One-Year Functional and Morphological Prognosis After Intravitreal Injection Treatments According to Different Morphological Patterns of Diabetic Macular Edema in Real-Life: MARMASIA Study Group Report No.13.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the responses of different optical coherence tomography (OCT) patterns of diabetic macular edema (DME) to intravitreal injection therapy. METHODS: In this retrospective, comparative, and multicenter study, patients who had previously untreated DME, who received intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) or aflibercept (IVA) and/or steroid treatment with the pro re nata (PRN) treatment regimen after a 3-month loading dose, and had a 12-month follow-up in the MARMASIA Study Group were included. Morphological patterns of DME were divided into four groups based on OCT features diffuse/spongious edema (Group 1), cystoid edema (Group 2), diffuse/spongious edema+subretinal fluid (SRF) (Group 3), and cystoid edema+SRF (Group 4). Changes in central macular thickness (CMT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at months 3, 6, and 12, and the number of injections at month 12 were compared between the DME groups. RESULTS: 455 eyes of 299 patients were included in the study. The mean baseline BCVAs [Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution (logMAR)] in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 0.54 ± 0.24, 0.52 ± 0.25, 0.55 ± 0.23, and 0.57 ± 0.27, respectively. There was no significant difference between the baseline mean BCVAs between the groups (p = .35). The mean BCVAs were significantly improved to 0,47 ± 0,33 in group 1, 0,42 ± 0,33 in group 2, 0,47 ± 0,31 in group 3, and 0,45 ± 0,43 at month 12. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of BCVA change at month 12 (p = .71). The mean baseline CMTs in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 387,19 ± 128,19, 447,02 ± 132,39, 449,12 ± 109,24, and 544,19 ± 178,61, respectively. At baseline, the mean CMT was significantly higher in Group 4 than in the other groups (p = .000). The mean CMTs were significantly decreased to 325,16 ± 97,55, 334,94 ± 115,99, 324,33 ± 79,20, and 332,08 ± 150,40 in four groups at month 12 respectively (p > .05). The groups had no significant difference in mean CMT at month 12 (p = .835). The change in CMT was significantly higher in Group 4 than in the other groups at month 12 (p = .000). The mean number of intravitreal anti-VEGF injections at month 12 was 4.51 ± 1.57 in Group 1, 4.63 ± 1.54 in Group 2, 4.88 ± 1.38 in Group 3, and 5.07 ± 1.49 in Group 4. The mean number of anti-VEGF injections in Group 1 and Group 2 was significantly lower than in Group 4 (p = 0,014 and p = 0,017). CONCLUSIONS: In real life, there was no significant difference between the DME groups in terms of visual improvement at month 12. However, better anatomical improvement was achieved in Group 4 than in the other DME groups.

Real-World Outcomes of Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Diabetic Macular Edema in Türkiye: MARMASIA Study Group Report No. 1.

Objectives: This study aimed to report the demographic and clinical characteristics of diabetic macular edema (DME) patients treated with intravitreal injection (IVI) of anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) and provide an overview of outcomes during routine clinical practice in Türkiye. Materials and Methods: This retrospective, real-world study included 1,372 eyes (854 patients) treated with a pro re nata protocol by 21 ophthalmologists from 8 tertiary clinics on the Asian side of the Marmara region of Türkiye (MARMASIA Study Group). Five cohort groups were established by collecting the patients' baseline and 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36-month follow-up data, where each subsequent cohort may include the previous. Changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, approximate ETDRS letters) and central macular thickness (CMT, µm), number of visits and IVI, and rates of anti-VEGF switch and intravitreal dexamethasone implant (IDI) combination were evaluated. Results: The 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36-month cohorts included 1372 (854), 1352 (838), 1185 (722), 972 (581), and 623 (361) eyes (patients), respectively. The mean baseline BCVA and CMT were 51.4±21.4 letters and 482.6±180.3 µm. The mean changes from baseline in BCVA were +7.6, +9.1, +8.0, +8.6, and +8.4 letters, and in CMT were -115.4, -140.0, -147.9, -167.3, and -215.4 µm at the 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36-month visits (p<0.001 for all). The median cumulative number of anti-VEGF IVI was 3.0, 3.0, 5.0, 7.0, and 9.0, respectively. The overall anti-VEGF switch and IDI combination rates were 18.5% (253/1372 eyes) and 35.0% (480/1372 eyes), respectively. Conclusion: This largest real-life study of DME from Türkiye demonstrated BCVA gains inferior to randomized controlled trials, mainly due to the lower number of IVI. However, with the lower baseline BCVA and higher IDI combination rates in our cohorts, these gains were relatively superior to other real-life study counterparts.