DEFINING "STRONG" VERSUS "WEAK" RESPONSE TO ANTIVASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR TREATMENT FOR CENTER-INVOLVED DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: To define "strong" versus "weak" antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment response in eyes with center-involved diabetic macular edema (CI-DME). METHODS: Exploratory analyses of three DRCR Retina Network randomized trials of eyes with CI-DME treated with aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab. Thresholds of 5-, 10-, and 15-letter gain defined strong visual acuity (VA) response when baseline VA was 20/25-20/32, 20/40-20/63, or 20/80-20/320, respectively. Thresholds of 50, 100, or 200- µ m reduction defined strong anatomical response when baseline central subfield thickness (CST) was <75, ≥75 to <175, or ≥175- µ m above standard thresholds. Additional thresholds from regression equations were calculated. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, outcomes for strong response were achieved by 476 of 958 eyes (50%) for VA and 505 eyes (53%) for CST. At 104 weeks among the 32% of eyes with strong VA and CST response at 24 weeks, 195 of 281 (69%) maintained strong VA and CST response, whereas 20 (7%) had neither strong VA nor strong CST response. Outcomes rates were similar across protocols and when defined using regression equations. CONCLUSION: These phenotypes are suitable for efforts to identify predictive biomarkers for response to anti-VEGF therapy for DME and might facilitate comparison of treatment response among diverse cohorts with DME.

Prevalence and causes of clinically detectable uveitic serous retinal detachment.

PURPOSE: To describe the prevalence and causes of clinically detectable uveitic serous retinal detachment (SRD). METHODS: Retrospective chart review of a large clinic-based series. RESULTS: Serous retinal detachment was present in 78 of the 2761 (2.8%) patients. Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada (VKH) disease was the most commonly identified cause (38/78, 48.7%). Less common associated etiologies included toxoplasmic retinochoroiditis (8/78, 10.3%), sarcoidosis (5/78, 6.4%), intraocular lymphoma (4/78, 5.1%), presumed tuberculosis (3/78, 3.8%), and posterior scleritis (2/78, 2.6%). Fifteen patients (19.2%) with uveitic SRD at presentation had no identifiable etiology and were labeled idiopathic or indeterminant. Thirty of the 38 patients with VKH disease (78.9%) had positive neurological and/or integumentary findings, and therefore constituted either complete or incomplete subtypes of the disease. The remaining eight (21.1%) had presumed/ocular VKH disease limited to the eye. CONCLUSION: While VKH disease by far is the most common cause of clinically detectable uveitic SRD, a number of other non-infectious and infectious inflammatory disorders were also associated with this distinctive clinical finding.

Structured layer surface segmentation for retina OCT using fully convolutional regression networks.

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a noninvasive imaging modality with micrometer resolution which has been widely used for scanning the retina. Retinal layers are important biomarkers for many diseases. Accurate automated algorithms for segmenting smooth continuous layer surfaces with correct hierarchy (topology) are important for automated retinal thickness and surface shape analysis. State-of-the-art methods typically use a two step process. Firstly, a trained classifier is used to label each pixel into either background and layers or boundaries and non-boundaries. Secondly, the desired smooth surfaces with the correct topology are extracted by graph methods (e.g., graph cut). Data driven methods like deep networks have shown great ability for the pixel classification step, but to date have not been able to extract structured smooth continuous surfaces with topological constraints in the second step. In this paper, we combine these two steps into a unified deep learning framework by directly modeling the distribution of the surface positions. Smooth, continuous, and topologically correct surfaces are obtained in a single feed forward operation. The proposed method was evaluated on two publicly available data sets of healthy controls and subjects with either multiple sclerosis or diabetic macular edema, and is shown to achieve state-of-the art performance with sub-pixel accuracy.

Real-world Outcomes among Eyes with Center-Involving Diabetic Macular Edema and Good Visual Acuity.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine long-term visual and anatomical outcomes among patients with center involving-diabetic macular edema and good vision and evaluate factors associated with visual and anatomic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, all patients with type 2 diabetes aged ≥18 years had seen at the Wilmer Eye Institute between March 2015-June 2018 and with diabetic macular edema confirmed on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography imaging were included, provided they had visual acuity of 20/30 or better in ≥1 eye and a follow-up duration of ≥3 clinic visits. Change in logMAR visual acuity and central 1 mm foveal thickness from baseline, lines of visual acuity gained/lost for overall cohort stratified by treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 197 (243 eyes) participants, mean (± standard deviation) age was 63.4 ± 11.2 years, and half were males. Average duration of follow-up was 1.7 ± 0.7 years. One hundred and forty-six eyes (60%) received anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections, at an average of 3.7 ± 2.9 injections/eye/year. Mean logMAR visual acuity at baseline was 0.1 ± 0.1 [Snellen 20/25] in both treatment and observation (no anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment received during and 3 months prior to the study inclusion period) groups. Final logMAR visual acuity was 0.2 ± 0.2 in the treatment group [Snellen 20/32] versus 0.1 ± 0.3 in observation group [Snellen 20/25]; (p = .23). Mean central foveal thickness changed from 333 ± 66 to 308 ± 45 microns in treatment group and 319 ± 41 to 308 ± 65 microns in observation group. CONCLUSIONS: After an average of 1.7 years of follow-up, there were no significant differences in final vision or central foveal thickness irrespective of whether patients received or did not receive treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections.

Loss of Peak Vision in Retinal Vein Occlusion Patients Treated for Macular Edema.

PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term visual and anatomic outcomes in patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. DESIGN: Prospective, interventional case series. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with central RVO (CRVO) or branch RVO (BRVO). METHODS: Number of anti-VEGF injections and improvement from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield thickness (CST) were prospectively recorded in 40 eyes of 39 CRVO patients and 50 eyes of 47 BRVO patients. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 58 months for BRVO and 78 months for CRVO. Within 6 months of last follow-up, 58% of BRVO patients and 75% of CRVO patients required anti-VEGF injections to control edema. Analysis of the course of each patient over time showed that for BRVO patients, BCVA letter score increased by a mean of 24, from baseline of 52 (20/100) to peak of 76 (20/32), and subsequently decreased by 13, to 63 (20/50), at final visit; and for CRVO patients, BCVA letter score increased by a mean of 26, from baseline of 48 (20/100) to peak of 74 (20/32), and subsequently decreased by 18, to 56 (20/80), at last follow-up. Loss from peak BCVA occurred primarily owing to persistent/recurrent edema and related foveal damage. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RVO showed large improvements in BCVA after initiation of anti-VEGF injections, but in many patients some visual gains were lost over time owing to bouts of recurrent edema. Sustained suppression of VEGF may help to provide optimal outcomes in RVO and reduce treatment burden.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the most common cause of uncorrectable severe vision loss in people aged 55 years and older in the developed world. Choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to AMD accounts for most cases of AMD-related severe vision loss. Intravitreous injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents aims to block the growth of abnormal blood vessels in the eye to prevent vision loss and, in some instances, to improve vision. OBJECTIVES: • To investigate ocular and systemic effects of, and quality of life associated with, intravitreous injection of three anti-VEGF agents (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab) versus no anti-VEGF treatment for patients with neovascular AMD• To compare the relative effects of one of these anti-VEGF agents versus another when administered in comparable dosages and regimens SEARCH METHODS: To identify eligible studies for this review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register (searched January 31, 2018); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to January 31, 2018); Embase Ovid (1947 to January 31, 2018); the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (1982 to January 31, 2018); the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Number (ISRCTN) Registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch - searched January 31, 2018); ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov - searched November 28, 2018); and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en - searched January 31, 2018). We did not impose any date or language restrictions in electronic searches for trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated pegaptanib, ranibizumab, or bevacizumab versus each other or versus a control treatment (e.g. sham treatment, photodynamic therapy), in which participants were followed for at least one year. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional data. We compared outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs). We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 RCTs that had enrolled a total of 6347 participants with neovascular AMD (the number of participants per trial ranged from 23 to 1208) and identified one potentially relevant ongoing trial. Six trials compared anti-VEGF treatment (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, or bevacizumab) versus control, and 10 trials compared bevacizumab versus ranibizumab. Pharmaceutical companies conducted or sponsored four trials but funded none of the studies that evaluated bevacizumab. Researchers conducted these trials at various centers across five continents (North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia). The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate to high, and most trials had an overall low risk of bias. All but one trial had been registered prospectively.When compared with those who received control treatment, more participants who received intravitreous injection of any of the three anti-VEGF agents had gained 15 letters or more of visual acuity (risk ratio [RR] 4.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.32 to 7.55; moderate-certainty evidence), had lost fewer than 15 letters of visual acuity (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.55; high-certainty evidence), and showed mean improvement in visual acuity (mean difference 6.7 letters, 95% CI 4.4 to 9.0 in one pegaptanib trial; mean difference 17.8 letters, 95% CI 16.0 to 19.7 in three ranibizumab trials; moderate-certainty evidence) after one year of follow-up. Participants treated with anti-VEGF agents showed improvement in morphologic outcomes (e.g. size of CNV, central retinal thickness) compared with participants not treated with anti-VEGF agents (moderate-certainty evidence). No trial directly compared pegaptanib versus another anti-VEGF agent and followed participants for one year; however, when compared with control treatments, ranibizumab and bevacizumab each yielded larger improvements in visual acuity outcomes than pegaptanib.Visual acuity outcomes after bevacizumab and ranibizumab were similar when the same RCTs compared the same regimens with respect to gain of 15 or more letters of visual acuity (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12; high-certainty evidence) and loss of fewer than 15 letters of visual acuity (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02; high-certainty evidence); results showed similar mean improvement in visual acuity (mean difference [MD] -0.5 letters, 95% CI -1.5 to 0.5; high-certainty evidence) after one year of follow-up, despite the substantially lower cost of bevacizumab compared with ranibizumab. Reduction in central retinal thickness was less among bevacizumab-treated participants than among ranibizumab-treated participants after one year (MD -11.6 µm, 95% CI -21.6 to -1.7; high-certainty evidence); however, this difference is within the range of measurement error, and we did not interpret it to be clinically meaningful.Ocular inflammation and increased intraocular pressure (IOP) after intravitreal injection were the most frequently reported serious ocular adverse events. Researchers reported endophthalmitis in less than 1% of anti-VEGF-treated participants and in no cases among control groups. The occurrence of serious systemic adverse events was comparable across anti-VEGF-treated groups and control groups; however, the numbers of events and trial participants may have been insufficient to show a meaningful difference between groups (evidence of low- to moderate-certainty). Investigators rarely measured and reported data on visual function, quality of life, or economic outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Results of this review show the effectiveness of anti-VEGF agents (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab) in terms of maintaining visual acuity; studies show that ranibizumab and bevacizumab improved visual acuity in some eyes that received these agents and were equally effective. Available information on the adverse effects of each medication does not suggest a higher incidence of potentially vision-threatening complications with intravitreous injection of anti-VEGF agents compared with control interventions; however, clinical trial sample sizes were not sufficient to estimate differences in rare safety outcomes. Future Cochrane Reviews should incorporate research evaluating variable dosing regimens of anti-VEGF agents, effects of long-term use, use of combination therapies (e.g. anti-VEGF treatment plus photodynamic therapy), and other methods of delivering these agents.

Factors Associated With Visual Acuity and Central Subfield Thickness Changes When Treating Diabetic Macular Edema With Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy: An Exploratory Analysis of the Protocol T Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Identifying the factors that are associated with the magnitude of treatment benefits from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy for diabetic macular edema (DME) may help refine treatment expectations. Objective: To identify the baseline factors that are associated with vision and anatomic outcomes when managing DME with anti-VEGF and determine if there are interactions between factors and the agent administered. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc analysis of data from the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network multicenter randomized clinical trial , Protocol T, was conducted between December 2016 and December 2017. Between August 22, 2012, and August 28, 2013, 660 participants were enrolled with central-involved DME and vision impairment (approximate Snellen equivalent, 20/32-20/320). Interventions: Repeated 0.05-mL intravitreous injections of 2.0-mg aflibercept (201 eyes), 1.25-mg bevacizumab (185 eyes), or 0.3-mg ranibizumab (192 eyes) per protocol. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in visual acuity (VA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) central subfield thickness at 2 years and change in VA over 2 years (area under the curve [AUC]). Results: Among 578 participants, the median age (interquartile range) was 61 (54-67) years. Across anti-VEGF treatment groups, each baseline factor was associated with mean improvement in VA and a reduction in central DME compared with the baseline. For every decade of participant age, the mean VA improvement was reduced by 2.1 letters (95% CI, -3.0 to -1.2; P < .001) in the VA and 1.9 letters (95% CI, -2.4 to -1.3; P < .001) in the VA AUC analyses. For each 1% increase in hemoglobin A1c levels, VA improvement was reduced by 1 letter in the VA (95% CI, -1.5 to -0.5; P < .001) and 0.5 letters (95% CI, -0.9 to -0.2; P < .001) in the VA AUC analyses. Eyes with no prior panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and less than severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy had an approximately 3-letter improvement in the VA (95% CI, 0.9-5.4; P = .007) and VA AUC (95% CI, 1.3-4.2; P < .001) analyses compared with eyes with prior PRP. On average, African American participants had greater reductions in central subfield thickness compared with eyes of white participants (-27.3 µm, P = .01), as did eyes with central subretinal fluid compared with eyes without this OCT feature (-22.9 µm, P = .01). There were no interactions between the predictive factors and the specific anti-VEGF agent that was administered for any VA or OCT outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: Lower hemoglobin A1c levels were associated with the magnitude of vision improvement following anti-VEGF therapy, providing further evidence to encourage glycemic control among persons with diabetes. Younger patients and those without prior PRP might expect greater improvement in VA than older patients or those with prior PRP.

Association of Cancer Immunotherapy With Acute Macular Neuroretinopathy and Diffuse Retinal Venulitis.

Importance: Checkpoint inhibition in cancer immunotherapy related to T-cell-driven mechanisms of action associated with acute macular neuroretinopathy (AMN) and diffuse retinal venulitis, an adverse event not previously described, is reported here. Objective: To describe 2 patients who developed ophthalmologic events after treatment with the programmed death 1 axis inhibitor, atezolizumab. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective review of 2 patients treated with atezolizumab for metastatic breast cancer and colon cancer, respectively, who presented with AMN and diffuse retinal venulitis conducted at 2 tertiary medical centers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multimodal imaging including near infrared, optical coherence tomography, and fluorescein angiography were used to characterize retinal vascular abnormalities. Results: Based on optical coherence tomography and multimodal imaging findings, the clinical diagnosis of AMN associated with diffuse retinal venulitis was made in these 2 patients receiving atezolizumab. Conclusions and Relevance: While only 2 cases of patients receiving the programmed death ligand 1 inhibitor atezolizumab who experienced AMN and diffuse retinal venulitis are described here, these findings suggest that patients receiving programmed death 1 axis inhibitor therapies may need to be monitored for unexpected immune-related ocular toxicity including abnormalities of the microvasculature and large retinal vessels. Further studies might investigate the potential mechanisms of retinal vascular changes associated with these therapies.

Shortest Distance From Fovea to Subfoveal Hemorrhage Border Is Important in Patients With Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration.

PURPOSE: To identify factors influencing visual outcome in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD) and subfoveal hemorrhage (SFH) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: Anti-VEGF-treated eyes with SFH > 1 disc area (DA) were identified (n = 16) and changes in visual acuity (VA) and central subfield thickness (CST) from baseline to last follow-up, along with SFH area, thickness, minimum distance from fovea to SFH border, and time to resolution, were determined. RESULTS: At baseline, mean (± standard error of the mean) size and thickness of SFH were 14.9 ± 2.8 DA and 386.6 ± 46.9 µm, and mean Snellen VA and CST were 20/250 and 591.7 ± 57.0 µm. Median follow-up was 47.6 months. While more than 50% of patients had VA ≤ 20/200 at baseline and all time points through week 48, the percentage of patients with VA ≥ 20/50 increased to 30%-40% at months 6 and 12 and remained stable through month 48. Spearman rank correlation demonstrated 2 independent variables that correlated with good visual outcome, smaller area of SFH at baseline (r = -0.630; P = .009), and high frequency of anti-VEGF injections (r = 0.646; P = .007). In exceptional patients with good visual outcome despite large baseline SFH, shortest distance between the fovea and hemorrhage border significantly correlated with baseline VA (r = -0.503, P = .047) and final VA (r = -0.575, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NVAMD and thick SFH, but short distance between fovea and uninvolved retina, can have good visual outcomes when given frequent anti-VEGF injections.

Intravitreal Bevacizumab Versus Ranibizumab for Treatment of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Findings from a Cochrane Systematic Review.

TOPIC: To summarize the relative effects of bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA) and ranibizumab (Lucentis; Genentech, Inc.), using findings from a Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group systematic review. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD) is the most common cause of uncorrectable vision loss among the elderly in developed countries. Bevacizumab and ranibizumab are the most frequently used anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents injected intravitreally to treat NVAMD. METHODS: For this systematic review, we included only randomized controlled trials in which the 2 anti-VEGF agents had been compared directly. The primary outcome was 1-year gain in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of ≥15 letters. We followed Cochrane methods for trial selection, data extraction, and data analyses. Relative effects of bevacizumab versus ranibizumab are presented as estimated risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We identified 6 eligible randomized controlled trials with 2809 participants. The proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters of BCVA by 1 year was similar for the 2 agents when the same regimens were compared (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11). The mean change in BCVA from baseline also was similar (MD, -0.5 letter; 95% CI, -1.6 to +0.6). Other BCVA and quality of life outcomes were similar for the 2 agents. One-year treatment cost with ranibizumab was 5.1 and 25.5 times the cost for bevacizumab in the 2 largest trials. Ocular adverse events were uncommon (<1%), and rates were similar for the 2 agents. CONCLUSIONS: We found no important difference in effectiveness or safety between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for NVAMD treatment, but there was a large cost difference.

Changes in Retinal Nonperfusion Associated with Suppression of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor in Retinal Vein Occlusion.

PURPOSE: To assess changes in retinal nonperfusion (RNP) in patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) treated with ranibizumab. DESIGN: Secondary outcome measure in randomized double-masked controlled clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine patients with central RVO (CRVO) and 42 with branch RVO (BRVO). METHODS: Subjects were randomized to 0.5 or 2.0 mg ranibizumab every month for 6 months and then were re-randomized to pro re nata (PRN) groups receiving either ranibizumab plus scatter laser photocoagulation or ranibizumab alone for an additional 30 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of percentage of patients with increased or decreased area of RNP in patients with RVO treated with 0.5 versus 2.0 mg ranibizumab, during monthly injections versus ranibizumab PRN, and in patients treated with ranibizumab PRN versus ranibizumab PRN plus laser. RESULTS: In RVO patients given monthly injections of 0.5 or 2.0 mg ranibizumab for 6 months, there was no significant difference in the percentage who showed reduction or increase in the area of RNP. However, regardless of dose, during the 6-month period of monthly injections, a higher percentage of patients showed a reduction in area of RNP and a lower percentage showed an increase in area of RNP compared with subsequent periods of ranibizumab PRN treatment. After the 6-month period of monthly injections, BRVO patients, but not CRVO patients, randomized to ranibizumab PRN plus laser showed significantly less progression of RNP compared with patients treated with ranibizumab PRN. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of dose (0.5 or 2.0 mg), monthly ranibizumab injections promote improvement and reduce progression of RNP compared with PRN injections. The addition of scatter photocoagulation to ranibizumab PRN may reduce progression of RNP in patients with BRVO, but a statistically significant reduction was not seen in patients with CRVO.

Angiopoietin-like 4 is a potent angiogenic factor and a novel therapeutic target for patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy.

Diabetic eye disease is the most common cause of severe vision loss in the working-age population in the developed world, and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) is its most vision-threatening sequela. In PDR, retinal ischemia leads to the up-regulation of angiogenic factors that promote neovascularization. Therapies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) delay the development of neovascularization in some, but not all, diabetic patients, implicating additional factor(s) in PDR pathogenesis. Here we demonstrate that the angiogenic potential of aqueous fluid from PDR patients is independent of VEGF concentration, providing an opportunity to evaluate the contribution of other angiogenic factor(s) to PDR development. We identify angiopoietin-like 4 (ANGPTL4) as a potent angiogenic factor whose expression is up-regulated in hypoxic retinal Müller cells in vitro and the ischemic retina in vivo. Expression of ANGPTL4 was increased in the aqueous and vitreous of PDR patients, independent of VEGF levels, correlated with the presence of diabetic eye disease, and localized to areas of retinal neovascularization. Inhibition of ANGPTL4 expression reduced the angiogenic potential of hypoxic Müller cells; this effect was additive with inhibition of VEGF expression. An ANGPTL4 neutralizing antibody inhibited the angiogenic effect of aqueous fluid from PDR patients, including samples from patients with low VEGF levels or receiving anti-VEGF therapy. Collectively, our results suggest that targeting both ANGPTL4 and VEGF may be necessary for effective treatment or prevention of PDR and provide the foundation for studies evaluating aqueous ANGPTL4 as a biomarker to help guide individualized therapy for diabetic eye disease.

Scatter Photocoagulation Does Not Reduce Macular Edema or Treatment Burden in Patients with Retinal Vein Occlusion: The RELATE Trial.

PURPOSE: To determine whether scatter and grid laser photocoagulation (laser) adds benefit to ranibizumab injections in patients with macular edema from retinal vein occlusion (RVO) and to compare 0.5-mg with 2.0-mg ranibizumab. DESIGN: Randomized, double-masked, controlled clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine patients with central RVO (CRVO) and 42 with branch RVO (BRVO). METHODS: Subjects were randomized to 0.5 mg or 2.0 mg ranibizumab every 4 weeks for 24 weeks and re-randomized to pro re nata ranibizumab plus laser or ranibizumab alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean change from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at week 24 for BCVA at weeks 48, 96, and 144 for second randomization. RESULTS: Mean improvement from baseline BCVA at week 24 was 15.5 and 15.8 letters in the 0.5-mg and 2.0-mg CRVO groups, and 12.1 and 14.6 letters in the 0.5-mg and 2.0-mg BRVO groups. For CRVO, but not BRVO, there was significantly greater reduction from baseline mean central subfield thickness (CST) in the 2.0-mg versus 0.5-mg group (396.1 vs. 253.5 µm; P = 0.03). For the second randomization in CRVO patients, there was no significant difference from week 24 BCVA in the ranibizumab plus laser versus the ranibizumab only groups at week 48 (-3.3 vs. 0.0 letters), week 96 (+0.69 vs. -1.6 letters), or week 144 (+0.4 vs. -6.7 letters), and a significant increase from week 24 mean CST at week 48 (+94.7 vs. +15.2 µm; P = 0.05) but not weeks 96 or 144. For BRVO, there was a significant reduction from week 24 mean BCVA in ranibizumab plus laser versus ranibizumab at week 48 (-7.5 vs. +2.8; P < 0.01) and week 96 (-2.0 vs. +4.8; P < 0.03), but not week 144, and there were no differences in mean CST change from week 24 at weeks 48, 96, or 144. Laser failed to increase edema resolution or to reduce the ranibizumab injections between weeks 24 and 144. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with macular edema resulting from RVO, there was no short-term clinically significant benefit from monthly injections of 2.0-mg versus 0.5-mg ranibizumab injections and no long-term benefit in BCVA, resolution of edema, or number of ranibizumab injections obtained by addition of laser treatment to ranibizumab.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the most common cause of uncorrectable severe vision loss in people aged 55 years and older in the developed world. Choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to neovascular AMD accounts for most AMD-related severe vision loss. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents, injected intravitreally, aim to block the growth of abnormal blood vessels in the eye to prevent vision loss and, in some instances, improve vision. OBJECTIVES: To investigate: (1) the ocular and systemic effects of, and quality of life associated with, intravitreally injected anti-VEGF agents (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab) for the treatment of neovascular AMD compared with no anti-VEGF treatment; and (2) the relative effects of one anti-VEGF agent compared with another when administered in comparable dosages and regimens. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2014, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to March 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2014), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to March 2014), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We used no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 27 March 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated pegaptanib, ranibizumab, or bevacizumab versus each other or a control treatment (e.g., sham treatment or photodynamic therapy). All trials followed participants for at least one year. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional data. We analyzed outcomes as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs). We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs including a total of 5496 participants with neovascular AMD (the number of participants per trial ranged from 28 to 1208). One trial compared pegaptanib, three trials ranibizumab, and two trials bevacizumab versus controls; six trials compared bevacizumab with ranibizumab. Four trials were conducted by pharmaceutical companies; none of the eight studies which evaluated bevacizumab were funded by pharmaceutical companies. The trials were conducted at various centers across five continents (North and South America, Europe, Asia and Australia). The overall quality of the evidence was very good, with most trials having an overall low risk of bias.When compared with control treatments, participants who received any of the three anti-VEGF agents were more likely to have gained 15 letters or more of visual acuity, lost fewer than 15 letters of visual acuity, and had vision 20/200 or better after one year of follow up. Visual acuity outcomes after bevacizumab and ranibizumab were similar when the same regimens were compared in the same RCTs, despite the substantially lower cost for bevacizumab compared with ranibizumab. No trial directly compared pegaptanib with other anti-VEGF agents; however, when compared with controls, ranibizumab or bevacizumab yielded larger improvements in visual acuity outcomes than pegaptanib.Participants treated with anti-VEGFs showed improvements in morphologic outcomes (e.g., size of CNV or central retinal thickness) compared with participants not treated with anti-VEGF agents. There was less reduction in central retinal thickness among bevacizumab-treated participants than among ranibizumab-treated participants after one year (MD -13.97 µm; 95% confidence interval (CI) -26.52 to -1.41); however, this difference is within the range of measurement error and we did not interpret it as being clinically meaningful.Ocular inflammation and increased intraocular pressure after intravitreal injection were the most frequently reported serious ocular adverse events. Endophthalmitis was reported in fewer than 1% of anti-VEGF treated participants; no cases were reported in control groups. The occurrence of serious systemic adverse events was comparable across anti-VEGF-treated groups and control groups; however, the numbers of events and trial participants may have been insufficient to detect a meaningful difference between groups. Data for visual function, quality of life, and economic outcomes were sparsely measured and reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review indicate the effectiveness of anti-VEGF agents (pegaptanib, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab) in terms of maintaining visual acuity; ranibizumab and bevacizumab were also shown to improve visual acuity. The information available on the adverse effects of each medication do not suggest a higher incidence of potentially vision-threatening complications with intravitreal injection compared with control interventions; however, clinical trial sample sizes may not have been sufficient to detect rare safety outcomes. Research evaluating variable dosing regimens with anti-VEGF agents, effects of long-term use, combination therapies (e.g., anti-VEGF treatment plus photodynamic therapy), and other methods of delivering the agents should be incorporated into future Cochrane reviews.

Long-term outcomes in ranibizumab-treated patients with retinal vein occlusion; the role of progression of retinal nonperfusion.

PURPOSE: To determine the percentage of ranibizumab-treated patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) who had resolution of edema for at least 6 months after the last injection, along with factors and outcomes that correlate with resolution. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of open-label clinical trial. METHODS: Twenty patients with branch RVO (BRVO) and 20 with central RVO (CRVO) received ranibizumab monthly for 3 months and as needed for recurrent/persistent macular edema, no more frequently than every 2 months. Patients still requiring injections after month 40 received scatter and grid laser photocoagulation to try to reduce the need for injections. Main outcome measures included the percentage of patients who had resolution of edema, change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline, and change in area of retinal nonperfusion in central subfields. RESULTS: Nine patients with BRVO (45%) had edema resolution from injections alone after a mean of 20.2 months, 4 resolved after addition of laser, 4 were unresolved through 72 months, and 3 exited prior to resolution. Five patients with CRVO (25%) resolved from injections alone after a mean of 14.0 months, 8 remained unresolved through 72 months despite addition of laser, and 7 exited prior to resolution. For BRVO or CRVO, there was a negative correlation between posterior retinal nonperfusion area and BCVA at months 18, 24, and 36 (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with RVO, infrequent ranibizumab injections to control edema may not be sufficient to prevent progression of retinal nonperfusion, which may contribute to loss of visual gains.

VEGF secreted by hypoxic Müller cells induces MMP-2 expression and activity in endothelial cells to promote retinal neovascularization in proliferative diabetic retinopathy.

In proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), retinal ischemia promotes neovascularization (NV), which can lead to profound vision loss in diabetic patients. Treatment for PDR, panretinal photocoagulation, is inherently destructive and has significant visual consequences. Therapies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have transformed the treatment of diabetic eye disease but have proven inadequate for treating NV, prompting exploration for additional therapeutic options for PDR patients. In this regard, extracellular proteolysis is an early and sustained activity strictly required for NV. Extracellular proteolysis in NV is facilitated by the dysregulated activity of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs). Here, we set out to better understand the regulation of MMPs by ischemia in PDR. We demonstrate that accumulation of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α in Müller cells induces the expression of VEGF, which, in turn, promotes increased MMP-2 expression and activity in neighboring endothelial cells (ECs). MMP-2 expression was detected in ECs in retinal NV tissue from PDR patients, whereas MMP-2 protein levels were elevated in the aqueous of PDR patients compared with controls. Our findings demonstrate a complex interplay among hypoxic Müller cells, secreted angiogenic factors, and neighboring ECs in the regulation of MMP-2 in retinal NV and identify MMP-2 as a target for the treatment of PDR.

Detection of new-onset choroidal neovascularization using optical coherence tomography: the AMD DOC Study.

PURPOSE: To determine the sensitivity of time domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) in detecting conversion to neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) in eyes at high risk for choroidal neovascularization (CNV), compared with detection using fluorescein angiography (FA) as the gold standard. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged ≥50 years with nonneovascular AMD at high risk of progressing to CNV in the study eye and evidence of neovascular AMD in the fellow eye. METHODS: At study entry and every 3 months through 2 years, participants underwent best-corrected visual acuity, supervised Amsler grid testing, preferential hyperacuity perimetry (PHP) testing, stereoscopic digital fundus photographs with FA, and OCT imaging. A central Reading Center graded all images. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: The sensitivity of OCT in detecting conversion to neovascular AMD by 2 years, using FA as the reference standard. Secondary outcomes included comparison of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of OCT, PHP, and supervised Amsler grid relative to FA for detecting incident CNV. RESULTS: A total of 98 participants were enrolled; 87 (89%) of these individuals either completed the 24-month visit or exited the study after developing CNV. Fifteen (17%) study eyes had incident CNV confirmed on FA by the Reading Center. The sensitivity of each modality for detecting CNV was: OCT 0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.68), supervised Amsler grid 0.42 (95% CI, 0.15-0.72), and PHP 0.50 (95% CI, 0.23-0.77). Treatment for incident CNV was recommended by the study investigator in 13 study eyes. Sensitivity of the testing modalities for detection of CNV in these 13 eyes was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.39-0.91) for OCT, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.19-0.81) for supervised Amsler grid, and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.35-0.93) for PHP. Specificity of the OCT was higher than that of the Amsler grid and PHP. CONCLUSIONS: Time-domain OCT, supervised Amsler grid, and PHP have low to moderate sensitivity for detection of new-onset CNV compared with FA. Optical coherence tomography has greater specificity than Amsler grid or PHP. Among fellow eyes of individuals with unilateral CNV, FA remains the best method to detect new-onset CNV.

Antagonism of vascular endothelial growth factor for macular edema caused by retinal vein occlusions: two-year outcomes.

PURPOSE: To determine the long-term effects of intraocular antagonism of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in patients with macular edema caused by retinal vein occlusions (RVOs). DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty patients with macular edema caused by branch RVOs (BRVOs) and 20 patients with central RVOs (CRVOs). METHODS: After the month 3 primary end point, patients were seen every 2 months and received injections of an anti-VEGF agent as needed for recurrent edema. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean change from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at month 24 with assessment of other parameters of visual function and center subfield thickness (foveal thickness [FTH]). RESULTS: For 17 patients with BRVO who completed 2 years of follow-up, the mean improvement from baseline in BCVA at month 24 was 17.8 letters compared with 15.6 letters at month 3. Improvement by at least 6, 3, or 2 lines occurred in 18%, 59%, and 76% of patients, respectively. The Snellen equivalent BCVA at month 24 was 20/40 or better in 10 patients. With an average of 2 injections of ranibizumab during year 2, the mean FTH at month 24 was 245.8 µm compared with 217.1 µm at month 3 and 481.5 µm at baseline. For 14 patients with CRVO who completed 2 years of follow-up, the mean improvement in BCVA at month 24 was 8.5 letters compared with 12.0 letters at month 3. Improvement by at least 6, 3, or 2 lines occurred in 14%, 21%, and 43% of patients, respectively. The Snellen equivalent BCVA at month 24 was 20/40 or better in 4 patients. With an average of 3.5 injections of ranibizumab in year 2, mean FTH at month 24 was 338 µm compared with 278 µm at month 3 and 533 µm at baseline. Duration of RVO >1 year at study entry and nonperfusion of perifoveal capillaries for 360 degrees correlated with reduced visual outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Antagonism of VEGF provides substantial long-term benefit to patients with macular edema caused by RVO, but frequent injections are required in some patients with BRVO and most patients with CRVO.