A Phase IIa Multicenter, Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled, Dose Escalating Study to Evaluate the Safety, Efficacy, and Pharmacokinetics of CBT-001 Ophthalmic Solution in Patients With Primary or Recurrent Pterygium.

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of CBT-001, a multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor eyedrop, for pterygia. Design: Phase II clinical trial. Stage 1 was a single center, open-labeled, vehicle-controlled study. Stage 2 was a multicenter, randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled trial. Participants: Patients with primary or recurrent pterygia. Main Outcome Measures: The primary efficacy end point was lesion vascularity based on masked grading of photographs by an independent reading center. Other end points included dimensions of pterygia and safety. Methods: In stage 1, 24 eyes of 24 patients received 1 drop of CBT-001 in a dose escalation fashion (0.02%, 0.05%, and 0.2%) to determine the maximally tolerated dose based on adverse events (AEs) and blood drug levels. In stage 2, subjects were randomly assigned to receive the maximally tolerated dose of CBT-001 or vehicle dosed 3 times a day for 4 weeks with a 20-week follow-up. Results: In stage 1, the plasma maximum concentration values for all doses of CBT-001 were at or below the limit of detection (0.01 ng/ml). The most commonly reported AEs were mild foreign body sensation and irritation. CBT-001 0.2% was evaluated in stage 2. Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between patients receiving CBT-001 (n = 25) and vehicle (n = 23). After 4 weeks of dosing, the mean change from baseline in pterygium vascularity scores was -0.8 ± 0.7 (mean ± standard deviation) in subjects receiving CBT-001 0.2% and 0.0 ± 0.5 in subjects receiving vehicle (P < 0.001; 95% confidence interval: -1.12, -0.40). Pterygium vascularity scores remained significantly decreased, after the 4-week dosing period, at weeks 8 and 16, but not at week 24. The mean changes from baseline in the length of the pterygia were also significantly lower in subjects receiving CBT-001 compared with vehicle at weeks 2, 4, and 8 (P ≤ 0.014). The most commonly reported AEs were ocular, mild in severity, resolved after therapy, and did not result in discontinuation. Conclusions: CBT-001 0.2% decreased pterygia vascularity and lesion length after 4 weeks of dosing with a prolonged effect after dosing. The drug was well tolerated with minimal detected systemic drug levels. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

The History of Botulinum Toxins in Medicine: A Thousand Year Journey.

Botulinum toxin is one of the most potent and deadliest substances on earth. Because of its unique mechanism of action at the synaptic junction and the ability to precisely deliver the toxin locally to where it is needed, botulinum toxin has been used as an effective treatment for a plethora of diseases from head to foot, from chronic migraine to ankle spasticity. Unlike systemic drugs, botulinum toxin is delivered by injection to the site of disease. As we will see from the history of botulinum toxin, the ability to deliver the drug locally to minimize the amount of botulinum toxin needed and thereby minimizing systemic exposure has been key to its medical utility. Botulinum toxin was first approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1989 for the treatment of blepharospasm and strabismus, but the history starts long before this, with outbreaks of food poisoning in the tenth century. Importantly, the development of botulinum toxins for medical use continues today with the engineering of novel toxins to treat disease.

Relationship between duration and extent of oedema and visual acuity outcome with ranibizumab in diabetic macular oedema: A post hoc analysis of Protocol I data.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: This post hoc analysis explores the relationship between residual oedema exposure after ranibizumab treatment initiation and long-term visual acuity outcome in eyes with centre-involved diabetic macular oedema (DMO). SUBJECTS/METHODS: Eyes randomised to the ranibizumab + prompt or deferred laser treatment arms in the Protocol I trial and with observed central retinal thickness (CRT) readings at baseline and ≥1 follow-up visits (n = 367) were stratified by 1) oedema duration (number of study visits with CRT ≥ 250 µm during the first 52 weeks of ranibizumab treatment); and 2) oedema extent (amount of excess CRT [≥ 250 µm] at each study visit, averaged over the first 52 weeks). Associations between measures of residual oedema and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were assessed in multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: Oedema duration and oedema extent during the first 52 weeks of ranibizumab treatment showed significant negative associations with BCVA improvement at weeks 52, 104 and 156. Eyes with the most persistent oedema gained (mean) 4.4 (95% CI 0.1─8.7) fewer Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters at week 156 than eyes with the least persistent oedema (P = 0.044). Eyes with the greatest amount of oedema gained (mean) 9.3 (95% CI 4.0─14.5) fewer ETDRS letters at week 156 than eyes with the least amount of oedema (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Macular oedema exposure over the first 52 weeks of ranibizumab treatment is a negative prognostic factor for long-term visual acuity improvement in centre-involved DMO.

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN EARLY ANATOMIC RESPONSE TO ANTI-VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR THERAPY AND LONG-TERM OUTCOME IN DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA: An Independent Analysis of Protocol i Study Data.

PURPOSE: This post hoc analysis explores the relationship between early retinal anatomical response and long-term anatomical and visual outcomes with ranibizumab in center-involved diabetic macular edema. METHODS: Eyes randomized to the ranibizumab plus prompt laser and ranibizumab plus deferred laser treatment arms in the Protocol I study were categorized according to their proportional reduction (<20 vs. ≥20%) in central retinal thickness (CRT) after 12 weeks. Adjusted and unadjusted analyses assessed the association between early (Week 12) anatomical response and long-term (Weeks 52 and 156) anatomical and best-corrected visual acuity outcomes. RESULTS: Of 335 study eyes, 118 showed limited (<20%) and 217 showed strong (≥20%) CRT reduction at Week 12. In unadjusted and adjusted analyses, limited early CRT response was negatively and significantly associated with strong CRT response at Weeks 52 and 156. Sensitivity analyses indicated that this association was robust and unrelated to any "floor effect." In unadjusted analyses, a strong early CRT response was associated with greater long-term improvement in best-corrected visual acuity; after controlling for confounders, the association lost statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Early CRT response to ranibizumab is a significant prognostic indicator of medium- to long-term anatomical outcome in center-involved diabetic macular edema.

Pharmacology of Corticosteroids for Diabetic Macular Edema.

Purpose: Corticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment for inflammatory diseases almost 80 years after their first clinical use. Topical ophthalmic formulations of corticosteroids have been available to treat disease of the anterior segment of the eye, but the approval of corticosteroids to treat vitreoretinal diseases, including vein occlusion, diabetic macular edema, and uveitis, has occurred only recently. Although most diseases respond to corticosteroid therapy, some patients are resistant to this therapy and side effects, including cataract and elevated intraocular pressure, can limit their use. The purpose of this review is to detail the basic science of corticosteroids focusing on differences in potency, drug delivery, pharmacokinetics, and gene activation, and how these differences affect safety and efficacy in the treatment of diabetic macular edema. Methods: A review was conducted of basic science and pharmacology of the corticosteroids used to treat diabetic macular edema. Results: Clinically available corticosteroids not only have differing potency and pharmacokinetics, but also activate different genes in different target tissues. These differences are associated with distinct efficacy, pharmacokinetic, and safety profiles. It is important to understand these differences in selecting corticosteroids to treat diabetic macular edema. Conclusions: Recent advances in our understanding of the basic science of corticosteroids can explain clinical differences in these agents regarding efficacy and safety. Importantly, this understanding should allow the future discovery of additional novel corticosteroids to treat diabetic macular edema.

Bimatoprost Sustained-Release Implants for Glaucoma Therapy: 6-Month Results From a Phase I/II Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of a biodegradable bimatoprost sustained-release implant (Bimatoprost SR). DESIGN: Phase I/II, prospective, 24-month, dose-ranging, paired-eye controlled clinical trial. METHODS: At baseline following washout, open-angle glaucoma patients (n = 75) were administered Bimatoprost SR (6 µg, 10 µg, 15 µg, or 20 µg) intracamerally in the study eye; the fellow eye began topical bimatoprost 0.03% once daily. Rescue topical IOP-lowering medication or a single repeat treatment with implant was allowed. The primary endpoint was IOP change from baseline. The main safety measure was adverse events. Results through month 6 are reported. RESULTS: Bimatoprost SR provided rapid, sustained IOP lowering. Overall mean IOP reduction from baseline through week 16 in study eyes was 7.2, 7.4, 8.1, and 9.5 mm Hg with the 6-µg, 10-µg, 15-µg, and 20-µg dose strengths of implant, respectively, vs 8.4 mm Hg in topical bimatoprost-treated pooled fellow eyes (data censored at rescue/retreatment). Rescue/retreatment was not required in 91% and 71% of study eyes up to week 16 and month 6, respectively. Adverse events in study eyes usually occurred within 2 days after the injection procedure and were transient. Conjunctival hyperemia with onset later than 2 days after the injection procedure was more common with topical bimatoprost than Bimatoprost SR (17.3% vs 6.7% of eyes). CONCLUSIONS: Bimatoprost SR demonstrated favorable efficacy and safety through 6 months. All dose strengths were comparable to topical bimatoprost in overall IOP reduction through week 16. A single administration controlled IOP in the majority of patients for up to 6 months.

A multicenter, 12-month randomized study comparing dexamethasone intravitreal implant with ranibizumab in patients with diabetic macular edema.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether treatment with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) 0.7 mg every 5 months provides a similar average change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline as ranibizumab 0.5 mg administered as per its European Summary of Product Characteristics in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, 12-month, randomized, parallel-group, noninferiority study in patients with DME (one eye/patient). The primary efficacy measure was BCVA using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) method. Secondary efficacy measures included area of leakage on fluorescein angiography and central retinal thickness (CRT) on optical coherence tomography. RESULTS: Baseline patient characteristics were similar in the two treatment groups (DEX implant, n = 181; ranibizumab, n = 182); mean DME duration was ∼33 months. The mean average BCVA change from baseline over 12 months was 4.34 letters with DEX implant and 7.60 letters with ranibizumab. The lower limit of the 95 % confidence interval of the between-group difference was -4.74 letters, and therefore, DEX was demonstrated to be noninferior to ranibizumab based on the prespecified noninferiority margin of 5 letters. At monthly follow-up visits, the percentage of patients with ≥15-letter BCVA gain from baseline ranged from 7.2 to 17.7 % with DEX implant and 4.4 to 26.9 % with ranibizumab. Both DEX implant and ranibizumab effectively reduced CRT and reduced the area of fluorescein leakage. Between-group differences in change from baseline CRT favored DEX implant at 1, 2, 6, and 7 months (p ≤ 0.007) and ranibizumab at 4, 5, 9, and 10 months (p < 0.001); the decrease in fluorescein leakage area was greater with DEX implant than ranibizumab at month 12 (p < 0.001). Ocular adverse events in the study eye were more frequent in the DEX implant group because of the occurrence of intraocular pressure (IOP) increases and cataract. IOP increases were transient and generally managed with topical medication. CONCLUSIONS: Both DEX implant and ranibizumab were well tolerated and improved BCVA and anatomic outcomes in patients with DME. DEX implant met the a priori criterion for noninferiority to ranibizumab in average change from baseline BCVA over 12 months. Noninferiority was achieved with an average of 2.85 DEX implant injections and 8.70 ranibizumab injections per patient.

Cytokine and chemokine tear levels in patients with uveitis.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the levels of cytokines and chemokines in tears differ in uveitis patients and healthy subjects. METHODS: Ninety-two uveitis patients (mean age 46.4 years) and 157 control healthy subjects (mean age 49.5 years) were recruited. Subjects with ocular surface diseases such as dry eye were excluded from the study. Using multiplex bead-based assays, tears (4 µl) were analysed for the concentration of interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-1RA, IL-2, IL-6, IL-7, IL-8/CXCL8, IL-10, IL-12p70, IL-15, IL-17A, IL-23, epidermal growth factor (EGF), fractalkine/CX3CL1, interferon-γ, IP-10/CXCL10, monocyte chemo-attractant protein (MCP)-1/CCL2, tumour necrosis factor-α, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), transforming growth factor (TGF)-ß1, TGF-ß2 and TGF-ß3. Tear molecule levels were compared between the groups and among the different forms of uveitis and disease severity. RESULTS: Epidermal growth factor, IL-1RA, IL-7, IL-8/CXCL8, IP-10/CXCL10, MCP-1/CCL2, TGF-ß2 and VEGF were detected in more than 75% of the samples in both groups. Statistically significant differences in percentage of detection between control and patient groups were found for IL-23, IL-1ß, IL-15, EGF, fractalkine/CX3CL1 and MCP-1/CCL2. The concentrations of IL-1RA, IL-8/CXCL8, fractalkine/CX3CL1, IP-10/CXCL10, VEGF and TGF-ß2 in uveitis tear samples were elevated compared to controls (p < 0.05). Significant differences in tear levels of those molecules and also EGF were also present depending on the anatomic classification of uveitis. CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in the levels of several cytokines and chemokines in tears of patients with uveitis compared with healthy subjects. These results can help understand the underlying pathophysiology of the uveitis and could potentially aid in diagnosis.

Early and Long-Term Responses to Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy in Diabetic Macular Edema: Analysis of Protocol I Data.

PURPOSE: To determine whether early visual acuity response to ranibizumab in diabetic macular edema is associated with long-term outcome. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of randomized controlled trial data. METHODS: Pooled data from the ranibizumab plus prompt and deferred laser treatment arms of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network's Protocol I study were used to explore the relationship between early (week 12) and late (weeks 52-156) visual acuity response (mean change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity [CFB BCVA]; categorized improvement [<5, 5-9, or ≥10 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters] in BCVA). RESULTS: In the analysis population (340 eyes), <5-, 5- to 9-, and ≥10-letter BCVA improvements occurred in 39.7%, 23.2%, and 37.1% of eyes, respectively, at 12 weeks, and 34.2%, 16.5%, and 49.3% of eyes at 156 weeks. Within each early BCVA response category (<5, 5-9, and ≥10 letters of improvement at 12 weeks), mean CFB BCVA at 52-156 weeks varied by <5 letters from that at 12 weeks. CFB BCVA and <5-letter improvement at 12 weeks showed significant positive and negative association, respectively, with CFB BCVA and ≥10-letter improvement at 52 and 156 weeks. Similar relationships were demonstrated in eyes with baseline BCVA <69 letters, and associations remained significant after multivariate adjustment for potential confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Ranibizumab ± laser therapy resulted in similar rates (∼40%) of suboptimal (<5-letter) and pronounced (≥10-letter) BCVA improvement at 12 weeks. Eyes with suboptimal early BCVA response showed poorer long-term visual outcomes than eyes with pronounced early response (mean improvement 3.0 vs 13.8 letters at 156 weeks).

Bimatoprost 0.03% for the Treatment of Eyebrow Hypotrichosis.

BACKGROUND: Eyebrow loss may have substantial negative functional and social consequences. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the safety and efficacy of bimatoprost 0.03% in subjects with eyebrow hypotrichosis. METHODS: This multicenter, double-masked study randomized adult females or males with eyebrow hypotrichosis to receive bimatoprost 0.03% twice (BID) or once daily (QD) or vehicle BID for 7 months. Primary endpoint was overall eyebrow fullness at Month 7. Secondary endpoints included eyebrow fullness (mm), darkness (intensity units), and subject satisfaction with treatment. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: At Month 7, the proportion of subjects with improvement was significantly higher in bimatoprost groups versus vehicle (both, p < .001). Improvements occurred in both bimatoprost groups versus vehicle after Month 1 and continued through follow-up; eyebrow fullness and darkness improved as early as Months 2 and 1, respectively (both, p < .001). Greater satisfaction was reported with bimatoprost versus vehicle at Month 2 and all subsequent time points. Overall, 38.1%, 42.4%, and 35.5% of subjects in the bimatoprost BID, QD, and vehicle groups, respectively, experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). Most frequent TEAEs were similar across groups. No skin or iris hyperpigmentation or conjunctival hyperemia occurred. CONCLUSION: Bimatoprost 0.03% BID and QD is safe, well tolerated, and effective for eyebrow hypotrichosis.

INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE IN PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA TREATED WITH DEXAMETHASONE INTRAVITREAL IMPLANT IN THE 3-YEAR MEAD STUDY.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the occurrence, management, and clinical significance of increases in intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with diabetic macular edema treated with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant). METHODS: Randomized, multicenter, 3-year, Phase III study. Patients (N = 1,048) with diabetic macular edema were randomized to DEX implant 0.7-mg, DEX implant 0.35-mg, or sham procedure with retreatment allowed at ≥6-month intervals (seven injections maximum). RESULTS: In the DEX implant 0.7-mg, DEX implant 0.35-mg, and sham groups, respectively, ≥10-mmHg IOP increases from baseline occurred in 27.7%, 24.8%, and 3.7% of patients, and their frequency did not increase with repeat injections. IOP-lowering medication was used by 41.5%, 37.6%, and 9.1% of patients. Only one patient (0.3%) in each DEX implant group had filtering surgery to manage a steroid-induced IOP increase. Among DEX implant 0.7-mg-treated patients with and without a ≥10-mmHg IOP increase, 21.9% (21 of 96) and 22.4% (57 of 255), respectively, achieved ≥15-letter best-corrected visual acuity gain at the end of the study, and mean average change in central retinal thickness from baseline was -127 µm and -106 µm, respectively. CONCLUSION: DEX implant demonstrated clear benefit of treatment despite increases in IOP. Sequential implants had no cumulative effect on IOP.

Anatomical effects of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in diabetic macular oedema: a pooled analysis of 3-year phase III trials.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To assess long-term effects of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) monotherapy on retinal morphology in diabetic macular oedema (DME). METHODS: Two multicentre, masked, phase III studies with identical protocols randomised patients with DME, best-corrected visual acuity of 34-68 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters and central subfield retinal thickness (CSRT) ≥300 µm to DEX implant 0.7, 0.35 mg or sham procedure. Patients were followed up for 3 years (39 months if treated at month 36), with retreatment allowed at ≥6-month intervals. Patients needing other macular oedema (ME) therapy exited the study. Changes from baseline in CSRT, macular volume and ME grade, area of retinal thickening, macular leakage, macular capillary loss and diabetic retinopathy severity were assessed. RESULTS: After 3 years, more eyes treated with DEX implant 0.7 and 0.35 mg than sham showed improvement (although small) in ME grade (p<0.05 vs sham). DEX implant 0.7 mg delayed time to onset of two-step progression in diabetic retinopathy severity by ∼12 months. DEX implant 0.7 and 0.35 mg produced small, non-sustained reductions in macular leakage but had no significant effect on macular capillary loss. CONCLUSIONS: DEX implant 0.7 or 0.35 mg, administered at ≥6-month intervals over 3 years, produced sustained retinal structural improvement in DME. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00168337 and NCT00168389.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RETINAL THICKNESS AND VISUAL ACUITY IN EYES WITH RETINAL VEIN OCCLUSION TREATED WITH DEXAMETHASONE IMPLANT.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) in eyes from two clinical trials of dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg for macular edema after branch or central retinal vein occlusion. METHODS: Patients with vision loss as a result of macular edema (≥6-week duration) after branch retinal vein occlusion or central retinal vein occlusion were treated with a single dexamethasone intravitreal implant or sham. Prospectively defined outcomes included BCVA and CRT (as assessed by optical coherence tomography). RESULTS: There was a modest but statistically significant negative linear correlation between changes in CRT and changes in BCVA in both treatment groups at Days 90 and 180 (correlation coefficient: -0.23 to -0.34; P < 0.001). Improvements in BCVA at Day 180 were significantly greater (P < 0.001) in eyes that achieved and maintained CRT ≤250 µm from Day 90 to 180 (mean BCVA improvement: 14 letters; 49% of eyes with ≥15-letter gain) than in eyes that never achieved CRT ≤250 µm (mean BCVA improvement: 2 letters; 13% of eyes with ≥15-letter gain). CONCLUSION: The greatest improvements in BCVA were seen in eyes that achieved and maintained the greatest improvements in CRT.

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in previously treated patients with diabetic macular edema: subgroup analysis of the MEAD study.

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX 0.7) was approved for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) after demonstration of its efficacy and safety in the MEAD registration trials. We performed subgroup analysis of MEAD study results to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DEX 0.7 treatment in patients with previously treated DME. METHODS: Three-year, randomized, sham-controlled phase 3 study in patients with DME, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 34-68 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters (20/200-20/50 Snellen equivalent), and central retinal thickness (CRT) ≥ 300 µm measured by time-domain optical coherence tomography. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 doses of DEX (0.7 mg or 0.35 mg), or to sham procedure, with retreatment no more than every 6 months. The primary endpoint was ≥ 15-letter gain in BCVA at study end. Average change in BCVA and CRT from baseline during the study (area-under-the-curve approach) and adverse events were also evaluated. The present subgroup analysis evaluated outcomes in patients randomized to DEX 0.7 (marketed dose) or sham based on prior treatment for DME at study entry. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of previously treated DEX 0.7 (n = 247) and sham (n = 261) patients were similar. In the previously treated subgroup, mean number of treatments over 3 years was 4.1 for DEX 0.7 and 3.2 for sham, 21.5% of DEX 0.7 patients versus 11.1 % of sham had ≥ 15-letter BCVA gain from baseline at study end (P = 0.002), mean average BCVA change from baseline was +3.2 letters with DEX 0.7 versus +1.5 letters with sham (P = 0.024), and mean average CRT change from baseline was -126.1 µm with DEX 0.7 versus -39.0 µm with sham (P < .001). Cataract-related adverse events were reported in 70.3% of baseline phakic patients in the previously treated DEX 0.7 subgroup; vision gains were restored following cataract surgery. CONCLUSIONS: DEX 0.7 significantly improved visual and anatomic outcomes in patients with DME previously treated with laser, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, or a combination of these therapies. The safety profile of DEX 0.7 in previously treated patients was similar to its safety profile in the total study population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00168337 and NCT00168389, registered 12 September 2005.

Development of a dexamethasone intravitreal implant for the treatment of noninfectious posterior segment uveitis.

Uveitis is a group of ocular inflammatory disorders that can lead to severe vision loss. Despite advances in anti-inflammatory therapy, many patients are resistant to or intolerant of existing treatments. A biodegradable, sustained-release implant, dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (Ozurdex), has been developed to deliver dexamethasone to target tissues in the posterior segment of the eye, minimizing systemic drug exposure and limiting side effects. The implant releases dexamethasone over a period of up to 6 months as the poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) polymer matrix of the implant is metabolized to carbon dioxide and water. The implant is placed in the vitreous of the eye with a single-use applicator in a sutureless, office-based procedure. Treatment with a single dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis has been shown to produce significant improvements in intraocular inflammation and best-corrected visual acuity with treatment benefit sustained for 6 months. Dexamethasone intravitreal implant has also been shown to reduce central retinal thickness and improve best-corrected visual acuity in patients with macular edema of various etiologies. The implant has been approved for treatment of noninfectious uveitis involving the posterior segment, diabetic macular edema, and macular edema associated with branch and central retinal vein occlusion.

Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant as Adjunctive Therapy to Ranibizumab in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX) as adjunctive therapy to ranibizumab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD). PROCEDURES: This was a 6-month, single-masked, multicenter study. Patients were randomized to DEX implant (n = 123) or sham procedure (n = 120) and received 2 protocol-mandated intravitreal ranibizumab injections. The main outcome measure was injection-free interval to first as-needed ranibizumab injection. RESULTS: DEX increased the injection-free interval versus sham (50th percentile, 34 vs. 29 days; 75th percentile, 85 vs. 56 days; p = 0.016). 8.3% of DEX versus 2.5% of sham-treated patients did not require rescue ranibizumab (p = 0.048). Visual acuity and retinal thickness outcomes were similar in DEX and sham-treated patients. Only reports of conjunctival hemorrhage (18.2 vs. 8.5%) and intraocular pressure elevation (13.2 vs. 4.2%) were significantly different in the DEX versus the sham treatment groups. CONCLUSION: DEX reduced the need for adjunctive ranibizumab treatment and showed acceptable tolerability in nvAMD patients.

Development of onabotulinumtoxinA for chronic migraine.

Discovery of the neuromuscular effects of botulinum toxin began in the early 19th century and has continued to evolve. Currently, onabotulinumtoxinA is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for two cosmetic and eight medical indications, including chronic migraine (CM). CM is a disabling form of migraine characterized by ≥15 headache days monthly and is believed to result from neuronal hypersensitivity to proinflammatory mediators, upregulation of sensory receptors, and consequent maladaptive pain responses with peripheral and central sensitization. OnabotulinumtoxinA achieves migraine prophylaxis in CM through regulation of vesicular trafficking and exocytosis, inhibition of peripheral release of neuropeptides and inflammatory peptides, and reduced cell surface expression of certain ion channels and receptors. Clinically, efficacy of onabotulinumtoxinA for CM has been shown in two phase III, placebo-controlled trials (PREEMPT 1 and PREEMPT 2). OnabotulinumtoxinA significantly reduced the number of headache days per 28-day cycle relative to placebo at week 24 (change from baseline: -8.4 days for onabotulinumtoxinA versus -6.6 days for placebo; P < 0.001, pooled data). OnabotulinumtoxinA improved health-related quality of life and had an acceptable safety profile. OnabotulinumtoxinA is the only approved treatment specifically for CM prevention and represents a safe and effective therapeutic for chronic migraineurs.

Three-year, randomized, sham-controlled trial of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with diabetic macular edema.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex, DEX implant) 0.7 and 0.35 mg in the treatment of patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Two randomized, multicenter, masked, sham-controlled, phase III clinical trials with identical protocols were conducted. Data were pooled for analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 1048) with DME, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 20/50 to 20/200 Snellen equivalent, and central retinal thickness (CRT) of ≥300 µm by optical coherence tomography. METHODS: Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to study treatment with DEX implant 0.7 mg, DEX implant 0.35 mg, or sham procedure and followed for 3 years (or 39 months for patients treated at month 36) at ≤40 scheduled visits. Patients who met retreatment eligibility criteria could be retreated no more often than every 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The predefined primary efficacy endpoint for the United States Food and Drug Administration was achievement of ≥15-letter improvement in BCVA from baseline at study end. Safety measures included adverse events and intraocular pressure (IOP). RESULTS: Mean number of treatments received over 3 years was 4.1, 4.4, and 3.3 with DEX implant 0.7 mg, DEX implant 0.35 mg, and sham, respectively. The percentage of patients with ≥15-letter improvement in BCVA from baseline at study end was greater with DEX implant 0.7 mg (22.2%) and DEX implant 0.35 mg (18.4%) than sham (12.0%; P ≤ 0.018). Mean average reduction in CRT from baseline was greater with DEX implant 0.7 mg (-111.6 µm) and DEX implant 0.35 mg (-107.9 µm) than sham (-41.9 µm; P < 0.001). Rates of cataract-related adverse events in phakic eyes were 67.9%, 64.1%, and 20.4% in the DEX implant 0.7 mg, DEX implant 0.35 mg, and sham groups, respectively. Increases in IOP were usually controlled with medication or no therapy; only 2 patients (0.6%) in the DEX implant 0.7 mg group and 1 (0.3%) in the DEX implant 0.35 mg group required trabeculectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The DEX implant 0.7 mg and 0.35 mg met the primary efficacy endpoint for improvement in BCVA. The safety profile was acceptable and consistent with previous reports.