10 and 13 days postoperatively (assessed by mandatory bilateral venography performed 10 to 13 days after surgery or confirmed symptomatic deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism). A 5% noninferiority margin compared with enoxaparin was chosen. The primary safety outcome of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was assessed until 10 to 13 days postoperatively. Results: Of 813 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 66.5 years [8.2 years]; body mass index, 32.7 [5.7]; and 74.2% women), 600 were included in the per-protocol population used for the primary analysis. The primary outcome occurred in 18 patients (23.7%) receiving 0.3 mg/kg, 8 (15.7%) receiving 0.6 mg/kg, 13 (16.5%) receiving 1.2 mg/kg, and 14 (17.9%) receiving 1.8 mg/kg of osocimab postoperatively; 23 (29.9%) receiving 0.3 mg/kg and 9 (11.3%) receiving 1.8 mg/kg of osocimab preoperatively; 20 (26.3%) receiving enoxaparin; and 12 (14.5%) receiving apixaban. Osocimab given postoperatively met criteria for noninferiority compared with enoxaparin with risk differences (1-sided 95% CIs) of 10.6% (95% CI, -1.2% to ∞) at the 0.6-mg/kg dose; 9.9% (95% CI, -0.9% to ∞) at the 1.2-mg/kg dose, and 8.4% (95% CI, -2.6 to ∞) at the 1.8-mg/kg dose. The preoperative dose of 1.8 mg/kg of osocimab met criteria for superiority compared with enoxaparin with a risk difference of 15.1%; 2-sided 90% CI, 4.9% to 25.2%). Postoperative and preoperative doses of 0.3 mg/kg of osocimab did not meet the prespecified criteria for noninferiority, with risk differences (1-sided 95% CIs) of 2.6% (95% CI, -8.9% to ∞) and -3.6% (95% CI, -15.5% to ∞), respectively. Major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was observed in up to 4.7% of those receiving osocimab, 5.9% receiving enoxaparin, and 2% receiving apixaban. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing knee arthroplasty, postoperative osocimab 0.6 mg/kg, 1.2 mg/kg, and 1.8 mg/kg met criteria for noninferiority compared with enoxaparin, and the preoperative 1.8-mg/kg dose of osocimab met criteria for superiority compared with enoxaparin for the primary outcome of incidence of venous thromboembolism at 10 to 13 days postoperatively. Further studies are needed to establish efficacy and safety of osocimab relative to standard thromboprophylaxis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03276143.

Longitudinal Retinal Perfusion Status in Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema Receiving Intravitreal Aflibercept or Laser in VISTA Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate changes in retinal perfusion status with intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) and laser treatment in the phase 3 VISTA study of patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of a double-masked, randomized, active-controlled, phase 3 trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with center-involved DME in the study eye. METHODS: VISTA randomized 466 patients to laser, IAI 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), or IAI 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 monthly doses (2q8). One eye per patient was enrolled in the study. Retinal perfusion status was evaluated by fluorescein angiography based on the presence or absence of retinal nonperfusion (RNP) in quadrants intersecting at the optic nerve head by a masked independent reading center at weeks 24, 52, 72, and 100. Visual and anatomic outcomes were evaluated at all visits. In patients who received rescue treatment, data were censored from the time rescue treatment was given. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in perfusion status from baseline through week 100. RESULTS: At week 100, the proportion of eyes with improvement in retinal perfusion (defined as a reduction from baseline in the total number of quadrants in which RNP is present) in the laser control, 2q4, and 2q8 groups was 14.6%, 44.7%, and 40.0%, respectively. The proportion of eyes that experienced worsening in retinal perfusion (defined as an increase from baseline in the total number of quadrants in which RNP is present) at week 100 in the laser control, 2q4, and 2q8 groups was 25.0%, 9.0%, and 8.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 VISTA study in patients with DME provides evidence that regular IAI dosing not only can slow worsening of retinal perfusion associated with diabetic retinopathy but also may be able to improve retinal perfusion in some cases by decreasing zones of RNP.

EFFICACY AND SAFETY OUTCOMES OF INTRAVITREAL AFLIBERCEPT FOCUSING ON PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA FROM JAPAN.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) in Japanese patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). METHODS: VIVID-DME was a Phase 3 study comprising patients with DME randomized 1:1:1 to IAI 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), IAI 2 mg every 4 weeks until Week 16 then 8-week dosing (2q8), and laser. A total of 403 patients (76 Japanese) were included in this study. VIVID-Japan (72; all Japanese patients) was a nonrandomized, open-label study comprising Japanese patients with DME receiving IAI 2q4 until Week 16, then 2q8. Primary efficacy endpoint (Week 52) of VIVID-DME was mean change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity; VIVID-Japan evaluated safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (letters) for 2q4, 2q8, and laser groups was +10.6, +10.9, and +1.2 and +9.8, +9.5, and +1.1 in the non-Japanese and Japanese populations of VIVID-DME, respectively. In VIVID-Japan, it was +9.3 for IAI 2q8. Intravitreal aflibercept injection also provided consistently greater benefits for anatomical outcomes versus laser. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of IAI. CONCLUSION: In Japanese patients with DME, IAI treatment was superior to laser for visual and anatomical outcomes and resulted in efficacy and safety outcomes similar to those in a non-Japanese patient population.

Impact of Baseline Central Retinal Thickness on Outcomes in the VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME Studies.

PURPOSE: To report the impact of baseline central retinal thickness (CRT) on outcomes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME. METHODS: Post hoc analyses of two randomized controlled trials in which 862 DME patients were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to treatment with intravitreal aflibercept 2.0 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), intravitreal aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks after five initial monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation at baseline and as needed. We compared visual and anatomical outcomes in subgroups of patients with baseline CRT < 400 µm and ≥400 µm. RESULTS: At weeks 52 and 100, outcomes with intravitreal aflibercept 2q4 and 2q8 were superior to those in laser control-treated patients regardless of baseline CRT. When looked at in a binary fashion, the treatment effect of intravitreal aflibercept versus laser was not significantly better in the ≥400 µm than the <400 µm group; when looked at as a continuous variable, baseline CRT seemed to have an impact on the treatment effect of intravitreal aflibercept versus laser. CONCLUSIONS: Post hoc analyses of VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME demonstrated the benefits of intravitreal aflibercept treatment in DME patients with baseline CRT < 400 µm and ≥400 µm. This trial is registered with NCT01331681 and NCT01363440.

Baseline Factors Affecting Changes in Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale Score After Intravitreal Aflibercept or Laser for Diabetic Macular Edema: Post Hoc Analyses from VISTA and VIVID.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether select baseline systemic and ocular factors influence ≥2-step improvement in the Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score at week 100 in VISTA and VIVID. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of 2 similarly designed phase 3 trials, VISTA and VIVID. PARTICIPANTS: Total of 456 patients with center-involved diabetic macular edema (DME). METHODS: VISTA and VIVID randomized 872 DME patients to receive intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), IAI 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation. This post hoc analysis evaluated the influence of select baseline factors on ≥2-step DRSS score improvement by logistic regression in an integrated VISTA and VIVID dataset using observed cases (n = 456) with patients in each treatment group divided into tertiles based on each characteristic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients with ≥2-step improvement in DRSS score from baseline at week 100 by age, duration of diabetes, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body mass index (BMI), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and DRSS score. RESULTS: At week 100, 10.1%, 34.3%, and 37.6% of patients in the laser, 2q4, and 2q8 groups experienced a ≥2-step DRSS score improvement, respectively. Age, duration of diabetes, HbA1c, BMI, BCVA, and CST had no impact on the ability to achieve ≥2-step improvement in DRSS score. Initial DRSS score was the only factor significantly associated with ≥2-step DRSS score improvement in all treatment groups at weeks 24, 52, 76, and 100. Relatively higher proportions of IAI-treated patients with worse BCVA or thicker CST experienced ≥2-step DRSS score improvement compared with those with better BCVA or thinner CST, respectively, but these associations were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: A strong association was present between baseline DRSS score and ≥2-step DRSS score improvement at week 100 for DME patients in VISTA and VIVID.

Impact of baseline Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale scores on visual outcomes in the VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME studies.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate intravitreal aflibercept versus laser in subgroups of patients with baseline Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) scores ≤43, 47, and ≥53 in VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME. METHODS: Patients with diabetic macular oedema were randomised to receive intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 8 weeks after five initial monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation at baseline with sham injections at every visit. These post hoc analyses evaluate outcomes based on baseline DRSS scores in patients in the integrated dataset. The 2q4 and 2q8 treatment groups were also pooled. RESULTS: 748 patients had a baseline DRSS score based on fundus photographs (≤43, n=301; 47, n=153; ≥53, n=294). At week 100, the least squares mean difference between treatment groups (effect of intravitreal aflibercept above that of laser, adjusting for baseline best-corrected visual acuity) was 8.9 (95% CI 5.99 to 11.81), 9.7 (95% CI 5.54 to 13.91), and 11.0 (95% CI 7.96 to 14.1) letters in those with baseline DRSS scores ≤43, 47, and ≥53, respectively. The proportions of patients with ≥2 step DRSS score improvement were greater in the intravitreal aflibercept group versus laser, respectively, for those with baseline DRSS scores of ≤43 (13% vs 5.9%), 47 (25.8% vs 4.5%), and ≥53 (64.5% vs 28.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of baseline DRSS score, functional outcomes were superior in intravitreal aflibercept-treated patients, demonstrating consistent treatment benefit across various baseline levels of retinopathy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT01331681 and NCT01363440, Post-results.

Evaluating the Impact of Intravitreal Aflibercept on Diabetic Retinopathy Progression in the VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME Studies.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of intravitreal aflibercept (EYLEA, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY) versus laser on progression of diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity in Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Vision Impairment due to DME (VIVID-DME) and Study of Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema (VISTA-DME). DESIGN: Secondary and exploratory analyses of 2 phase 3, randomized, controlled studies. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with a baseline Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score based on fundus photograph (full analysis), patients who progressed to proliferative DR (PDR) (safety analysis) in VIVID-DME (n = 403) and VISTA-DME (n = 459), or both. METHODS: We randomized patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) to intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 initial monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation at baseline and sham injections at every visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportions of patients with 2-step or more and 3-step or more improvements from baseline in DRSS score, who progressed to PDR, and who underwent panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). RESULTS: Among patients with an assessable baseline DRSS score, most showed moderately severe or severe nonproliferative DR. The proportions of patients treated with 2q4, 2q8, and laser with a 2-step or more improvement in DRSS score at week 100 were 29.3%, 32.6%, and 8.2%, respectively, in VIVID-DME and 37.0%, 37.1%, and 15.6%, respectively, in VISTA-DME; the proportions with a 3-step or more improvement in DRSS score were 7.3%, 2.3%, and 0%, respectively, and 22.7%, 19.9%, and 5.2%, respectively. Fewer patients in the 2q4 and 2q8 groups versus the laser group progressed to PDR at week 100 in VISTA-DME (1.5% and 2.2% vs. 5.3%) and VIVID-DME (3.2% and 2.0% vs. 12.3%). The proportions of patients who underwent PRP were 2.9%, 0.7%, and 4.5%, respectively, in VIVID-DME and 1.9%, 0.7%, and 5.2%, respectively, in VISTA-DME. The most frequent serious ocular adverse event at week 100 was cataract (pooled intravitreal aflibercept, 1.7% of patients; laser, 3.5% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: These analyses demonstrate the benefit of intravitreal aflibercept over laser with respect to DR progression, suggesting a benefit on DME, and on underlying DR.

Outcomes of Diabetic Macular Edema Eyes with Limited Early Response in the VISTA and VIVID Studies.

PURPOSE: To evaluate benefit of continued treatment in diabetic macular edema (DME) eyes showing a limited early response to treatment. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of VISTA and VIVID. PARTICIPANTS: 818 patients (eyes) with DME. METHODS: Eyes with baseline central subfield thickness (CST) of ≥300 µm that received 2-mg intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) every 4 weeks (2q4) or every 8 weeks after 5 monthly injections (2q8) or laser control treatment were included in this analysis if they showed a limited early response at week 12 after 3 monthly injections or a single laser treatment at baseline, as defined by those who met: anatomic criteria (CST reduction ≤10% and CST >300 µm); visual criteria (best-corrected visual acuity [BCVA] gain <5 letters); or both. Least square (LS) means repeated measures were used to compare outcomes between initial (baseline-week 12) and later (weeks 16-100) periods within each treatment group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual outcomes of eyes with limited early response through week 100. RESULTS: In the anatomic subgroup, mean BCVA gains with 2q4 (n = 41) and 2q8 (n = 31) from baseline were 4.3 and 6.6 letters at week 12 and 8.6 and 8.5 letters at week 100, respectively. Corresponding LS mean differences for BCVA gains between initial and later periods were 3.0 (P = 0.0026) and 3.6 letters (P = 0.0017), respectively. In the visual subgroup, mean BCVA gains with 2q4 (n = 53) and 2q8 (n = 49) from baseline were 0.4 and 0.3 letters at week 12 and 6.1 and 4.1 letters at week 100, respectively. Corresponding LS mean differences for BCVA gains between initial and later periods were 5.0 (P < 0.0001) and 3.1 letters (P = 0.0008), respectively. In the combined subgroup, only a small percentage of IAI-treated eyes (<7%) met criteria. Regardless of type of limited early response, continued laser treatment did not result in additional BCVA gains through week 100. CONCLUSIONS: Significant vision improvements were observed through week 100 with continued IAI treatment in a small number of DME eyes that showed a limited early response after 3 monthly IAI.

Outcomes of Diabetic Macular Edema Patients by Baseline Hemoglobin A1c: Analyses from VISTA and VIVID.

PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between glycemic control at baseline and response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of 2 similarly designed phase III trials, VISTA and VIVID. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with central-involved DME. METHODS: Both VISTA and VIVID compared efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) with macular laser photocoagulation for DME. Current analysis focused on comparison within each treatment group in an integrated VISTA and VIVID dataset. Baseline hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was partitioned into 4 quartiles: 4.5% to <6.7% (n = 233), 6.7% to <7.4% (n = 206), 7.4% to <8.6% (n = 209), and 8.6% to <14.7% (n = 208). Outcomes were analyzed by mixed model for repeated measures. Intragroup differences were quantified by a regression model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and HbA1c. RESULTS: In the IAI group, mean BCVA improvement from baseline did not depend on baseline HbA1c at week 52 (P = 0.1852), but seemed to be dependent at week 100 (P = 0.0425). The mean CST reduction from baseline was independent of baseline HbA1c at both weeks 52 (P = 0.1857) and 100 (P = 0.7346). Mean HbA1c change from baseline in IAI group was small across all HbA1c quartiles. In the laser group, the mean BCVA gain decreased with increasing baseline HbA1c at both weeks 52 (P = 0.0421) and 100 (P = 0.0001). Similarly, the mean CST decrease was greater with decreasing baseline HbA1c, at both weeks 52 (P = 0.0065) and 100 (P = 0.0162). The mean HbA1c change from baseline in the laser group was minimal across HbA1c quartiles, although glycemic control tended to worsen in upper quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of IAI in patients with DME was less dependent on their presenting glycemic status as opposed to laser.

Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Eyes With Substantial Vision Loss After Laser Photocoagulation for Diabetic Macular Edema: Subanalysis of the VISTA and VIVID Randomized Clinical Trials.

IMPORTANCE: Information on the effect of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) with vision loss after macular laser photocoagulation is clinically valuable. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate visual and anatomic outcomes in a subgroup of macular laser photocoagulation treatment control (hereafter laser control) eyes with substantial vision loss receiving treatment with intravitreal aflibercept injection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This investigation was a post hoc analysis of a subgroup of laser control eyes in 2 phase 3 trials-VISTA (Study of Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema) and VIVID (Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Vision Impairment Due to DME)-in a multicenter setting. One hundred nine laser control eyes with center-involving DME were included. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with intravitreal aflibercept injection (2 mg) every 8 weeks after 5 monthly doses with sham injections on nontreatment visits starting at week 24 was initiated on meeting prespecified criteria of at least a 10-letter visual acuity loss at 2 consecutive visits or at least a 15-letter visual acuity loss from the best previous measurement at 1 visit and vision not better than at baseline. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Visual and anatomic outcomes in a subgroup of laser control eyes receiving treatment with intravitreal aflibercept injection. RESULTS: Through week 100, a total of 63 of 154 eyes (40.9%) in VISTA and 46 of 133 eyes (34.6%) in VIVID initially randomized to laser control received treatment with intravitreal aflibercept injection. The median time from week 24 to the first intravitreal aflibercept injection treatment was 34.0 (VISTA) and 83.5 (VIVID) days. In this subgroup, the mean (SD) visual gain from baseline to week 100 was 2.2 (12.5) (VISTA) and 3.8 (10.1) (VIVID) letters. At the time of intravitreal aflibercept injection initiation, these eyes had a mean (SD) loss of 11.0 (10.1) (VISTA) and 10.0 (6.5) (VIVID) letters from baseline, and they subsequently gained a mean (SD) of 17.4 (9.7) (VISTA) and 13.6 (8.6) (VIVID) letters from the initiation of treatment with intravitreal aflibercept injection through week 100. There was a minimal mean change in central subfield thickness from baseline in these eyes at the time of intravitreal aflibercept injection initiation (an increase of 3.9 µm in VISTA and a decrease of 3.0 µm in VIVID), after which further mean (SD) reductions of 285.6 (202.6) µm (VISTA) and 313.4 (181.9) µm (VIVID) occurred through week 100. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Intravitreal aflibercept injection improves visual and anatomic outcomes in eyes experiencing substantial vision loss after macular laser photocoagulation treatment for DME. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01363440 and NCT01331681.

Intravitreal Aflibercept for Diabetic Macular Edema: 148-Week Results from the VISTA and VIVID Studies.

PURPOSE: To compare efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) with macular laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema (DME) over 3 years. DESIGN: Two similarly designed phase 3 trials: VISTADME and VIVIDDME. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (eyes; n = 872) with central-involved DME. METHODS: Eyes received IAI 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), IAI 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 monthly doses (2q8), or laser control. From week 24, if rescue treatment criteria were met, IAI patients received active laser, and laser control patients received IAI 2q8. From week 100, laser control patients who had not received IAI rescue treatment received IAI as needed per retreatment criteria. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was the change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at week 52. We report the 148-week results. RESULTS: Mean BCVA gain from baseline to week 148 with IAI 2q4, IAI 2q8, and laser control was 10.4, 10.5, and 1.4 letters (P < 0.0001) in VISTA and 10.3, 11.7, and 1.6 letters (P < 0.0001) in VIVID, respectively. The proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters from baseline at week 148 was 42.9%, 35.8%, and 13.6% (P < 0.0001) in VISTA and 41.2%, 42.2%, and 18.9% (P < 0.0001) in VIVID, respectively. Greater proportions of eyes treated with IAI 2q4 and IAI 2q8 versus those treated with laser control had an improvement of ≥2 steps in the Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score in both VISTA (29.9% and 34.4% vs. 20.1% [P = 0.0350, IAI 2q4; P = 0.0052, IAI 2q8]) and VIVID (44.3% and 47.8% vs. 17.4% [P < 0.0001 for both]). In an integrated safety analysis, the most frequent ocular serious adverse event was cataract (3.1%, 2.1%, 0.3% for 2q4, 2q8, and control). CONCLUSIONS: Visual improvements observed with both IAI regimens (over laser control) at weeks 52 and 100 were maintained at week 148, with similar overall efficacy in the IAI 2q4 and IAI 2q8 groups. Treatment with IAI also had positive effects on the DRSS score. Over 148 weeks, the incidence of adverse events was consistent with the known safety profile of IAI.

Intravitreal Aflibercept for Diabetic Macular Edema: 100-Week Results From the VISTA and VIVID Studies.

PURPOSE: To compare efficacy and safety of 2 dosing regimens of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) with macular laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Two similarly designed, randomized, phase 3 trials, VISTA(DME) and VIVID(DME). PARTICIPANTS: Patients (eyes; n=872) with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus who had DME with central involvement. METHODS: Eyes received IAI 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), IAI 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 monthly doses (2q8), or laser control. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was mean change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at week 52. This report presents the 100-week results including mean change from baseline in BCVA, proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters, and proportion of eyes with a ≥2-step improvement in the Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score. RESULTS: Mean BCVA gain from baseline to week 100 with IAI 2q4, IAI 2q8, and laser control was 11.5, 11.1, and 0.9 letters (P < 0.0001) in VISTA and 11.4, 9.4, and 0.7 letters (P < 0.0001) in VIVID, respectively. The proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters from baseline at week 100 was 38.3%, 33.1%, and 13.0% (P < 0.0001) in VISTA and 38.2%, 31.1%, and 12.1% (P ≤ 0.0001) in VIVID. The proportion of eyes that lost ≥15 letters at week 100 was 3.2%, 0.7%, and 9.7% (P ≤ 0.0220) in VISTA and 2.2%, 1.5%, and 12.9% (P ≤ 0.0008) in VIVID. Significantly more eyes in the IAI 2q4 and 2q8 groups versus those in the laser control group had a ≥2 step improvement in the DRSS score in both VISTA (37.0% and 37.1% vs. 15.6%; P < 0.0001) and VIVID (29.3% and 32.6% vs. 8.2%; P ≤ 0.0004). In an integrated safety analysis, the most frequent serious ocular adverse event was cataract (2.4%, 1.0%, and 0.3% for 2q4, 2q8, and control). CONCLUSIONS: In both VISTA and VIVID, the 52-week visual and anatomic superiority of IAI over laser control was sustained through week 100, with similar efficacy in the 2q4 and 2q8 groups. Safety in these studies was consistent with the known safety profile of IAI.

Prediction of worsening of skin fibrosis in patients with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis using the EUSTAR database.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictive parameters for the progression of skin fibrosis within 1 year in patients with diffuse cutaneous SSc (dcSSc). METHODS: An observational study using the EUSTAR database was performed. Inclusion criteria were dcSSc, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria fulfilled, modified Rodnan skin score (MRSS) ≥7 at baseline visit, valid data for MRSS at 2nd visit, and available follow-up of 12±2 months. Worsening of skin fibrosis was defined as increase in MRSS >5 points and ≥25% from baseline to 2nd visit. In the univariate analysis, patients with progressive fibrosis were compared with non-progressors, and predictive markers with p<0.2 were included in the logistic regression analysis. The prediction models were then validated in a second cohort. RESULTS: A total of 637 dcSSc patients were eligible. Univariate analyses identified joint synovitis, short disease duration (≤15 months), short disease duration in females/patients without creatine kinase (CK) elevation, low baseline MRSS (≤22/51), and absence of oesophageal symptoms as potential predictors for progressive skin fibrosis. In the multivariate analysis, by employing combinations of the predictors, 17 models with varying prediction success were generated, allowing cohort enrichment from 9.7% progressive patients in the whole cohort to 44.4% in the optimised enrichment cohort. Using a second validation cohort of 188 dcSSc patients, short disease duration, low baseline MRSS and joint synovitis were confirmed as independent predictors of progressive skin fibrosis within 1 year resulting in a 4.5-fold increased prediction success rate. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides novel, evidence-based criteria for the enrichment of dcSSc cohorts with patients who experience worsening of skin fibrosis which allows improved clinical trial design.

Intravitreal aflibercept for diabetic macular edema.

PURPOSE: A head-to-head comparison was performed between vascular endothelial growth factor blockade and laser for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Two similarly designed, double-masked, randomized, phase 3 trials, VISTA(DME) and VIVID(DME). PARTICIPANTS: We included 872 patients (eyes) with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus who presented with DME with central involvement. METHODS: Eyes received either intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), IAI 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 initial monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters at week 52. Secondary efficacy endpoints at week 52 included the proportion of eyes that gained ≥ 15 letters from baseline and the mean change from baseline in central retinal thickness as determined by optical coherence tomography. RESULTS: Mean BCVA gains from baseline to week 52 in the IAI 2q4 and 2q8 groups versus the laser group were 12.5 and 10.7 versus 0.2 letters (P < 0.0001) in VISTA, and 10.5 and 10.7 versus 1.2 letters (P < 0.0001) in VIVID. The corresponding proportions of eyes gaining ≥ 15 letters were 41.6% and 31.1% versus 7.8% (P < 0.0001) in VISTA, and 32.4% and 33.3% versus 9.1% (P < 0.0001) in VIVID. Similarly, mean reductions in central retinal thickness were 185.9 and 183.1 versus 73.3 µm (P < 0.0001) in VISTA, and 195.0 and 192.4 versus 66.2 µm (P < 0.0001) in VIVID. Overall incidences of ocular and nonocular adverse events and serious adverse events, including the Anti-Platelet Trialists' Collaboration-defined arterial thromboembolic events and vascular deaths, were similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: At week 52, IAI demonstrated significant superiority in functional and anatomic endpoints over laser, with similar efficacy in the 2q4 and 2q8 groups despite the extended dosing interval in the 2q8 group. In general, IAI was well-tolerated.

Long-term effect of early treatment with interferon beta-1b after a first clinical event suggestive of multiple sclerosis: 5-year active treatment extension of the phase 3 BENEFIT trial.

BACKGROUND: The Betaferon/Betaseron in newly emerging multiple sclerosis for initial treatment (BENEFIT) trial investigated the effect of treatment with interferon beta-1b after a clinically isolated syndrome. The 5-year active treatment extension compares the effects of early and delayed treatment with interferon beta-1b on time to clinically definite multiple sclerosis (CDMS) and other disease outcomes, including disability progression. METHODS: Patients with a first event suggestive of multiple sclerosis and a minimum of two clinically silent lesions in MRI were randomly assigned to receive interferon beta-1b 250 microg (n=292; early treatment) or placebo (n=176; delayed treatment) subcutaneously every other day for 2 years, or until diagnosis of CDMS. All patients were then eligible to enter a prospectively planned follow-up phase with open-label interferon beta-1b up to a maximum of 5 years after randomisation. Patients and study personnel remained unaware of initial treatment allocation throughout the study. Primary endpoints were time to CDMS, time to confirmed disability progression measured with the expanded disability status scale, and the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis trial outcomes index (FAMS-TOI) at 5 years. Analysis of the primary endpoints was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00185211. FINDINGS: 235 (80%) patients from the early treatment and 123 (70%) from the delayed treatment group completed the 5-year study. Early treatment reduced the risk of CDMS by 37% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.48-0.83; p=0.003) compared with delayed treatment. The risk for confirmed disability progression was not significantly lower in the early treatment group (0.76, 0.52-1.11; p=0.177). At 5 years, median FAMS-TOI scores were 125 in both groups. No significant differences in other disability related outcomes were recorded. Frequency and severity of adverse events remained within the established safety and tolerability profile of interferon beta-1b. INTERPRETATION: Effects on the rate of conversion to CDMS and the favourable long-term safety and tolerability profile support early initiation of treatment with interferon beta-1b, although a delay in treatment by up to 2 years did not affect long-term disability outcomes. FUNDING: Bayer Schering Pharma.