PIGMENT EPITHELIAL DETACHMENT THICKNESS AND VARIABILITY AFFECTS VISUAL OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH NEOVASCULAR AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of pigment epithelial detachment (PED) thickness (i.e., height) and thickness variability on best-corrected visual acuity outcomes in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration in the Phase 3 HAWK and HARRIER trials. METHODS: Optical coherence tomography images from the pooled brolucizumab 6 mg and aflibercept 2 mg arms were analyzed for the maximum PED thickness across the macula at baseline through to week 96. Best-corrected visual acuity outcomes were compared in patients with different PED thickness and variability cut-off thresholds. RESULTS: Greater PED thickness at baseline or at week 12 was associated with lower mean best-corrected visual acuity gain from baseline to week 96 (baseline PED ≥200 µ m: +4.6 letters; <200 µ m: +7.0 letters; week 12 PED ≥100 µ m: +5.6 letters; <100 µ m: +6.6 letters). Eyes with the largest PED thickness variability from week 12 through week 96 gained fewer letters from baseline at week 96 (≥33 µ m: +3.3 letters; <9 µ m: +6.2 letters). Furthermore, increased PED thickness at week 48 was associated with higher prevalence of intraretinal and subretinal fluid. CONCLUSION: In this treatment-agnostic analysis, greater PED thickness and PED thickness variability were associated with poorer visual outcomes in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration and greater neovascular activity.

Treatment patterns in patients with age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema: A real-world claims analysis in Dubai.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the pattern of approved anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatments among patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME) in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). METHOD: This was a retrospective, nonrandomized, observational cohort analysis of the Dubai Real-world Claims Database with a 360-day follow-up period. Adult patients diagnosed with nAMD or DME treated with ranibizumab or aflibercept for the first time were included. The primary objective was to evaluate anti-VEGF treatment patterns with respect to the proportion of patients receiving ranibizumab and aflibercept for nAMD and DME separately. RESULTS: Of the 451 patients included in the final study cohort, 83.6% and 16.4% had a diagnosis of DME (ranibizumab: 48.5%; aflibercept: 51.5%) and nAMD (ranibizumab: 40.5%; aflibercept: 59.5%), respectively, at baseline. Treatment frequency of ranibizumab/aflibercept was similar for nAMD (mean: 2.4/2.9 injections; p = 0.2389) with fewer injections in the ranibizumab cohort for DME (mean: 1.9/2.5 injections; p = 0.0002). Most patients received ≤3 anti-VEGF injections during the 360-day follow-up period. The time between consecutive treatments was large (nAMD: 73.6 days/10.5 weeks; DME: 80.5 days/11.5 weeks). Approximately 10%-13.5% of patients switched their anti-VEGF therapy. Most patients (83.8%) had a diabetes diagnosis during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study provides an initial understanding of anti-VEGF treatment patterns in patients with nAMD and DME in the UAE. Treatment frequency of the 2 anti-VEGF agents assessed was similar in both patient populations. Both treatments were infrequently administered with large dosing intervals.