Hospital-based health technology assessment of innovative medical devices: insights from a nationwide survey in France.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the process of hospital acquisition of innovative medical devices (MDs) and the hospital-based health technology assessment (HB-HTA) pathways in France, an in-depth study based on a quantitative approach is needed. The aim of the present study was to assess through a national survey how HB-HTA is currently implemented in French hospitals and to identify its level of formalization. METHODS: A quantitative online survey was conducted among hospitals performing HB-HTA in France, with a focus on the acquisition of innovative MDs for individual use. The survey, conducted between March and June 2022, was developed by a scientific board composed of members of the French-speaking Society for HB-HTA. RESULTS: Sixty-seven out of 131 surveyed hospitals with HB-HTA activities responded, including 29 university hospitals, 24 nonprofit private hospitals, and 14 local hospitals. Sixty-one respondents (91 percent) reported the existence of a process dedicated to evaluating innovative MDs; of these, 16 declared that their hospitals had a formalized unit with HB-HTA activity. These units were more frequently found in larger hospitals with more than 500 inpatient beds (n = 16, p = 0.0160) and in university hospitals (n = 12, p = 0.0158). No hospital reported any collaboration with HAS, the French national HTA agency. CONCLUSION: A diverse range of HB-HTA organizations with different structural levels exist in France for MD procurement linked to the category of hospitals. The study highlights the need for recognition of HB-HTA activity at the regulatory level in France and for direct collaboration between HTA activities performed at local and national levels.

EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF AFLIBERCEPT FOR THE TREATMENT OF IDIOPATHIC CHOROIDAL NEOVASCULARIZATION IN YOUNG PATIENTS: The INTUITION Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the mean change in visual acuity at 52 weeks in patients with idiopathic choroidal neovascularization treated with aflibercept. METHODS: We conducted a prospective noncomparative open-label Phase-II trial. The dosage regimen evaluated in this study was structured into two periods: (1) from inclusion to 20 weeks: a treat-and-extend period composed of three mandatory intravitreal injections, and complementary intravitreal injections performed if needed; (2) from 21 weeks to 52 weeks: a pro re nata period composed of intravitreal injections performed only if needed. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were included, and 16 completed the 52-week study. At baseline, the mean best corrected visual acuity was 66.56 (±20.72) letters (≈20/50 Snellen equivalent), and the mean central retinal thickness was 376.74 µm (±93.77). At 52 weeks, the mean change in the best-corrected visual acuity was +19.50 (±19.36) letters [95% confidence interval = +9.18 to +29.82]. None of the patients included lost ≥15 letters at 24 weeks or 52 weeks. The mean change in central retinal thickness was -96.78 µm (±104.29) at 24 weeks and -86.22 µm (±112.27) at 52 weeks. The mean number of intravitreal injections was 5.4 (±3.0) at 52-weeks. No ocular serious adverse events related to the treatment were reported. CONCLUSION: The present analysis shows clinically significant functional and anatomical treatment effect of aflibercept in case of idiopathic choroidal neovascularization. The treat-and-extend regimen proposed after the first injection seems adequate to treat most neovessels.

Flow Diverters for Intracranial Aneurysms: The DIVERSION National Prospective Cohort Study.

Background and Purpose- Flow diverters are used for endovascular therapy of intracranial aneurysms. We did a nationwide prospective study to investigate the safety and effectiveness of flow diversion at 12 months. Methods- DIVERSION was a national prospective cohort study including all flow diverters placement between October 2012 and February 2014 in France. The primary end point was the event-free survival rate at 12 months, defined as the occurrence of morbidity (intracranial hemorrhage, ischemic stroke, noncerebral hemorrhage, or neurological deficit due to mass effect), retreatment, or death within 12 months post-treatment. A quality control was carried out on 100% of the collected data and of at least 10% of the included patients in each center, chosen at random. All reported serious events were adjudicated by an independent Data Safety and Monitoring Board. Satisfactory occlusion was defined as 3 or 4 on Kamran scale by an independent imaging core laboratory at 12 months. Results- We enrolled 398 patients harboring 477 intracranial aneurysms. At least 1 morbidity-mortality event was noted in 95 of 408 interventions representing an event-free survival rate of 75.7% (95% CI, 71.1-79.7). The rate of permanent-related serious events and mortality was 5.9% and 1.2% at 12 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that high baseline blood pressure (hazard ratio, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.35-4.79; P=0.039), diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio, 3.70; 95% CI, 1.60-8.6; P=0.0022), and larger aneurysms (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.11; P<0.0001) were associated with the occurrence of a neurological deficit. The satisfactory occlusion rate at 12 months was 79.9%, and the absence of high baseline blood pressure (odds ratio, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.12-3.71; P=0.0193) and postprocedural satisfactory occlusion (odds ratio, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.49-5.09; P=0.0012) were associated with a 12-month satisfactory occlusion. Conclusions- A satisfactory occlusion was achieved in almost 80% of cases after flow diverter treatment with a permanent-related serious event and mortality rates of 5.9% and 1.2% at 12 months, respectively.

SMABcare study: subcutaneous monoclonal antibody in cancer care: cost-consequence analysis of subcutaneous rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma.

Rituximab is used as a standard of care for follicular lymphoma and is usually administered intravenously. A novel subcutaneous formulation recently showed non-inferior efficacy with similar pharmacokinetic and safety profiles compared to intravenous rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma. This new approach is promising in terms of comfort for patients and time-saving for hospital staff. To evaluate the real-life economic impact of subcutaneous rituximab as maintenance therapy in patients with follicular lymphoma in real life, we conducted a cost-consequence analysis from the hospital's point of view in three French teaching hospitals. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L) was investigated as well as patients' and nurses' perception. Compared to intravenous rituximab, subcutaneous administration showed an estimated cost-saving of €109.20 per patient per cycle (p < 0.001), 78.6% of which could be attributed to the rituximab cost. Health-related quality of life showed no significant difference between the two groups despite tendencies for greater pain in the subcutaneous group and greater anxiety in the intravenous group. Thus, subcutaneous rituximab had a favorable pharmacoeconomic profile, with clinical efficacy similar to that of intravenous rituximab. The subcutaneous form was preferred by almost all patients, but further consideration should be given to improve the patients' experience: a dedicated day unit with trained medical, nursing, and pharmaceutical staff could be helpful.

PREDICTORS OF ONE-YEAR VISUAL OUTCOMES AFTER ANTI-VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR TREATMENT FOR NEOVASCULAR AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION.

PURPOSE: To determine predictors of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) outcomes 1 year after ranibizumab or bevacizumab treatment for neovascular age-related macular degeneration, within the French Study Group Avastin versus Lucentis for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (GEFAL). METHODS: Patients aged ≥50 years presenting subfoveal neovascular age-related macular degeneration were randomized to receive ranibizumab or bevacizumab (3 monthly intravitreal injections followed by an as-needed regimen). The main outcome measures were BCVA and its change from baseline at 1 year. Variables with a P value <0.20 in the univariate model and/or which were clinically relevant were included in the multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The following baseline factors were associated with a lower BCVA score at 1 year and with less improvement in BCVA (multivariate analysis): intraretinal fluid, thickness of central subfield macular ≤277 µm, predominantly classic choroidal neovascularization, and total area of choroidal neovascularization (all P ≤ 0.01). Pigment epithelium detachment and high baseline BCVA were associated with less improvement in BCVA (P = 0.03, P = 0.05, respectively). Patients who met retreatment criteria but did not receive the corresponding injection had significantly poorer outcomes (only tested in the univariate analysis). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the predictors of BCVA score at 1 year posttreatment; the presence of intraretinal fluid was associated with a poor prognosis.

Using connected objects in clinical research.

Connected objects (CO), whether medical devices or not, are used in clinical research for data collection, a specific activity (communication, diagnosis, effector, etc.), or several functions combined. Their validation should be based on three approaches: technical and clinical reliability, data protection and cybersecurity. Consequently, the round table recommends that the typology of COs, their uses and limitations, be known and shared by all, particularly for implementing precise specifications. COs are used in clinical research during observational studies (assessment of the device itself or data collection), randomized studies, where only one group has a CO (assessment of its impact on patient follow-up or management), or randomized studies where both groups have a CO, which is then used as a tool to help with assessment. The benefits of using COs in clinical research includes: improved collection and quality of data, compliance of patients and pharmacovigilance, easier implementation of e-cohorts and a better representative balance of patients. The societal limits and risks identified relate to the sometimes intrusive nature of certain collected parameters and the possible misuse of data. The round table recommends the following on this last point: anticipation, by securing transmission methods, the qualification of data hosts, and assessment of the object's vulnerability. For this, a risk analysis appears necessary for each project. It is also necessary to accurately document the data flow, in order to inform both patients and healthcare professionals and to ensure adequate security. Anticipating regulatory changes and involving users starting from the study design stage are also recommended.

High-Resolution Manometry Improves the Diagnosis of Esophageal Motility Disorders in Patients With Dysphagia: A Randomized Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: High-resolution manometry (HRM) might be superior to conventional manometry (CM) to diagnose esophageal motility disorders. We aimed to compare the diagnosis performed with HRM and CM and confirmed at 6 months in a multicenter randomized trial. METHODS: Patients with unexplained dysphagia were randomized to undergo either CM or HRM. Motility disorders were diagnosed using the Castell and Spechler classification for CM and the Chicago classification for HRM. Diagnosis confirmation was based on clinical outcome and response to treatment after 6-month follow-up. The initial diagnosis and percentage of confirmed diagnoses were compared between the two arms (CM and HRM). RESULTS: In total, 247 patients were randomized and 245 analyzed: 122 in the CM arm and 123 in the HRM arm. A manometric diagnosis was more frequently initially achieved with HRM than with CM (97% vs. 84%; P<0.01). Achalasia was more frequent in the HRM arm (26% vs. 12% in the CM arm; P<0.01) while normal examinations were more frequent in the CM arm (52% vs. 28% in the HRM arm; P<0.05). After follow-up, the initial diagnosis was confirmed in 89% of patients in the HRM arm vs. 81% in the CM arm (P=0.07). Finally, overall procedure tolerance was better with CM than with HRM (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial demonstrated an improved diagnostic yield for achalasia with HRM compared with CM. Diagnoses tended to be more frequently confirmed in patients who underwent HRM, suggesting that esophageal motility disorders could be identified earlier with HRM than with CM (ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT01284894).

EVIDENCE trial: design of a phase 2, randomized, controlled, multicenter study comparing flow diversion and traditional endovascular strategy in unruptured saccular wide-necked intracranial aneurysms.

INTRODUCTION: Endovascular treatment of large, wide-necked intracranial aneurysms with coils is associated with low rates of initial angiographic occlusion and high rates of recurrence. The Pipeline™ Embolization Device has shown high rates of complete occlusion in uncontrolled clinical series. METHODS: The study is a prospective, controlled, randomized, multicenter, phase 2 open-label trial. Intention-to-treat population includes age ≥18, unruptured saccular aneurysm located in the intra-dural area, neck diameter ≥4 and ≤10 mm, sac diameter ≥7 mm and ≤20 mm, "dome/neck" ratio is ≥1, diameter of the parent artery ≥2 mm and ≤5 mm, and no prior treatment of the aneurysm. Site can only participate if five patients have been previously treated with the Pipeline device. The primary end point of the study is complete occlusion of the aneurysm on angiogram performed 12 months after the endovascular procedure. Complete aneurysm occlusion is defined as the absence of visible blood flow, grade 1 according to the Raymond scale for the standard procedure group and grade 4 according to the grading scale of Kamran for the flow diverter group. RESULTS: The trial is currently enrolling and results of the data are pending the completion of enrollment and follow-up. CONCLUSION: This paper details the trial design of the French EVIDENCE phase 2 trial, a blinded, controlled randomized trial of wide-neck intra-dural aneurysms amenable to either traditional endovascular strategy or flow diversion with Pipeline device.

Bevacizumab and ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: an updated meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the main cause of central vision loss among individuals aged 50 years or older in developed countries. The aim of this study was to review systematically the effect of bevacizumab compared to ranibizumab in patients with AMD at 1 year. METHODS: A systematic review was performed on Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library and Trial registers to October 2013. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing bevacizumab with ranibizumab in patients with neovascular AMD. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) estimates were synthesized under fixed- and random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I(2). RESULTS: Five RCTs were included, representing 2,686 randomised patients. The meta-analysis confirmed the non-inferiority of bevacizumab compared to ranibizumab for change in visual acuity at 1 year (MD 0.57 letters, -1.80 to 0.66, p = 0.37, I(2) = 0 %). Better anatomical results were found for ranibizumab. Bevacizumab was associated with a 34 % increase in the number of patients with at least one serious systemic adverse event (OR 1.34, 1.08 to 1.66, p = 0.01, I(2) = 0 %). CONCLUSIONS: The pooled evidence confirmed that, compared with ranibizumab, bevacizumab was associated with equivalent effects on visual acuity at 1 year and with a higher risk of systemic serious adverse events. The current available data do not show which types of adverse events occur more frequently. In practice, bevacizumab should be used under a risk-management plan until further studies have been carried out to assess accurately the increased risk of systemic adverse events.

Cost-effectiveness of the ONCORAL multidisciplinary programme for the management of outpatients taking oral anticancer agents at risk of drug-related event: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: The development of oral anticancer agents (OAA) has profoundly changed cancer care, leading patients to manage their chemotherapy treatment on an outpatient basis. The prevention of iatrogenic effects of OAA remains a major concern, especially since their side effects are not less serious than those of intravenous chemotherapy. The ONCORAL programme was set up to secure the management of OAA in cancer patients followed at the Lyon University Hospital. This multidisciplinary programme involves hospital pharmacists, nurses, oncologists, and haematologists, as well as community health professionals. Given the economic stakes that this programme entails for the health system, a medico-economic study was designed. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective controlled study, with individual open-label randomisation. A total of 216 outpatients treated with OAA and at risk of developing a drug-related iatrogenic event, will be randomised (2:1) to undergo follow-up in the ONCORAL programme or usual care. The primary outcome will be the estimation of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (difference in total costs per quality adjusted life years gained) at 12 months between the two groups. The secondary outcomes will be evaluation of OAA management consequences (relative-dose intensity, adherence, adverse drug events, drug-drug interactions, and proven medication errors), evaluation of overall survival and cancer-related quality of life, and patient-reported outcomes in relation to the treatment. A budget impact analysis will be implemented. Patient and health professional satisfaction regarding the ONCORAL programme will be measured. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval to conduct this study was obtained from an Ethics Committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Ile-de-France VI) in October 2019, and from the French data protection agency (Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés), according to the French Law. Trial results will be disseminated at clinical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03660670.

Clinical impact and cost-saving analysis of a comprehensive pharmaceutical care intervention in older patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hospital admission and discharge are at high risk of drug-related problems (DRPs) in older patients with cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical and economic impact of a comprehensive pharmaceutical care intervention (RECAP) to optimize drug therapy in patients with cancer ≥75 years admitted to oncology or geriatric wards. METHOD: RECAP intervention was defined as follows: at admission and discharge, hospital pharmacists conducted comprehensive medication reconciliation and review, identified relevant DRPs and provided optimization recommendations to prescribers; at discharge, pharmacists also provided patient education and shared information with primary care providers. The impact of the intervention was assessed by the rate of implementation of recommendations by the prescribers and the evolution of polypharmacy rate; a peer review of the clinical significance of DRPs was performed by an expert panel of geriatric oncologists and pharmacists. A cost saving analysis compared cost avoided through resolution of DRPs to cost of pharmacist's time. RESULTS: From January 2019 and August 2020, 201 patients were included (median age 80 [75-97] years), 68.7% with solid tumors. DRPs requiring optimization were identified in 70.9% of patients at admission (mean 1.7 DRP/patient) and 47.7% at discharge (0.9 DRP/patient). Most pharmacist recommendations (70.8%) were followed by prescribers, allowing the correction of 1.2 DRP/patient at admission and 0.7 DRP/patient at discharge. Half of resolved DRPs were rated as clinically significant. However, polypharmacy rate was not reduced at discharge. Cost comparison showed $7.2 avoided for $1 invested, with an estimated total net benefit of $354,822 (mean $1766 per patient). CONCLUSIONS: The RECAP model significantly reduces DRPs in hospitalized older patients with cancer. The model was cost saving, confirming the value of implementing it in routine practice.

Bioreactance assessment of cardiac output lacks reliability for the follow-up of patients with pulmonary hypertension.

Cardiac output (CO) is one of the primary prognostic factors evaluated during the follow-up of patients treated for pulmonary hypertension (PH). It is recommended that it be measured using the thermodilution technique during right heart catheterization. The difficulty to perform iterative invasive measurements on the same individual led us to consider a non-invasive option. The aims of the present study were to assess the agreement between CO values obtained using bioreactance (Starling™ SV) and thermodilution, and to evaluate the ability of the bioreactance monitor to detect patients whose CO decreased by more than 15% during follow-up and, accordingly, its usefulness for patient monitoring. A prospective cohort study evaluating the performance of the Starling™ SV monitor was conducted in patients with clinically stable PH. Sixty patients referred for hemodynamic assessment were included. CO was measured using both the thermodilution technique and bioreactance during two follow-up visits. A total of 60 PH patients were included. All datasets were available at the baseline visit (V0) and 50 of them were usable during the follow-up visit (V1). Median [IQR] CO was 4.20 l/min [3.60-4.70] when assessed by bioreactance, and 5.30 l/min [4.57-6.20] by thermodilution (p<0.001). The Spearman correlation coefficient was 0.51 [0.36-0.64], and the average deviation on Bland-Altman plot was -1.25 l/min (95% CI [-1.48-1.01], p<0.001). The ability of the monitor to detect a variation in CO of more than 15% between two follow-up measurements, when such variation existed using thermodilution, was insufficient for clinical practice (AUC = 0.54, 95% CI [0.33-0.75]).

Ranibizumab versus Bevacizumab for Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration: Results from the GEFAL Noninferiority Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative efficacy and safety profile of bevacizumab versus ranibizumab intravitreal injections for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective, noninferiority, double-masked, randomized clinical trial performed in 38 French ophthalmology centers. The noninferiority limit was 5 letters. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥50 years were eligible if they presented with subfoveal neovascular AMD, with best-corrected visual acuity (BVCA) in the study eye of between 20/32 and 20/320 measured on the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart and a lesion area of less than 12 optic disc areas (DA). METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to intravitreal administration of bevacizumab (1.25 mg) or ranibizumab (0.50 mg). Hospital pharmacies were responsible for preparing, blinding, and dispensing treatments. Patients were followed for 1 year, with a loading dose of 3 monthly intravitreal injections, followed by an as-needed regimen (1 injection in case of active disease) for the remaining 9 months with monthly follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean change in visual acuity at 1 year. RESULTS: Between June 2009 and November 2011, 501 patients were randomized. In the per protocol analysis, bevacizumab was noninferior to ranibizumab (bevacizumab minus ranibizumab +1.89 letters; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.16 to +4.93, P < 0.0001). The intention-to-treat analysis was concordant. The mean number of injections was 6.8 in the bevacizumab group and 6.5 in the ranibizumab group (P = 0.39). Both drugs reduced the central subfield macular thickness, with a mean decrease of 95 µm for bevacizumab and 107 µm for ranibizumab (P = 0.27). There were no significant differences in the presence of subretinal or intraretinal fluid at final evaluation, dye leakage on angiogram, or change in choroidal neovascular area. The proportion of patients with serious adverse events was 12.6% in the bevacizumab group and 12.1% in the ranibizumab group (P = 0.88). The proportion of patients with serious systemic or ocular adverse events was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab was noninferior to ranibizumab for visual acuity at 1 year with similar safety profiles. Ranibizumab tended to have a better anatomic outcome. The results are similar to those of previous head-to-head studies.

Perspectives in prospective comparative economic evaluations: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Depending on countries and health systems, medico-economic assessment guidelines recommend to adopt one or several perspectives. We conducted a systematic literature review in order to assess the fit between the country guidelines and the perspectives announced in the published studies. AREAS COVERED: Searches were carried out within the Medline electronic database for records published between 1 January 2000 and 31 August 2020. Only studies from countries in which guidelines recommending a perspective to adopt were available online were selected. EXPERT OPINION: A total of 398 studies were included. Among those studies, 212 (54.9%) adopted as a main perspective a public payer perspective, 141 (36.5%) a societal perspective, 25 (6.5%) a hospital perspective, and 8 (2.1%) a patient perspective. Recommendations in terms of perspective were followed by 267 (67.1%) studies, mainly from Canada, the UK, and the Netherlands. Two thirds of the perspectives chosen in studies were in line with the recommendations. While the choice of a perspective does not question the quality of the studies published, it raises the question of the relevance of the perspectives that must be adapted to the question asked, the pathology studied, and the feasibility of the studies.

Cost-effectiveness of a bone substitute delivering gentamicin in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis of long bones: Protocol for the CONVICTION randomized multicenter study.

Introduction: Chronic osteomyelitis is a serious osteoarticular infection that most often occurs in the long bones, responsible for significant morbidity with the risk of fracture and amputation. Despite advances in both antibiotics and surgical treatment, the probability of recurrence of infection remains at around 20%. Cerament-G (BONESUPPORT AB, Sweden) is a synthetic bone substitute that fills the bone void left by surgery, prevents infection and promotes bone regeneration within this space. Cerament-G also provides the local delivery of high doses of gentamicin over several weeks. Two prospective observational studies described a number of infectious recurrences of 4 and 5% after the use of Cerament-G. Although available in France, Cerament-G is currently not reimbursed and its high cost constitutes a barrier to its use. We hypothesize that the use of Cerament-G will lead to fewer costs to the collectivity while improving patient utility and, as an innovative strategy, will be superior to standard of care on recurrence of infection. Methods and analysis: The Conviction Study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, single blind study conducted in 14 French Reference Centers for Complex Osteoarticular infections. The main objective is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using Cerament-G in the treatment of chronic long bone osteomyelitis by comparing this innovative strategy to standard of care. A cost-utility analysis from the collective perspective will be conducted over a 24-month time horizon after the initial surgery. The outcome for the main medico-economic evaluation will be Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Discussion: The study is being conducted throughout the CRIOAc network in France, in referral centers for the management of complex infections which will facilitate patient recruitment. This study has several limitations: the investigators have to be trained to handle the device, and it was impossible to blind the surgeon. Conclusion: If the use of Cerament-G is demonstrated to be superior to leaving the dead space empty during surgery for patients with stage III chronic long bone osteomyelitis, its use will be recommended to improve the prognosis of such patients, and this device may eventually qualify for reimbursement through the French Health Insurance scheme. Ethics and dissemination: This protocol received authorization from the Ethics Committee CPP Sud Méditerranée V on April 27, 2021 (21.03.10.77652) and the French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products on May 6, 2021 (2020-A02299-30). Results will be disseminated to the scientific community through congresses and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Efficacy and safety of Aflibercept for the treatment of inflammatory choroidal neovascularization: The ALINEA study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 52 weeks in patients with inflammatory choroidal neovascularization (CNV) treated with aflibercept. METHODS: We conducted a prospective non-comparative open-label trial. Following one mandatory intravitreal injection of aflibercept, patients were treated under a pro re nata (PRN) dosing regimen with monthly visits. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were included, but one presented exclusion criteria; 16 patients were followed for the whole 52-week study, and data for the primary endpoint analysis were available for 14. At baseline, mean BCVA and mean central retinal thickness (CRT) were 64.53 (±19.64) letters and 351.79 (±97.77) µm, respectively. At 52 weeks, the mean change in BCVA was +9.50 (±12.90) letters [95%CI = +2.05-+16.95]. One patient had lost more than 15-letters at 24 weeks, and another one at 52 weeks. CRT change was -62.77 (±100.73) µm at 24 weeks and -66.53 (±97.47) µm at 52 weeks. There was a mean number of 3.56 (±3.29) intravitreal injections at 52 weeks (min = 1; max = 12). No serious ocular adverse events related to the treatment were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that aflibercept is clinically effective, both anatomically and functionally in the treatment of inflammatory CNV. Following the first injection, the PRN strategy appears sufficient for treating most choroidal neovessels.

Microperimetry to predict disease progression in eyes at high risk of age-related macular degeneration disease: The PREVISION study.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to determine whether microperimetric parameters could predict the progression of an eye at high risk of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) at 24 months. METHODS: We conducted a multicentric prospective non-comparative open-label study including patients with one eye in stage 4 of the Age-Related Eye Disease Study Group (AREDS) classification, and the other eye in AREDS stage 3 (study eye). A microperimetry examination (MAIA™, CenterVue, Padova, Italy) was performed at baseline and every 6 months during the 2-year follow-up. At the end of the follow-up, each study eye was classified as 'progressive' (i.e. AREDS stage 4) or 'non-progressive' (i.e. AREDS stage 3). RESULTS: A total of 147 patients were analysed, of which 30.6% progressed from AREDS stage 3 to stage 4. The microperimetry criterion 'mean retinal sensitivity' was significantly different at baseline between non-progressive and progressive eyes (p = 0.022), with lower values for the latter. With a threshold for mean retinal sensitivity set at 24.7 dB, diagnostic sensitivity was 80% [95%CI (65.4-90.4)], specificity was 30.4% [95%CI (21.7-40.3)], positive predictive value was 33.6% [95%CI (24.8-43.4)], and negative predictive value was 77.5% [95%CI (61.5-89.2)]. In the multivariate analysis including microperimetric parameters and other routine ophthalmologic examinations, mean retinal sensitivity was the only predictive parameter statistically associated with progression (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are encouraging as regards the use of microperimetry, and mean retinal sensitivity value in particular, to predict the 2-year risk of progression to AREDS stage 4 eye.

Medical device assessment: scientific evidence examined by the French national agency for health - a descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Scientific evidence supports decision-making on the use of implantable medical devices (IMDs) in clinical practice, but IMDs are thought to be far less investigated than drugs. In the USA, studies have shown that approval process of high-risk medical devices was often based on insufficiently robust studies, suggesting that evidence prior to marketing may not be adequate. This study aimed to ascertain level of evidence available for IMDs access to reimbursement in France. METHODS: The objective was to examine the scientific evidence used for IMDs assessment by the French National Authority for Health. We collected all public documents summarising supportive clinical data and opinions concerning IMDs issued in 2008. An opinion qualifies the expected benefit (EB) of the IMD assessed as sufficient or insufficient, and if sufficient, the level of improvement of the expected benefit (IEB) on a scale from major (level I) to no improvement (level V). For each opinion, the study with the highest level of evidence of efficacy data, and its design were collected, or, where no studies were available, any other data sources used to establish the opinion. RESULTS: One hundred and two opinions were analysed, with 72 reporting at least one study used for assessment (70.6%). When considering the study with the highest level of evidence: 34 were clinical non-comparative studies (47.2%); 29 were clinical comparative studies of which 25 randomised controlled trials (40.3%); 5 were meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (6.9%); and 4 were systematic literature reviews (5.6%). The opinions were significantly different according to the study design (p < 0.001). The most frequent design for insufficient EB, IEB level V and IEB level IV was a non-comparative study (10/19, 52.6%; 15/24, 62.5%; and 8/15, 53.3%; respectively). For the 30 opinions with no supporting clinical study, 16 (53.3%) were based on an expert-based process, 9 (30.0%) were based on the conclusions of a previous opinion (all concluding IEB level V), and 5 (16.7%) reported no data (concluding insufficient EB for 4 and IEB level V for 1). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that level of evidence of clinical evaluation of IMDs is low and needs to be improved.

Early Predictive Factors of Visual Loss at 1 Year in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration under Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor.

PURPOSE: To evaluate early predictive factors of visual loss in patients treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections under an as-needed regimen for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis from the randomized controlled trial Groupe d'Evaluation Français Avastin versus Lucentis (GEFAL). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 393 patients with neovascular AMD. METHODS: The present analysis is based on 1-year data from patients included in the study. Patients were separately categorized according to the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) change at 3 months and 1 year into 3 trajectories: (1) patients with no vision loss ≥5 letters at 3 months and 1 year (absence of loss ≥5 letters); (2) patients with no vision loss ≥5 letters at 3 months but loss ≥5 letters at 1 year (secondary loss ≥5 letters); and (3) patients with vision loss ≥5 letters at 3 months and 1 year (initial loss ≥5 letters). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The following factors were evaluated at baseline and 3 months: age, sex, BCVA, presence of fluid, central macular thickness, angiographic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) subtype, CNV area measured in disc area on fluorescein angiography, and number of intravitreal injections. RESULTS: An absence of loss ≥5 letters was found in 225 patients (57.3%), a secondary loss ≥5 letters after 3 months was found in 109 patients (27.7%), and an initial loss ≥5 letters was found in 59 patients (15%). Baseline characteristics were comparable among the 3 groups except for the total CNV area, which was larger in the initial and secondary loss groups (P = 0.0412). At 3 months, a significant association was found between presence of subretinal fluid (SRF) (P = 0.0318) and vision loss ≥5 letters, and an even stronger significant association between the presence of intraretinal fluid (IRF) (P = 0.0066) and vision loss ≥5 letters. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, we found that a large CNV area at baseline was significantly associated with initial or secondary loss of visual acuity ≥5 letters despite anti-VEGF injection. The presence of fluid, both SRF and IRF, at 3 months was found in patients with poorer trajectories.