Aflibercept more effectively weans patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration off therapy compared with bevacizumab.

BACKGROUNDStudies assessing the efficacy of therapies for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD) have demonstrated that aflibercept may have a longer treatment interval than its less-expensive alternative, bevacizumab. However, whether this benefit justifies the additional cost of aflibercept remains under debate. We have recently reported that a treat-and-extend-pause/monitor approach can be used to successfully wean 31% of patients with nvAMD off anti-VEGF therapy. Here, we examined whether the choice of therapy influences the outcomes of this approach.METHODSIn this retrospective analysis, 122 eyes of 106 patients with nvAMD underwent 3 consecutive monthly injections with either aflibercept (n = 70) or bevacizumab (n = 52), followed by a treat-and-extend protocol, in which the decision to extend the interval between treatments was based on visual acuity, clinical exam, and the presence or absence of fluid on optical coherence tomography. Eyes that remained stable 12 weeks from their prior treatment were given a 6-week trial of holding further treatment, followed by quarterly monitoring. Treatment was resumed for worsening vision, clinical exam, or optical coherence tomography findings.RESULTSAt the end of 1 year, eyes receiving bevacizumab had similar vision but required more injections (8.7 ± 0.3 treatments vs. 7.2 ± 0.3 treatments) compared with eyes receiving aflibercept. However, eyes treated with aflibercept were almost 3 times more likely to be weaned off treatment (43% vs. 15%) compared with eyes treated with bevacizumab at the end of 1 year.CONCLUSIONThese observations expose an advantage of aflibercept over bevacizumab and have important clinical implications for the selection of therapy for patients with nvAMD.FUNDINGThis work was supported by the National Eye Institute, NIH grants R01EY029750 and R01EY025705, Research to Prevent Blindness, the Alcon Young Investigator Award from the Alcon Research Institute, and the Branna and Irving Sisenwein Professorship in Ophthalmology.

ANGPTL4 influences the therapeutic response of patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration by promoting choroidal neovascularization.

Most patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD), the leading cause of severe vision loss in elderly US citizens, respond inadequately to current therapies targeting a single angiogenic mediator, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Here, we report that aqueous fluid levels of a second vasoactive mediator, angiopoietin-like 4 (ANGPTL4), can help predict the response of patients with nvAMD to anti-VEGF therapies. ANGPTL4 expression was higher in patients who required monthly treatment with anti-VEGF therapies compared with patients who could be effectively treated with less-frequent injections. We further demonstrate that ANGPTL4 acts synergistically with VEGF to promote the growth and leakage of choroidal neovascular (CNV) lesions in mice. Targeting ANGPTL4 expression was as effective as targeting VEGF expression for treating CNV in mice, while simultaneously targeting both was more effective than targeting either factor alone. To help translate these findings to patients, we used a soluble receptor that binds to both VEGF and ANGPTL4 and effectively inhibited the development of CNV lesions in mice. Our findings provide an assay that can help predict the response of patients with nvAMD to anti-VEGF monotherapy and suggest that therapies targeting both ANGPTL4 and VEGF will be a more effective approach for the treatment of this blinding disease.

Aqueous proteins help predict the response of patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration to anti-VEGF therapy.

BackgroundTo reduce the treatment burden for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD), emerging therapies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) are being designed to extend the interval between treatments, thereby minimizing the number of intraocular injections. However, which patients will benefit from longer-acting agents is not clear.MethodsEyes with nvAMD (n = 122) underwent 3 consecutive monthly injections with currently available anti-VEGF therapies, followed by a treat-and-extend protocol. Patients who remained quiescent 12 weeks from their prior treatment entered a treatment pause and were switched to pro re nata (PRN) treatment (based on vision, clinical exam, and/or imaging studies). Proteomic analysis was performed on aqueous fluid to identify proteins that correlate with patients' response to treatment.ResultsAt the end of 1 year, 38 of 122 eyes (31%) entered a treatment pause (≥30 weeks). Conversely, 21 of 122 eyes (17%) failed extension and required monthly treatment at the end of year 1. Proteomic analysis of aqueous fluid identified proteins that correlated with patients' response to treatment, including proteins previously implicated in AMD pathogenesis. Interestingly, apolipoprotein-B100 (ApoB100), a principal component of drusen implicated in the progression of nonneovascular AMD, was increased in treated patients who required less frequent injections. ApoB100 expression was higher in AMD eyes compared with controls but was lower in eyes that develop choroidal neovascularization (CNV), consistent with a protective role. Accordingly, mice overexpressing ApoB100 were partially protected from laser-induced CNV.FundingThis work was supported by the National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health grants R01EY029750, R01EY025705, and R01 EY27961; the Research to Prevent Blindness, Inc.; the Alcon Research Institute; and Johns Hopkins University through the Robert Bond Welch and Branna and Irving Sisenwein professorships in ophthalmology.ConclusionAqueous biomarkers could help identify patients with nvAMD who may not require or benefit from long-term treatment with anti-VEGF therapy.

Factors Associated With a Patient's Decision to Select a Cost-effective vs the Most Effective Therapy for Their Own Eye Disease.

Importance: Ten percent of the Medicare Part B budget is spent on aflibercept, used to treat a myriad of ocular neovascular diseases. A substantial portion of these costs can be attributed to a few hundred ophthalmologists, raising concerns regarding the influence of pharmaceutical companies on the choice of medication by a relatively small group of clinicians. One approach to protect patients' health care interests is to include them in deliberations on the choice of therapy for their eye disease. Objective: To examine factors associated with patients' choice between an effective and less expensive off-label drug or a more effective, but also more expensive, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort analysis used data from the satellite office of a tertiary referral center from August 2, 2013, to April 9, 2018. Insured patients initiating treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from March 26, 2018, to June 10, 2020. Interventions: Patients were asked to choose between bevacizumab (approximately $100 per dose), a chemotherapy that is effective, but not FDA approved, for the treatment of ocular vascular disease, or aflibercept (approximately $2000 per dose), an FDA-approved drug for ocular vascular disease that may be more effective than bevacizumab in some patients. Independent of this choice, patients were separately asked by a study coordinator to participate in an invasive clinical study for which they would not be compensated, there was a small risk for an adverse event, and they would not personally benefit from participating (a surrogate marker for altruism). Main Outcomes and Measures: Factors associated with patients' choice of medication, including age, sex, ocular disease, race, and participation in an invasive clinical study. Results: A total of 189 patients were included in the analysis (106 women [56%]; mean [SEM] age, 74.6 [0.8] years). Despite being told that it may not be as effective as aflibercept, 100 patients (53%) selected bevacizumab for their own eye care. An act of altruism (ie, participation in an invasive clinical study) when the patient was making a choice between the 2 drugs was associated with a patient's choice of bevacizumab (odds ratio [OR], 7.03; 95% CI, 2.27-21.80; P < .001); the OR for selecting bevacizumab for patients who never agreed to participate in the clinical study was 0.45 (95% CI, 0.25-0.83; P = .001). Age (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.03; P = .86), race (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.41-1.22; P = .21), sex (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.39-1.35; P = .31), presence of diabetes (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.59-3.93; P = .39), and type of eye disease (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.30-1.04; P = .07) were not associated with choice of therapy. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that clinicians must consider the ethical implications of the influence of altruism when patients participate in the decision between cost-effective vs the most effective medicines for their own health care.