Effect of Oral Valproic Acid vs Placebo for Vision Loss in Patients With Autosomal Dominant Retinitis Pigmentosa: A Randomized Phase 2 Multicenter Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are no approved drug treatments for autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa, a relentlessly progressive cause of adult and childhood blindness. Objectives: To evaluate the potential efficacy and assess the safety of orally administered valproic acid (VPA) in the treatment of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, phase 2, prospective, interventional, placebo-controlled, double-masked randomized clinical trial. The study took place in 6 US academic retinal degeneration centers. Individuals with genetically characterized autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa were randomly assigned to receive treatment or placebo for 12 months. Analyses were intention-to-treat. Interventions: Oral VPA 500 mg to 1000 mg daily for 12 months or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was determined prior to study initiation as the change in visual field area (assessed by the III4e isopter, semiautomated kinetic perimetry) between baseline and month 12. Results: The mean (SD) age of the 90 participants was 50.4 (11.6) years. Forty-four (48.9%) were women, 87 (96.7%) were white, and 79 (87.8%) were non-Hispanic. Seventy-nine participants (87.8%) completed the study (42 [95.5%] received placebo and 37 [80.4%] received VPA). Forty-two (46.7%) had a rhodopsin mutation. Most adverse events were mild, although 7 serious adverse events unrelated to VPA were reported. The difference between the VPA and placebo arms for mean change in the primary outcome was -150.43 degree2 (95% CI, -290.5 to -10.03; P = .035). Conclusions and Relevance: This negative value indicates that the VPA arm had worse outcomes than the placebo group. This study brings to light the key methodological considerations that should be applied to the rigorous evaluation of treatments for these conditions. This study does not provide support for the use of VPA in the treatment of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01233609.

Anecortave acetate (15 milligrams) versus photodynamic therapy for treatment of subfoveal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration.

PURPOSE: To compare 1-year safety and efficacy of anecortave acetate 15 mg with photodynamic therapy (PDT) with verteporfin in patients eligible for initial PDT treatment. DESIGN: Prospective, masked, randomized, multicenter, parallel group, active control, noninferiority clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred thirty patients with predominantly classic subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration were randomized to treatment with either anecortave acetate 15 mg or PDT. METHODS: In the anecortave acetate group, the drug was administered under the Tenon's capsule as a periocular posterior juxtascleral depot (PJD) at the beginning of the study and at month 6. Before the first administration of anecortave acetate, patients in this treatment group received a sham PDT treatment, and sham PDT treatments were repeated every 3 months if there was evidence of leakage on fluorescein angiography (FA). Patients assigned to PDT received up to 4 PDT treatments at 3-month intervals, as needed based upon FA, and a sham PJD procedure at the beginning of the study and at month 6. Best-corrected visual acuity was determined at baseline and all follow-up visits. Safety data were regularly reviewed by an independent safety committee. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Percent responders (patients losing <3 lines of vision) at month 12. RESULTS: Percent responders in the anecortave acetate and PDT groups were 45% and 49%, respectively (not statistically different, P = 0.43). The confidence interval (CI) for the difference ranged from -13.2% favoring PDT to +5.6% favoring anecortave acetate. The month 12 clinical outcome for anecortave acetate was improved in patients for whom reflux was controlled and who were treated within the 6-month treatment window (57% vs. 49%; 95% CI, -4.3% favoring PDT to +21.7% favoring anecortave acetate). No serious adverse events related to the study drug were reported in either treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy outcomes in this study demonstrate that the benefits of anecortave acetate for the treatment of choroidal neovascularization outweigh the risks associated with either the drug or the PJD administration procedure.

Anecortave acetate as monotherapy for treatment of subfoveal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration: twelve-month clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of the angiostatic agent anecortave acetate, compared with a placebo, for treatment of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization (CNV). DESIGN: Ongoing masked, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel evaluation of anecortave acetate (30 mg, 15 mg, and 3 mg) versus a placebo. PARTICIPANTS: There were 128 eyes of 128 patients with subfoveal CNV secondary to age-related macular degeneration who were enrolled and treated, with 80% (102/128) of eyes presenting with predominantly classic lesions at baseline. METHODS: All eyes received a posterior juxtascleral depot application of masked study medication or a placebo, with retreatment at 6-month intervals if the masked investigator believed the patient could benefit. Patients received periodic detailed ophthalmic examinations with both fluorescein and indocyanine green angiography, general physical examinations with electrocardiograms, and hematology/serum chemistry/urinalysis. All ophthalmic and systemic safety data were periodically reviewed by the Independent Safety Committee overseeing the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Best-corrected logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) vision and fluorescein angiographic lesion characteristics were compared over time and among treatment groups. RESULTS: At month 12, anecortave acetate (15 mg) administered at 6-month intervals was statistically superior to the placebo for 3 measures of clinical efficacy: mean change from baseline vision (P = 0.0131), stabilization of vision (<3 logMAR line change; P = 0.0323), and prevention of severe vision loss (decrease of > or = 6 logMAR lines from baseline; P = 0.0224). Subgroup analysis of predominantly classic lesions revealed that anecortave acetate (15 mg) was also superior to the placebo at 1 year for each of these 3 measures of visual outcome (Ps = 0.0022, 0.0100, and 0.0299, respectively). Anecortave acetate (15 mg) trended toward significance over the placebo at month 12 for inhibition of total lesion growth and for inhibition of both the total CNV component and the classic CNV component in both the overall and subgroup analyses. The Independent Safety Committee identified no clinically relevant treatment-related safety issues. CONCLUSIONS: Anecortave acetate (15 mg) is safe and clinically efficacious at 1 year for maintaining vision, preventing severe vision loss, and inhibiting subfoveal CNV lesion growth.

Anecortave acetate as monotherapy for the treatment of subfoveal lesions in patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD): interim (month 6) analysis of clinical safety and efficacy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical safety and efficacy of the angiostatic agent anecortave acetate for treatment of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to AMD. METHODS: 128 patients were randomized to placebo treatment or one of three anecortave acetate doses. Study medication was administered as a posterior juxtascleral injection onto the posterior scleral surface. Best-corrected logMAR vision was obtained at baseline and follow-up visits. Fluorescein angiograms were evaluated for eligibility before enrollment and posttreatment. RESULTS: Six months after a single treatment, visual acuity (mean change from baseline logMAR values) was significantly better (P = 0.003) after anecortave acetate 15 mg than placebo. More patients treated with anecortave acetate 15 mg than placebo maintained vision (88% versus 70%, P = 0.080), especially those with predominantly classic lesions (92% versus 65%, P = 0.021). Anecortave acetate 15 mg inhibited lesion growth significantly better than placebo (P = 0.001). Trends favoring the other doses over placebo were observed for vision preservation and lesion inhibition, but statistical significance was not achieved. The Independent Safety Committee overseeing this study identified no clinically relevant treatment-related changes. CONCLUSION: Anecortave acetate 15 mg is safe and effective for preserving or improving vision and for inhibiting lesion growth in patients with subfoveal AMD.