Advancing Inclusive Research (AIR) Site Alliance: Facilitating the inclusion of historically underrepresented people in oncology and ophthalmology clinical research.

BACKGROUND: The Advancing Inclusive Research (AIR) Site Alliance is composed of clinical research centers that partner with Genentech, a biotechnology company, to advance the representation of diverse patient populations in its oncology and ophthalmology clinical trials, test recruitment, and retention approaches and establish best practices to leverage across the industry to achieve health equity. METHODS: Through a data-driven selection process, Genentech identified 6 oncology and 3 ophthalmology partners that focus on reaching historically underrepresented patients in clinical trials and worked collaboratively to share knowledge and explore original ways of increasing clinical study access for every patient, including sites co-creation of a Protocol Entry Criteria Guideline with inclusion principles. RESULTS: For patients, three publicly available educational videos about clinical trials were created in multiple languages. The AIR Site Alliance has also defined invoiceable services for sites to enhance patient support; this has been built into the new study budget templates for sustainability. For healthcare professionals (HCPs), the first-of-its-kind AIR Educational Program was developed to focus on identifying and addressing bias and engaging historically underrepresented patient populations in trials. The sites also co-created videos for HCPs and patients on why advancing inclusive research matters. Over 16 regional health equity symposia have been delivered for patients, HCPs, and community leaders. CONCLUSIONS: This AIR Site Alliance is a model for other site alliances, including Kenya, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and Canada. Such alliances will build a robust and sustainable research ecosystem that includes diverse patient groups and encourages change across the healthcare system.

Analysis of the Long-term Visual Outcomes of ForeseeHome Remote Telemonitoring: The ALOFT Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term visual acuity (VA) and performance of a monitoring strategy with a self-operated artificial-intelligence-enabled home monitoring system in conjunction with standard care for early detection of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). DESIGN: Retrospective review. SUBJECTS: Patients with dry-age-related macular degeneration from 5 referral clinics. METHODS: Clinical data of patients monitored with ForeseeHome (FSH) device from August 2010 to July 2020 were reviewed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual acuity at baseline, VA at diagnosis of nAMD for eyes that converted while monitored, and VA from the final study follow-up, weekly frequency of use, duration of monitoring, modality of conversion diagnosis (system alert vs. detection by other standard care means), and duration and number of treatments since conversion to final study follow-up were collected. RESULTS: We reviewed 3334 eyes of 2123 patients with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of 74(8) years, monitored for a mean (SD) duration of 3.1 (2.4) years, with a total of 1 706 433 tests in 10 474 eye-monitoring years. The mean (SD) weekly use per patient was 5.2 (3.4), and it was persistent over the usage period. Two hundred eighty-five eyes converted while monitored at an annual rate of 2.72% and were treated with a mean (SD) 17.3 (16.5) injections over a mean (SD) 2.7 (2.0) years, with 6.4 (3.1) injections per year for eyes treated for > 1 year. The median VAs at baseline and at final follow-up for eyes that did not convert were 20/27 and 20/34 with a median change of 0.0 letters. The median VAs at baseline, conversion, and final follow-up for eyes that converted during the monitoring period were 20/30, 20/39, and 20/32 with a median change from baseline to conversion, baseline to recent, and conversion to recent of -4, -4, and 0 letters, respectively. Fifty-two percent of conversions detected had a system alert before conversion. Forty-eight percent of patients were detected by symptoms or routine visit. Patients experienced a non-nAMD alert on average every 4.6 years. At conversion and at final follow-up, the proportion (95% CI) of eyes that maintained ≥ 20/40 was 84% (78% to 88%) and 82% (76% to 86%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the FSH monitoring program showed excellent long-term VA years after conversion to nAMD.

Ziv-aflibercept for Better Regulating Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration (ZEBRA): A Prospective, Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine if ziv-aflibercept is a safe and effective maintenance drug for nAMD. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a randomized, prospective, single-blinded trial. Inclusion criteria were active nAMD, prior anti-VEGF treatment, and BCVA ≤20/200. The treatment group received ziv-aflibercept. The control group continued their existing anti-VEGF regimen. The main outcome measures were BCVA, CFT, and safety. RESULTS: Mean baseline BCVA was 1.58 ± 0.44 logMAR and 1.71 ± 0.39 logMAR in the control (n = 27) and treatment (n = 29) groups, respectively. After 24 months, the mean change in BCVA was 0.11 in the control group (equivalent to a loss of 5 ETDRS letters) and 0.01 logMAR in the treatment group (p = .48). Baseline CFT was 257 ± 33 µm and 247 ± 30 µm in the control and treatment groups, respectively, and after 24 months mean change in CFT was 26 µm and -5 µm (p = .24). There were no ocular or systemic adverse events during the study. CONCLUSION: Ziv-aflibercept is a safe and effective as a maintenance drug for patients with nAMD. It may represent a cost-effective alternative to aflibercept and second-line therapy for eye resistant bevacizumab or ranibizumab.

Successful Clinical Outcome of Vancomycin-induced Hemorrhagic Occlusive Retinal Vasculitis.

We present a case of a patient that experienced severe hemorrhagic occlusive retinal vasculitis secondary to injection of 1.0 mg/0.1 ml of intracameral vancomycin for endophthalmitis prophylaxis after an uneventful cataract surgery. The case is especially unique in that our patient ended up maintaining 20/25 vision with an ocular disease that is typically visually threatening. This may be due to the aggressive administration of periocular and oral steroids combined with scheduled anti-VEGF injections that were later transitioned into a treat and extend regimen.

Differences in characteristics of Medicare patients treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists.

PURPOSE: To quantify differences in the age, gender, race, and clinical complexity of Medicare beneficiaries treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists in each of the United States. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study based on publicly accessible Medicare payment and utilization data from 2012 through 2017. METHODS: For each ophthalmic and optometric provider, demographic information of treated Medicare beneficiaries was obtained from the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the years 2012 through 2017. Clinical complexity was defined using CMS Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) coding. RESULTS: From 2012 through 2017, ophthalmologists in every state treated statistically significantly older beneficiaries, with the greatest difference (4.99 years in 2014) between provider groups seen in Rhode Island. In most states there was no gender difference among patients treated by the providers but in 46 states ophthalmologists saw a more racially diverse group of beneficiaries. HCC risk score analysis demonstrated that ophthalmologists in all 50 states saw more medically complex beneficiaries and the differences were statistically significant in 47 states throughout all six years. CONCLUSIONS: Although there are regional variations in the characteristics of patients treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists, ophthalmologists throughout the United States manage older, more racially diverse, and more medically complex Medicare beneficiaries.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ocriplasmin versus watchful waiting for treatment of symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion in the US.

Aim: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ocriplasmin in symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) with or without full-thickness macular hole ≤400 µm versus standard of care. Methods: A state-transition model simulated a cohort through disease health states; assignment of utilities to health states reflected the distribution of visual acuity. Efficacy of ocriplasmin was derived from logistic regression models using Ocriplasmin for Treatment for Symptomatic Vitreomacular Adhesion Including Macular Hole trial data. Model inputs were extracted from Phase III trials and published literature. The analysis was conducted from a US Medicare perspective. Results: Lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$4887 per quality-adjusted life year gained in the total population, US$4255 and US$10,167 in VMA subgroups without and with full-thickness macular hole, respectively. Conclusion: Ocriplasmin was cost effective compared with standard of care in symptomatic VMA.

Updated Cost-Effectiveness of Intravitreal Ocriplasmin for Vitreomacular Adhesion and Macular Hole.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to provide an updated assessment of cost-efficacy of intravitreal ocriplasmin (IVO) for vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) and macular holes (MH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a single-center, multiple-physician, institutional review board-approved, retrospective, 15-month cost-effectiveness analysis study (January 2015 to April 2016). Clinical charts and billing records of 247 patients with VMA and MH were reviewed. Patients were divided into group 1 (VMA and MH treated by pars plana vitrectomy [PPV]), group 2 (VMA and MH treated by IVO), and group 3 (VMA treated by IVO). Success rates of interventions in each group were compared, including cost-effectiveness, cost per line-year, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: Success rates for initial intervention were 98% in group 1, 55.6% in group 2, and 67.7% in group 3. Cost of PPV at our institution was $6,538.00 and cost of IVO (2016) was $3,480.00. Using a cohort-based computer Markov model, the treatment decision tree demonstrated group 1 was less cost-effective, with cost per line of $2,654.39, cost per line-year saved of $185.62, and cost per QALY of $6,187.00. Group 2 was cost-effective with cost per line of $2,456.25, cost per line-year saved of $171.77, and cost per QALY of $5,726.00. The difference in cost-effectiveness showed IVO was more cost-effective than PPV, with a difference in cost per line of $198.14, cost per line-year saved of $13.85, and cost per QALY of $461.00. CONCLUSIONS: IVO is a more cost-effective intervention than vitrectomy for the treatment of VMA and MH in the setting of judicious use in appropriate patients. The success rate of IVO in our patient population was greater than currently published rates and most certainly impacted probability of cost-efficacy. Further research targeting optimizing IVO success rate is needed. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2018;49:e240-e248.].

Eplerenone in the Treatment of Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy.

Overactivation of mineralocorticoid receptor pathways has been implicated in the pathophysiology of central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR). Recently, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists such as eplerenone have demonstrated success in treating subretinal fluid in CSCR. This case demonstrates a patient who was initially presumed to have subretinal fluid secondary to CSCR and was started on a trial of oral eplerenone. It quickly became evident that her subretinal fluid was secondary to a peripapillary polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy network, but she demonstrated a significant improvement with oral eplerenone. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first case of eplerenone use to treat polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy.