Switching to ranibizumab in diabetic macular oedema refractory to bevacizumab treatment. / Cambio a ranibizumab en edema macular diabético refractario al tratamiento con bevacizumab.

AIM: To determine the efficacy of switching to ranibizumab in patients with diabetic macular oedema refractory to treatment with bevacizumab, and to evaluate the outcomes when switching back to bevacizumab. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted that included 43 eyes of 31 patients refractory to previous bevacizumab treatment. The patients were switched to ranibizumab, and optical coherence tomography was performed one month post-injection. Patients showing improvement (>10% reduction in central sub-field thickness) were switched back to bevacizumab, and optical coherence tomography was performed one month post-switch back. RESULTS: The 34 eyes switched to ranibizumab showed a statistically significant improvement in mean best corrected visual acuity from 0.67±0.39 logMAR to a mean of 0.55±0.36 logMAR (P<.05). In addition, there was a statistically significant decrease in central subfield thickness (CST) from a mean of 475.3±122.8 to a mean of 417.3±109.1 (P<.05). In the 21 eyes that were switched back to bevacizumab, there was no significant difference either in the change in CST or in the change in best corrected visual acuity post-switch back. CONCLUSION: Switching to ranibizumab in patients improves both the best corrected visual acuity and CST in diabetic patients refractory to previous bevacizumab treatment. This effect is pronounced in patients with increased CST prior to the switch. Switching back to bevacizumab adds no further improvement.

Aflibercept in age-related macular degeneration: evaluating its role as a primary therapeutic option.

The recent VIEW studies have demonstrated the non-inferiority of monthly and bi-monthly aflibercept in the management of wet age related macular degeneration (AMD) compared with ranibizumab. However, the current data are limited mainly to fixed dosing regimens with few studies looking at flexible dosing regimens of aflibercept in wet AMD. In addition, recent data from the VIEW 96 week extension has shown that patients being shifted from fixed dosing regimens to PRN have shown a drop in visual acuity and increase in central macular thickness. This is an indication that fixed dosing, a non-sustainable option, is only effective as long as it is continued. Regimens such as treat and extend (TAE) and pro-re nata (PRN) have been studied extensively in ranibizumab and bevacizumab and have shown to be effective options. With the presence of effective, established and less costly drugs such as ranibizumab and bevacizumab, the role of aflibercept as a primary treatment modality has yet to be clearly defined. The current review provides an analysis of the VIEW studies, as well as the extension phases. It also looks at post hoc analysis of predictors of response and outcomes. We have also conducted a search on studies comparing between PRN regimens using aflibercept and other anti-VEGF agents. This review also explores cheaper off label aflibercept; ziv-aflibercept in the treatment of wet AMD. The main purpose of the review is to delineate the role of aflibercept as a primary therapeutic option and if there are any significant advantages that would advocate its use over alternative anti-VEGF drugs. Finally, we propose a treatment algorithm for patients being started on aflibercept during the first year and thereafter.

Central retinal vein occlusion: modifying current treatment protocols.

Central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) is a common retinal vascular disorder that can result in severe visual acuity loss. The randomized control study, CRUISE, helped establish anti-VEGFs as the standard of care in cases with CRVO. The extension studies for CRUISE; HORIZON and RETAIN showed that not all visual gains are maintained beyond the first year. In addition, patients showed different behavior patterns; with some patients showing complete response with few recurrences, whereas others showed partial or even no response with multiple recurrences. Long-term follow-up demonstrated that patients responding poorly to anti-VEGFs tended to do so early in the course of treatment. It also demonstrated the effectiveness of a pro re nata (PRN) protocol for improving vision and maintaining these gains over long-term follow-ups. The SHORE study further illustrated this point by demonstrating that there were minimal differences in visual outcomes between patients receiving monthly injections and patients being treated PRN. In this review we analyzed the data from the major randomized clinical trials (RCT) that looked at anti-VEGFs as the primary treatment modality in patients with CRVO (CRUISE and the extension studies HORIZON and RETAIN for ranibizumab as well as GALILEO and COPERNICUS for aflibercept). In addition, we looked at SCORE and GENEVA to help determine whether there is a place for steroids as a first line therapy in current treatment practice. We then explored alternative treatment regimens such as laser therapy and switching between anti-VEGF agents and/or steroids for non or partially responding patients. Finally, we propose a simplified modified treatment algorithm for patients with CRVO for better long-term outcomes in all types of responders.

Socioeconomic and psychological impact of treatment for unilateral intraocular retinoblastoma.

PURPOSE: To identify the socioeconomic and psychosocial impacts of clinical treatment decisions for advanced unilateral intraocular retinoblastoma. DESIGN: Retrospective observational case series. SETTING: institutional study at Alexandria Main University Hospital. STUDY POPULATION: records of 66 unilateral retinoblastoma cases treated from May 2005 to May 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Sixty cases were eligible (International Intraocular Retinoblastoma Classification [IIRC] group C, D or E). PROCEDURES: two treatment groups were compared: enucleation vs. salvage treatment. Salvage treatment eyes were further subdivided based on IIRC group. Six socioeconomic parameters (financial burden, financial impact, psychological, social, medical and tumor impacts) were scored. Parameter scores ranged from 0 to 3, for overall score range 0 (no adverse impact) to 18 (severe adverse impact). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: derived Socioeconomic scores were correlated with treatment and outcomes. RESULTS: The enucleation group (28 eyes) had a median overall Socioeconomic score of 4/18, significantly lower than the salvage treatment group (32 eyes), median score 11/18 (P<0.01). Socioeconomic score varied with IIRC group. Attempted eye salvage failed in 25 children, due to uncontrolled tumor (44%) and socioeconomic impact of cumulative therapies (56%). Treatment duration and Socioeconomic score were higher for the 5 children in the salvage treatment group who developed metastatic disease compared to those without metastasis (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The socioeconomic and psychosocial impacts of attempted ocular salvage for unilateral intraocular retinoblastoma are severe, in comparison to primary enucleation. Primary enucleation is a good treatment for unilateral retinoblastoma.