Use of Imaging Modalities in Real Life: Impact on Visual Acuity Outcomes of Ranibizumab Treatment for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in Germany.

BACKGROUND: To date, there are limited prospective real-world data on the impact of optical coherence tomography (OCT) diagnostics on treatment outcomes in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Therefore, the prospective, noninterventional OCEAN study (NCT02194803) evaluated the use of OCT imaging and its impact on functional outcomes in Germany. METHODS: The use of OCT imaging for treatment decisions was documented in nAMD patients receiving intravitreal ranibizumab injections at 347 study centres. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) testing and treatment were performed according to routine clinical practice and documented over 24 months. RESULTS: The majority of the 3,631 nAMD patients (59.6%) received a combination of OCT and fluorescein angiography imaging within the first 6 months. Over the remaining study course, this combination was used infrequently (range: 7.6% to 13.4%) and continually decreased over time; most patients received only OCT examinations (range: 48.9% to 52.5%; median: 3 within 12 months and 4 within 24 months). Subgroups according to the number of OCT examinations (≤4, rarely OCT examined; 5-8, moderately OCT examined; ≥8, well monitored) were associated with different treatment frequencies and outcomes: Rarely OCT-examined patients had received a median of 4 injections (range: 1-19) at 24 months; well-monitored patients had received a median of 8 injections (range: 1-21) at 24 months. Rarely OCT-examined patients had a mean change of BCVA of -0.3 letters (±26.1) at 24 months (n = 165); well-monitored patients showed a change of +2.0 letters (±20.8) at 24 months (n = 249). Time-to-response was greater for rarely examined than well-monitored patients, while duration-of-response was similar. CONCLUSION: Low number of visits as well as high number of treatment decisions without the use of OCT may contribute to undertreatment and poorer functional outcomes in patients undergoing ranibizumab treatment for nAMD in Germany. One potential reason for this could be that OCT was not covered by insurance for all patients during the study.

Ranibizumab Pro Re nata versus Dexamethasone in the Management of Ischemic Retinal Vein Occlusion: Post-hoc Analysis from the COMRADE Trials.

Purpose: To compare ischemia-related clinical outcomes in patients treated with either ranibizumab pro re nata (PRN) or single dexamethasone implant in the Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion (COMRADE-B) or Central Retinal Vein Occlusion (COMRADE-C) trials.Methods: A post-hoc analysis of the Phase IIIb, 6-month, multicenter, double-masked, randomized, COMRADE-B and COMRADE-C trials. Change over 6 months in retinal ischemia status (central avascular [CA] zone and peripheral nonperfusion [PNP]), mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the development of shunt vessels and neovascularization, and frequency of laser therapy were assessed in retinal vein occlusion (RVO) patients treated with either ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN or single dexamethasone 0.7 mg implant, as per European labels, in the COMRADE-B (N = 244; ranibizumab, 126, dexamethasone, 118) or COMRADE-C (N = 243; ranibizumab, 124, dexamethasone, 119) trials. BCVA progression in ischemic vs. non-ischemic patients based on the ischemia assessment at month 6 was carried out.Results: Visual acuity (VA) gains from baseline to month 6 were higher with ranibizumab than with dexamethasone in both patients with central ischemia and those with peripheral retinal nonperfusion, independent of the type of RVO (branch or central). The presence of CA and PNP had a significant impact on VA gain over 6 months in CRVO patients (p < .0001), while there was no significant impact in BRVO. Ranibizumab was associated with less new ischemia than dexamethasone. Central RVO patients treated with dexamethasone received more laser treatments over the 6 months than those treated with ranibizumab, while there was no difference in the frequency of laser therapy between the branch RVO treatment groups.Conclusions: VA gain over six months in ranibizumab-treated RVO patients is not affected by ischemia, and is associated with less development of new ischemia during the first 6 months of treatment and equal or fewer laser treatments than dexamethasone implant.

Real-World Data: Ranibizumab Treatment For Retinal Vein Occlusion In The OCEAN Study.

PURPOSE: The non-interventional OCEAN study (NCT02194803) evaluated frequency and monitoring of ranibizumab injections for retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in routine practice in Germany. METHODS: RVO patients (including branch and central RVO (BRVO/CRVO)) receiving ranibizumab were included. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) testing, imaging and treatment were performed at the investigators' discretion and documented over 24 months. RESULTS: Overall, 744 RVO patients (27% BRVO, 16% CRVO, remaining unspecified RVO) were included. For 74% of patients, data were available for the 12-month visit and for 56% for the 24-month visit. Mean baseline BCVA was 52.0 Early Treatment for Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters (BRVO: 55.9, CRVO: 43.9). BCVA improved rapidly within the first 3 months, reaching 64.3 letters at 12 months and 64.7 at 24 months. CRVO patients showed less improvement than those with BRVO. Patients received a median of 4 (5) injections over 12 (24) months, with 100% of patients receiving injections at baseline, 70% at Month 1 and 81% at Month 2. Overall, 40% of patients demonstrated a ≥15 letter increase within the first 3 months (42% BRVO, 46% CRVO). Patients with low initial BCVA (<50 letters) showed greater improvement than patients with higher baseline BCVA. Due to considerable loss to follow-up, the number of injections and optical coherence tomography (OCT) examinations were not associated with the change in BCVA. CONCLUSION: Patients with RVO in routine practice in Germany received fewer injections and fewer OCT examinations than in clinical trials. CRVO patients showed less and later improvement compared to BRVO patients.

[Baseline diagnostics and initial treatment decision for anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment in retinal diseases : Comparison between results by study physician and reading centers (ORCA/OCEAN study)]. / Initiale Diagnostik und Indikationsstellung zur Anti-Vascular-Endothelial Growth-Factor-Therapie bei Netzhauterkrankungen : Vergleich der Befundung durch Studienarzt versus Reading Center (ORCA/OCEAN-Studie).

BACKGROUND: The ORCA module of the non-interventional OCEAN study investigated the use of retinal imaging diagnostics in the clinical treatment of patients undergoing vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor treatment as part of routine clinical care. This article analyzes the agreement between the diagnosis documented by the treating ophthalmologist and the evaluation of reading centers at baseline as well as the effect on the response to treatment during the course. METHODS: A total of 396 patients (age 75.4 years) were enrolled in which ranibizumab treatment was indicated by the treating ophthalmologist due to either diabetic macular edema (DME), neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD) or retinal venous occlusion (RVO). Over a period of 24 months, patient and examination data, treatments and interpretation of retinal imaging data by the treating ophthalmologist were systematically recorded. Furthermore, retinal imaging data were also evaluated by three reading centers. RESULTS: In 338 out of 396 (85.4%) study eyes, the baseline diagnosis of the treating ophthalmologist was confirmed by the reading centers (DME 87.5%, nvAMD 82.3%, RVO 94.9%). In 17 of the remaining 58 eyes with a discrepant diagnosis, there was at least a consensus with respect to the indications for VEGF inhibitor therapy. The differential diagnoses included a variety of different retinal diseases. During follow-up of up to 3 months, eyes with a consistent diagnosis showed a clear increase in visual acuity (6.4 versus 2.7 letters, p = 0.05) and greater decrease in central retinal thickness (-112.3 versus -24.4 µm, p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: The initial treatment decision for anti-VEGF therapy with consideration of the differential diagnoses can be challenging. Accurate evaluation of the clinical and imaging findings along with appropriate expertise appear to be important. The observation of superior initial response in eyes with a consensus of the diagnosis at baseline underlines the relevance of an adequate initial assessment for a successful treatment outcome.

The RELATION study: efficacy and safety of ranibizumab combined with laser photocoagulation treatment versus laser monotherapy in NPDR and PDR patients with diabetic macular oedema.

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab 0.5 mg plus laser (COMBI) versus laser monotherapy (LASER) in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular oedema (DME) in either nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) or proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and to analyse the relevance of inner versus outer retinal thickness. METHODS: In this double-masked, multicentre phase IIIb study, patients (N = 128) were randomized (2:1) to receive COMBI (n = 85) versus LASER (n = 43). Patients received four initial monthly injections of ranibizumab 0.5 mg (COMBI) or sham (LASER) followed by pro re nata (PRN) injections. In both groups, patients received laser at baseline and additional laser at 3 monthly intervals, as needed. The study was started in 2010 and was prematurely terminated due to approval of ranibizumab for DME. RESULTS: The least squares (LS) mean change in mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to month 12 was higher in the COMBI (6.5) versus LASER (2.3) group (LS mean difference: 4.2 [95% CI 0.9; 7.4] letters, p = 0.01, primary end-point). There was also a tendency in the same direction for the subgroup of 26 patients with PDR (LS mean difference 14.7, p = 0.11). Mean central retinal thickness decreased by 107.3 µm in the COMBI group and by 80.3 µm in the LASER group from baseline to month 12 (p = 0.28). Ranibizumab was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This study showed that ranibizumab plus laser is a valuable treatment option for the management of DME. Patients with DME in PDR might also benefit from combined therapy compared to laser alone.

Baseline visual acuity strongly predicts visual acuity gain in patients with diabetic macular edema following anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment across trials.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to evaluate the correlation of baseline visual acuity (VA) with VA outcome in response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in diabetic macular edema using a retrospective analysis of nine clinical trials. The result will help assess the relevance of VA gain comparisons across trials. METHODS: A correlation analysis was performed between mean baseline VA and VA gain at month 12 for 1,616 diabetic macular edema patients across nine randomized clinical trials (RESOLVE, RISE, RIDE, RESTORE, RETAIN, DRCR.net Protocol I, DA VINCI, VIVID, VISTA) with anti-VEGF treatment regimens ranibizumab 0.5 mg and aflibercept 2 mg. RESULTS: The mean baseline VA ranged from 56.9 to 64.8 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters. The mean VA gain at month 12 ranged from 6.8 to 13.1 ETDRS letters across trials. There was a strong inverse correlation between mean baseline VA and VA gain at month 12 (r=-0.85). The mean VA at 12 months plateaued at ~70 (68.5-73.0) ETDRS letters (20/40 Snellen VA equivalent) for the anti-VEGF treatment groups from all trials, regardless of dosing regimens and agents. CONCLUSION: Cross-trial comparisons based on changes in best-corrected visual acuity should be done cautiously and only after adjusting for best-corrected visual acuity at baseline. Furthermore, the total VA afforded by treatment appears to be subject to a plateau effect, which warrants further exploration.