Identifying Medical Diagnoses and Treatable Diseases by Image-Based Deep Learning.

The implementation of clinical-decision support algorithms for medical imaging faces challenges with reliability and interpretability. Here, we establish a diagnostic tool based on a deep-learning framework for the screening of patients with common treatable blinding retinal diseases. Our framework utilizes transfer learning, which trains a neural network with a fraction of the data of conventional approaches. Applying this approach to a dataset of optical coherence tomography images, we demonstrate performance comparable to that of human experts in classifying age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema. We also provide a more transparent and interpretable diagnosis by highlighting the regions recognized by the neural network. We further demonstrate the general applicability of our AI system for diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia using chest X-ray images. This tool may ultimately aid in expediting the diagnosis and referral of these treatable conditions, thereby facilitating earlier treatment, resulting in improved clinical outcomes. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

PHASE 2 RANDOMIZED STUDY (ORION-1) OF A NOVEL, BIODEGRADABLE DEXAMETHASONE IMPLANT (AR-1105) FOR THE TREATMENT OF MACULAR EDEMA DUE TO CENTRAL OR BRANCH RETINAL VEIN OCCLUSION.

PURPOSE: AR-1105 is a novel biodegradable sustained-release dexamethasone implant designed to deliver 6-month durability. This Phase 2 study evaluated two AR-1105 formulations with different release profiles in patients with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion. METHODS: Patients received a single intravitreal injection with 340 µg dexamethasone. In the initial phase, five patients received clinical formulation (CF) 1. In the randomized phase, 44 patients were randomized 1:1 to CF1 or CF2. The follow-up was 6 months. Patients had vision loss due to macular edema diagnosed ≥9 (central retinal vein occlusion) or ≥12 months (branch retinal vein occlusion) before screening, and could be treatment-naive or -experienced (if received prior steroids, must have demonstrated response). RESULTS: Both formulations improved vision and reduced retinal thickening from baseline across all visits. At Month 6, mean changes in best-corrected visual acuity were +4.3 and +8.0 letters, and mean changes in central subfield thickness were -93 µm and -211 µm in CF1 and CF2 randomized patients, respectively. Most common adverse events were reduced visual acuity, worsening macular edema, conjunctival hemorrhage, and increased intraocular pressure. No patients required surgery or laser for intraocular pressure control. CONCLUSION: Both formulations were well tolerated and demonstrated clinically meaningful and sustained improvements in vision and retinal thickening in patients with retinal vein occlusion with longstanding edema.

Three-Year Safety and Efficacy of the 0.19-mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant for Diabetic Macular Edema: The PALADIN Study.

PURPOSE: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of the 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant (Iluvien; Alimera Sciences, Inc) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Three-year, phase 4, nonrandomized, open-label observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with DME who previously received corticosteroid treatment without a clinically significant rise in intraocular pressure (IOP; all eyes, n = 202 eyes of 159 patients; 36-month completion, n = 94 eyes). METHODS: A prospective, observational study in which patients received a 0.19-mg FAc intravitreal implant at baseline and then were observed for safety-, visual-, anatomic-, and treatment burden-related outcomes for up to 36 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary safety outcomes included changes in IOP and interventions to manage IOP elevations. Secondary outcomes included changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and adjunctive DME treatment frequency RESULTS: At 36 months after FAc implantation, study eyes showed a mean CST change of -60.69 µm (P < 0.0001) and a mean BCVA change of +3.61 letters (P = 0.0222) compared with baseline. Overall median treatment frequency decreased from 3.4 treatments/year in the 36 months before FAc implantation to 1 treatment/year in the 36 months after FAc implant, a treatment burden reduction of 70.5%. Furthermore, among the group that completed 36 months of treatment (n = 94 eyes), 25.53% of eyes remained rescue free through 36 months. Mean IOP remained stable throughout the study, and IOP increases to more than 30 mmHg occurred in 10.89% of eyes. Intraocular pressure-related procedures were infrequent, with a surgical rate of 2.97%, with 1.49% attributable to steroid use (vs. surgeries attributable primarily to neovascular glaucoma). In addition, an IOP response of < 25 mmHg after the steroid challenge predicted that 96.92% of eyes would have a similar outcome to 0.19-mg FAc implant at the last visit. Intraocular pressure increases that did occur were manageable with standard treatments (n = 202 eyes). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with DME, the 0.19-mg FAc implant provided improved visual outcomes and reduced treatment burden compared with previous treatments while maintaining a favorable safety profile.

Suprachoroidal triamcinolone acetonide versus rescue therapies for the treatment of uveitic macular oedema: A post hoc analysis of PEACHTREE.

BACKGROUND: This post hoc analysis compared the efficacy and safety of suprachoroidally administered triamcinolone acetonide (CLS-TA) to other commonly available treatments for non-infectious uveitis. METHODS: Results from the PEACHTREE study were compared between subjects randomised to CLS-TA not requiring rescue therapy and those subjects randomised to control, who subsequently required rescue therapy. Endpoints included best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), treatment emergent adverse events and intraocular pressure (IOP) related safety findings. RESULTS: In this analysis, there were 83 unrescued CLS-TA subjects and 46 rescued control subjects. At Week 24, 51.9% of the unrescued CLS-TA subjects gained ≥15 letters in BCVA, compared to 37.0% of the rescued control subjects (p = 0.115). Unrescued CLS-TA subjects showed a mean gain of 15.7 versus 10.9 letters in rescued control subjects (p = 0.080). A significantly greater mean reduction in CST was observed for unrescued CLS-TA subjects versus rescued control subjects (174.0 and 148.5 µm; p = 0.040). Of unrescued CLS-TA subjects, 4.9% experienced IOP elevations ≥30 mm Hg at any visit versus 10.9% of rescued control subjects. Further, use of IOP-lowering medications appeared lower in unrescued CLS-TA subjects versus rescued control subjects (7.2% vs. 13.0%). There were no IOP-lowering surgical interventions in either group. CONCLUSION: CLS-TA subjects experienced significantly greater reduction in CST and tended towards greater improvement in BCVA, compared with rescued control subjects. Suprachoroidally administered CLS-TA showed a lower incidence of IOP-related safety findings.

Two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implants in treatment-naïve patients with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion: subgroup analysis of a retrospective chart review study.

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) is a biodegradable, sustained-release implant that releases dexamethasone for up to 6 months. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of DEX implant in the treatment of macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in treatment-naïve patients. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, open-label chart review study investigated the efficacy and safety of DEX implant treatment in 289 patients with macular edema secondary to branch or central RVO (BRVO, CRVO) who received ≥2 treatments with DEX implant in the study eye. Concomitant adjunctive RVO treatments were permitted. Data collected from the time of the first implant (baseline) to 3-6 months after the last implant included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness measured with optical coherence tomography. In this subgroup analysis, we evaluated outcomes in patients who had received no previous treatment for RVO complications. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were treatment-naïve at the time of their first DEX implant (18 BRVO, 21 CRVO). Before the initial DEX implant, the mean duration of macular edema in treatment-naïve patients was 4.9 months, mean central retinal thickness was 550 µm, and mean Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study BCVA was 8.5 lines (20/125 Snellen). Treatment-naïve patients received a mean of 2.9 implants, either as monotherapy (n = 12) or with adjunctive RVO treatments (n = 27). The mean interval between implants was 177 days. After the first through sixth implants, mean changes from baseline BCVA ranged from +3.0 - +8.0 lines, and mean decreases from baseline central retinal thickness ranged from 241-459 µm. BCVA improved in both BRVO and CRVO and in both phakic and pseudophakic eyes. Overall, 83.8 % of treatment-naïve patients gained ≥2 lines in BCVA, 70.3 % gained ≥3 lines in BCVA, and 56.4 % achieved central retinal thickness ≤250 µm. The most common adverse event was increased intraocular pressure. Fifteen treatment-naïve patients had intraocular pressure ≥25 mm Hg; none required laser or incisional glaucoma surgery. CONCLUSION: Treatment with 2 or more DEX implants had a favorable safety profile and improved visual acuity and anatomic outcomes when used, either alone or with adjunctive RVO therapy, as initial treatment for RVO-associated macular edema. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01411696 , registered on August 5, 2011.

Two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implants as monotherapy or in combination therapy for macular edema in retinal vein occlusion: subgroup analysis of a retrospective chart review study.

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) is a sustained-release biodegradable implant approved for treatment of macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion (RVO). The safety and efficacy of treatment of RVO-associated macular edema with sequential DEX implants in clinical practice was evaluated in patients who received DEX implant as monotherapy compared with patients who received DEX implant in combination with other RVO treatments. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, open-label chart review study (one study eye/patient) evaluated use of DEX implant and outcomes in 289 patients with branch or central RVO who received at least 2 DEX implant treatments in the study eye. Data were collected from the time of the first implant (baseline) to 3-6 months after the last implant. Subgroup analysis evaluated outcomes in patients receiving only DEX implant during the study versus patients receiving DEX implant plus adjunctive RVO treatments. Endpoints included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) change from baseline. RESULTS: DEX implant was used as monotherapy in 84 (29.1%) patients and in combination with other therapy in 205 (70.9%) patients. Mean number of DEX implant treatments received was 3.1 in the monotherapy group and 3.3 in the combination therapy group (P = 0.344). Mean time between implants was longer in the combination therapy group (177 vs. 151 days, P < 0.001). Mean change from baseline BCVA after the first through sixth DEX implants ranged from +0.6 to +3.4 lines in the monotherapy group and +1.3 to +2.8 lines in the combination therapy group. Mean decrease from baseline CRT ranged from 165 to 230 µm in the monotherapy group and 136 to 175 µm in the combination therapy group. Increased intraocular pressure was more common in the combination therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of RVO-associated macular edema with at least 2 sequential DEX implants was safe and effective both when used alone and when combined with other RVO treatments. Improvements in BCVA and CRT were generally similar in the monotherapy and combined therapy groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01411696 .

Efficacy and safety of two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implant injections for treatment of macular edema related to retinal vein occlusion (Shasta study).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and reinjection interval of dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) in branch retinal vein occlusion and central retinal vein occlusion patients receiving ≥ 2 DEX implant treatments. METHODS: Multicenter (26-site), retrospective chart review study. Data were collected from baseline (at first DEX implant) through 3 months to 6 months after last DEX implant. RESULTS: Patients (n = 289) received 2 to 9 (mean, 3.2) DEX implants as monotherapy (29.1% of patients) or with adjunctive treatments/procedures. Mean duration of macular edema before first DEX implant was 18.4 months. Mean reinjection interval was 5.6 months. Mean peak change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline through 4 weeks to 20 weeks after final DEX implant was +1.0 line (P < 0.001). Best-corrected visual acuity and central retinal thickness improved significantly from baseline after each of the first 6 DEX implant injections (P ≤ 0.037); 59.7% of branch retinal vein occlusion and 66.7% of central retinal vein occlusion patients achieved ≥ 2-line best-corrected visual acuity improvement. Intraocular pressure increase (≥ 10 mmHg) occurred in 32.6% of patients; 29.1% used intraocular pressure-lowering medication to treat increases associated with DEX implant. Only 1.7% of patients required incisional glaucoma surgery. CONCLUSION: Retinal vein occlusion patients treated with multiple DEX implant injections, either alone or combined with other therapies, had improved central retinal thickness and visual acuity with each subsequent injection. No new safety concerns developed with multiple implants.

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in combination with laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diffuse diabetic macular edema.

PURPOSE: To evaluate Ozurdex (dexamethasone intravitreal implant [DEX implant]; Allergan, Inc, Irvine, CA) 0.7 mg combined with laser photocoagulation compared with laser alone for treatment of diffuse diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, multicenter, double-masked, parallel-group, 12-month trial. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-three patients with retinal thickening and impaired vision resulting from diffuse DME in at least 1 eye (the study eye) were enrolled. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to treatment in the study eye with DEX implant at baseline plus laser at month 1 (combination treatment; n = 126) or sham implant at baseline and laser at month 1 (laser alone; n = 127) and could receive up to 3 additional laser treatments and 1 additional DEX implant or sham treatment as needed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy variable was the percentage of patients who had a 10-letter or more improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline at month 12. Other key efficacy variables included the change in BCVA from baseline and the area of vessel leakage evaluated with fluorescein angiography. Safety variables included adverse events and intraocular pressure (IOP). RESULTS: The percentage of patients who gained 10 letters or more in BCVA at month 12 did not differ between treatment groups, but the percentage of patients was significantly greater in the combination group at month 1 (P<0.001) and month 9 (P = 0.007). In patients with angiographically verified diffuse DME, the mean improvement in BCVA was significantly greater with DEX implant plus laser treatment than with laser treatment alone (up to 7.9 vs. 2.3 letters) at all time points through month 9 (P ≤ 0.013). Decreases in the area of diffuse vascular leakage measured angiographically were significantly larger with DEX implant plus laser treatment through month 12 (P ≤ 0.041). Increased IOP was more common with combination treatment. No surgeries for elevated IOP were required. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant between-group difference at month 12. However, significantly greater improvement in BCVA, as demonstrated by changes from baseline at various time points up to 9 months and across time based on the area under the curve analysis, occurred in patients with diffuse DME treated with DEX implant plus laser than in patients treated with laser alone. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Arginine methylation at histone H3R2 controls deposition of H3K4 trimethylation.

Modifications on histones control important biological processes through their effects on chromatin structure. Methylation at lysine 4 on histone H3 (H3K4) is found at the 5' end of active genes and contributes to transcriptional activation by recruiting chromatin-remodelling enzymes. An adjacent arginine residue (H3R2) is also known to be asymmetrically dimethylated (H3R2me2a) in mammalian cells, but its location within genes and its function in transcription are unknown. Here we show that H3R2 is also methylated in budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae), and by using an antibody specific for H3R2me2a in a chromatin immunoprecipitation-on-chip analysis we determine the distribution of this modification on the entire yeast genome. We find that H3R2me2a is enriched throughout all heterochromatic loci and inactive euchromatic genes and is present at the 3' end of moderately transcribed genes. In all cases the pattern of H3R2 methylation is mutually exclusive with the trimethyl form of H3K4 (H3K4me3). We show that methylation at H3R2 abrogates the trimethylation of H3K4 by the Set1 methyltransferase. The specific effect on H3K4me3 results from the occlusion of Spp1, a Set1 methyltransferase subunit necessary for trimethylation. Thus, the inability of Spp1 to recognize H3 methylated at R2 prevents Set1 from trimethylating H3K4. These results provide the first mechanistic insight into the function of arginine methylation on chromatin.

Association of OCT angle recess width with IOP response after intravitreal triamcinolone injection.

PURPOSE: A circumferential pretrabecular anatomical structure, the angle recess (AR), can be imaged with anterior segment ocular coherence tomography. AR's utility to predict ocular hypertension after intravitreal triamcinolone injection was assessed. METHODS: All intravitreal triamcinolone injection recipients from 2002 to 2005 with high-resolution anterior segment ocular coherence tomography images had AR width (between the anteriormost prominence of the iris root and posterior cornea) measured by masked physicians using the caliper function of Stratus ocular coherence tomography. Intraocular pressures (IOPs) from 1 month before to 6 months after the injection were compiled for IOP rise (Δ) and maximal IOP (max), categorized as "minimal" (IOPmax < 21 mmHg and/or IOPΔ ≤ 5 mmHg), "moderate" (IOPmax 21-29 mmHg and/or IOPΔ 6-14 mmHg), or "severe" (IOPmax ≥ 30 mmHg and/or IOPΔ ≥ 15 mmHg). Linear regression and analyses of variance were applied. RESULTS: Twenty-six eyes satisfied the entry criteria, with 11 (42%) eyes demonstrating minimal, 11 (42%) moderate, and 4 (15%) severe IOP responses. The corresponding (mean ± SEM) AR widths were: 326 ± 31.5 µm, 281 ± 22.0 µm, and 138 ± 20.3 µm, respectively. Highly significant AR width differences existed between moderate and severe responders and between minimal and severe responders (both P < 0.004); 5 of 6 patients with IOP ≥ 29 mmHg had AR < 200 µm. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that a potentially clinically useful relationship exists between AR width and IOP elevation accompanying intravitreal triamcinolone injection. Anterior segment screening could become a beneficial extension of ocular coherence tomography for retinal practices.

Association of Treatment Duration and Clinical Outcomes in Dry Eye Treatment with Sutureless Cryopreserved Amniotic Membrane.

Background: While sutureless, cryopreserved amniotic membrane (cAM) has been shown to significantly improve signs and symptoms of dry eye disease (DED), no studies have assessed the association of cAM treatment duration to the differential response in clinical outcomes. Methods: A multi-center, retrospective study was conducted on patients with moderate-to-severe DED who were treated with self-retained cAM (Prokera® Slim) for 2 to 7 days. The primary outcome measure was DEWS severity score assessed at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. Secondary outcome measures included ocular discomfort, visual symptoms, corneal staining, and visual acuity. Results: A total of 89 eyes (77 patients) with moderate-to-severe DED (DEWS severity 3.24 ± 0.56) received treatment with self-retained cAM for 2 days (n = 10), 3 days (n = 15), 4 days (n = 12), 5 days (n = 19), 6 days (n = 6), or 7 days (n = 27). DEWS scores significantly improved at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months for all treatment duration groups, with no significant difference observed between groups at any timepoint. In addition to an improvement in DEWS severity scores, those receiving cAM treatment for 2 days demonstrated a significant improvement in corneal staining, visual symptoms, and ocular discomfort at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. Conclusion: This retrospective study suggests that a single placement of self-retained cAM for 2 days can significantly improve signs and symptoms of DED with a lasting benefit observed for up to 3 months.

The real-world efficacy and safety of faricimab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: the TRUCKEE study - 6 month results.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Investigate real-world patients receiving faricimab for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). SUBJECTS/METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective chart review was conducted on patients treated with faricimab for nAMD from February 2022 to September 2022. Collected data includes background demographics, treatment history, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), anatomic changes, and adverse events as safety markers. The main outcome measures are changes in BCVA, changes in central subfield thickness (CST) and adverse events. Secondary outcome measures included treatment intervals and presence of retinal fluid. RESULTS: After one injection of faricimab, all eyes (n = 376), previously-treated (n = 337) and treatment-naïve (n = 39) eyes demonstrated a + 1.1 letter (p = 0.035), a + 0.7 letter (p = 0.196) and a + 4.9 letter (p = 0.076) improvement in BCVA, respectively, and a - 31.3 µM (p < 0.001), a - 25.3 µM (p < 0.001) and a - 84.5 µM (p < 0.001) reduction in CST, respectively. After three injections of faricimab, all eyes (n = 94), previously-treated (n = 81) and treatment-naïve (n = 13) eyes demonstrated a + 3.4 letter (p = 0.03), a + 2.7 letter (p = 0.045) and a + 8.1 letter (p = 0.437) improvement in BCVA, and a - 43.4 µM (p < 0.001), a - 38.1 µM (p < 0.001) and a - 80.1 µM (p < 0.204) reduction in CST, respectively. One case of intraocular inflammation was observed after four injections of faricimab and resolved with topical steroids. One case of infectious endophthalmitis was treated with intravitreal antibiotics and resolved. CONCLUSIONS: Faricimab has demonstrated improvement or maintenance of visual acuity for patients with nAMD, along with rapid improvement of anatomical parameters. It has been well-tolerated with low incidence of treatable intraocular inflammation. Future data will continue to investigate faricimab for real-world patients with nAMD.

HORIZON: an open-label extension trial of ranibizumab for choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of multiple intravitreal ranibizumab injections (Lucentis, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA) administered at the investigator's discretion in patients with choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. DESIGN: An open-label, multicenter, extension study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who completed the controlled treatment phase of 1 of 3 prospective, randomized, 2-year clinical trials of ranibizumab were eligible for enrollment. Analyses were performed for 3 groups: (1) patients treated with ranibizumab in the initial study (ranibizumab treated-initial; n = 600); (2) patients randomized to control who crossed over to receive ranibizumab (ranibizumab treated-XO; n = 190); and (3) ranibizumab-naïve patients (ranibizumab untreated; n = 63). METHODS: Ranibizumab 0.5 mg was administered at the investigator's discretion. Adverse events (AEs) and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) assessments were conducted at study visits every 3 to 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence and severity of AEs. RESULTS: There was 1 occurrence of mild endophthalmitis per 3552 HORIZON injections in the ranibizumab treated-initial/ranibizumab treated-XO groups. There were no serious AE reports of lens damage, retinal tears, or rhegmatogenous retinal detachments in the study eyes. The proportion of patients with any single postdose intraocular pressure ≥30 mmHg was 9.2%, 6.6%, and 0%, and the proportion of patients with glaucoma was 3.2%, 4.2%, and 3.2% in the ranibizumab treated-initial, ranibizumab treated-XO, and ranibizumab untreated groups, respectively. Cataract AEs were less frequent in the ranibizumab untreated group: 6.3% versus 12.5% and 12.1% in the ranibizumab treated-initial and ranibizumab treated-XO groups, respectively. The proportion of patients with arterial thromboembolic events as defined by the Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration was 5.3% in the ranibizumab treated-initial and ranibizumab treated-XO groups, and 3.2% in the ranibizumab untreated group. At month 48 (2 years of HORIZON), the mean change in BCVA (ETDRS letters) relative to the initial study baseline was 2.0 in the ranibizumab treated-initial group versus -11.8 in the pooled ranibizumab treated-XO and ranibizumab untreated groups. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple ranibizumab injections were well tolerated for ≥4 years. With less frequent follow-up leading to less treatment, there was an incremental decline of the visual acuity (VA) gains achieved with monthly treatment. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Effect of combination therapy with bevacizumab and dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with retinal vein occlusion.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc) with bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, Inc) therapy can be synergistic, providing further improvements in visual acuity, sustainability, and macular thickness when compared with dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg alone. METHODS: This is a prospective, interventional case series intended to monitor changes in visual acuity and macular thickness in patients diagnosed with retinal vein occlusion (RVO), after injection of bevacizumab followed by a scheduled dexamethasone intravitreal implant. This study was designed to emulate patient care as received in the typical ophthalmology practice. Patients diagnosed with RVO, who were seen between September 2009 and July 2010, were included in this study if they had received previous anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Patients were included in analysis if the previous anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy was at least 6 weeks before and optical coherence tomography (OCT) was >300 µm on spectral-domain OCT. Exclusion criteria included history of vitrectomy, and/or rubeotic or advanced glaucoma. All patients were evaluated with Snellen visual acuity and measured for macular thickness (calculated by spectral-domain OCT) and intraocular pressure. At baseline, all patients were injected with bevacizumab, followed by dexamethasone intravitreal implant injection 2 weeks later. These patients were reexamined on a monthly basis and retreated when edema occurred. RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the time to reinjection based on OCT and vision criteria. The secondary outcomes were increases in visual acuity and the reduction of OCT thickness during that period. Thirty-four eyes of 33 patients, with a mean age of 72.8 years, were identified. Thirty-five percent were diagnosed with central RVO, while the other 65% were with branch RVO. Of these patients, 97% gained vision during the study. Mean visual acuity improved from initially 11 letters to a maximum of 25 letters during the study period. In addition, vision improved by at least 15 letters in 29% of patients initially up to 64% during the study period. Macular thickness decreased with the combination treatment by OCT, and the effect continued an average of 126 days from the initial bevacizumab treatment. Retreatment was unnecessary in 18% of the population during the 6-month study period. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates efficacy and the duration of effect using a combination of bevacizumab and dexamethasone versus dexamethasone alone. The combination is synergistic, increasing visual acuity and prolonging the time between injections, compared with either of these medications alone. Therefore, the combination of a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor and a dexamethasone implant may be a valuable option for RVO treatment.

Modeling blood flow in a tilted inferior vena cava filter: does tilt adversely affect hemodynamics?

PURPOSE: Filter tilt is often seen with conical filters and adversely affects retrievability and clot trapping efficiency. In addition, tilt may also alter flow dynamics. This study uses computational fluid dynamics to evaluate flow past an unoccluded and partially occluded Celect inferior vena cava filter (Cook, Bloomington, Indiana). In particular, the hemodynamic response to thrombus volume and filter tilt is examined, and the results are compared with flow conditions known to be thrombogenic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computer models of an upright and tilted Celect filter are constructed using high-resolution digital photographs and methods of computer-aided design. The three-dimensional models are placed inside a model cava, and steady-state flow past unoccluded and partially occluded filters is computed. RESULTS: The volume of stagnant and recirculating flow increases with thrombus volume. In addition, as filter tilt increases, the cava wall in the direction of filter tilt is subjected to low-velocity flow and gives rise to regions of low wall shear stress. CONCLUSIONS: Flow conditions caused by the tilted Celect filter may elevate the risk of intra/perifilter thrombosis and facilitate vascular remodeling. This latter condition may increase the potential for incorporation of the hook of the filter into the vena cava wall, thereby complicating filter retrieval. These findings also suggest that further long-term clinical follow-up with conical filters should be pursued with a specific evaluation of tilt as a factor of intrafilter thrombus and thrombosis.

A high-resolution map of active promoters in the human genome.

In eukaryotic cells, transcription of every protein-coding gene begins with the assembly of an RNA polymerase II preinitiation complex (PIC) on the promoter. The promoters, in conjunction with enhancers, silencers and insulators, define the combinatorial codes that specify gene expression patterns. Our ability to analyse the control logic encoded in the human genome is currently limited by a lack of accurate information regarding the promoters for most genes. Here we describe a genome-wide map of active promoters in human fibroblast cells, determined by experimentally locating the sites of PIC binding throughout the human genome. This map defines 10,567 active promoters corresponding to 6,763 known genes and at least 1,196 un-annotated transcriptional units. Features of the map suggest extensive use of multiple promoters by the human genes and widespread clustering of active promoters in the genome. In addition, examination of the genome-wide expression profile reveals four general classes of promoters that define the transcriptome of the cell. These results provide a global view of the functional relationships among transcriptional machinery, chromatin structure and gene expression in human cells.

IOP Elevation in Patients Treated With Fluocinolone Acetonide Insert for Chronic Noninfectious Uveitis Affecting the Posterior Segment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Characterize timing of intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation in patients treated with fluocinolone acetonide insert (FAi) for uveitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A post-hoc subset analysis of data from a randomized, prospective, double-masked, sham-controlled, 3-year, phase 3 clinical trial with 129 participants with noninfectious posterior uveitis randomly assigned to receive 0.18-mg fluocinolone acetonide insert or sham injection. The number of eyes with IOP of 30 mm Hg or greater at different time points were recorded. RESULTS: The incidence of FAi eyes that reached IOP 30 mm Hg or greater was 17.2%. The mean number of days to first IOP response was 241. IOP elevations were divided into four time periods: under 1 month (33%), 3 to 6 months (33%), 6 to 18 months (26.7%), and greater than 18 months (6.7%). Ten cases of elevated IOP were managed medically and five required surgical management. Visual field analysis revealed no significant change in mean deviation compared to patients' own, untreated eyes (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: IOP elevations occurred in 15 out of 87 patients treated with the FAi. The onset of elevated IOP was fairly evenly distributed across the 36-month trial. Patients should be regularly evaluated for increased IOP, which can be successfully managed by traditional means. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2021;52:387-390.].

Safety and Efficacy of Intravitreal Risuteganib for Non-Exudative AMD: A Multicenter, Phase 2a, Randomized, Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 1.0 mg risuteganib in subjects with nonexudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase 2a, prospective, double-masked, sham-controlled study. Eyes with nonexudative (dry) AMD and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between 20/40 and 20/200 were included. Subjects were randomized to intravitreal 1.0 mg risuteganib or sham injection. At Week 16, subjects in the risuteganib group received a second 1.0-mg dose and the sham group crossed over to receive a dose of 1.0 mg risuteganib and were evaluated at Week 28. The primary endpoint was proportion of subjects with 8 letters ETDRS or more BCVA gain from baseline to Week 28 in the risuteganib group versus baseline to Week 12 for the sham group. BCVA was tested and subjects were observed for adverse events (AEs) every 4 weeks until completion of the study at 32 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-five subjects (risuteganib, n = 29; sham, n = 16) were enrolled in the study, of whom 39 (risuteganib, n = 25; sham, n = 14) completed the study and were included in the per protocol efficacy analysis. At baseline, mean age was 78.8 and 75.9 years and mean BCVA was 67.1 and 64.4 letters in the sham and risuteganib groups, respectively. The primary endpoint was met by 48% of the risuteganib group at Week 28 and 7% of the sham group at Week 12 (P = .013). Of the risuteganib subjects, 20% gained 15 letters or more at Week 28, whereas no patients in the sham group at Week 12 achieved this visual acuity gain. The only ocular treatment-related treatment-emergent AE was vitreous floaters, which spontaneously recovered without sequelae. No drug-related serious AE was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Risuteganib demonstrated significant BCVA improvement in patients with non-exudative AMD. No drug-related AEs were seen during a 32-week observation period. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2021;52:327-335.].

Toward an optimal position for inferior vena cava filters: computational modeling of the impact of renal vein inflow with Celect and TrapEase filters.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the hemodynamic effects of renal vein inflow and filter position on unoccluded and partially occluded inferior vena cava (IVC) filters with use of three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional models of the TrapEase and Günther Celect IVC filters, spherical thrombi, and an IVC with renal veins were constructed. Hemodynamics of steady-state flow was examined for unoccluded and partially occluded TrapEase and Günther Celect IVC filters in varying proximity to the renal veins. RESULTS: Flow past the unoccluded filters demonstrated minimal disruption. Natural regions of stagnant/recirculating flow in the IVC were observed superior to the bilateral renal vein inflows. High flow velocities and elevated shear stresses were observed in the vicinity of renal inflow. Spherical thrombi induce stagnant/recirculating flow downstream of the thrombus. Placement of the TrapEase filter in the suprarenal position resulted in a large area of low shear stress/stagnant flow within the filter just downstream of thrombus trapped in the upstream trapping position. CONCLUSIONS: Filter position with respect to renal vein inflow influences filter trapping hemodynamics. Placement of the TrapEase filter in a suprarenal location may be thrombogenic, with redundant areas of stagnant/recirculating flow and low shear stress along the caval wall caused by the upstream trapping position and the naturally occurring region of stagnant flow from the renal veins. Infrarenal vein placement of IVC filters in a near-juxtarenal position with the downstream cone near the renal vein inflow likely confers increased levels of mechanical lysis of trapped thrombi from increased shear stress from renal vein inflow.

Design optimization of vena cava filters: an application to dual filtration devices.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a significant medical problem that results in over 300,000 fatalities per year. A common preventative treatment for PE is the insertion of a metallic filter into the inferior vena cava that traps thrombi before they reach the lungs. The goal of this work is to use methods of mathematical modeling and design optimization to determine the configuration of trapped thrombi that minimizes the hemodynamic disruption. The resulting configuration has implications for constructing an optimally designed vena cava filter. Computational fluid dynamics is coupled with a nonlinear optimization algorithm to determine the optimal configuration of a trapped model thrombus in the inferior vena cava. The location and shape of the thrombus are parametrized, and an objective function, based on wall shear stresses, determines the worthiness of a given configuration. The methods are fully automated and demonstrate the capabilities of a design optimization framework that is broadly applicable. Changes to thrombus location and shape alter the velocity contours and wall shear stress profiles significantly. For vena cava filters that trap two thrombi simultaneously, the undesirable flow dynamics past one thrombus can be mitigated by leveraging the flow past the other thrombus. Streamlining the shape of the thrombus trapped along the cava wall reduces the disruption to the flow but increases the area exposed to low wall shear stress. Computer-based design optimization is a useful tool for developing vena cava filters. Characterizing and parametrizing the design requirements and constraints is essential for constructing devices that address clinical complications. In addition, formulating a well-defined objective function that quantifies clinical risks and benefits is needed for designing devices that are clinically viable.