A 2-year prospective randomized controlled trial of intravitreal bevacizumab or laser therapy (BOLT) in the management of diabetic macular edema: 24-month data: report 3

Beyond VEGF: Angiopoietin-Tie Signaling Pathway in Diabetic Retinopathy

Complications from diabetic retinopathy such as diabetic macular edema (DME) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) constitute leading causes of preventable vision loss in working-age patients. Since vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays a major role in the pathogenesis of these complications, VEGF inhibitors have been the cornerstone of their treatment. Anti-VEGF monotherapy is an effective but burdensome treatment for DME. However, due to the intensive and burdensome treatment, most patients in routine clinical practice are undertreated, and therefore, their outcomes are compromised. Even in adequately treated patients, persistent DME is reported anywhere from 30% to 60% depending on the drug used. PDR is currently treated by anti-VEGF, panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) or a combination of both. Similarly, a number of eyes, despite these treatments, continue to progress to tractional retinal detachment and vitreous hemorrhage. Clearly there are other molecular pathways other than VEGF involved in the pathogenesis of DME and PDR. One of these pathways is the angiopoietin-Tie signaling pathway. Angiopoietin 1 (Ang1) plays a major role in maintaining vascular quiescence and stability. It acts as a molecular brake against vascular destabilization and inflammation that is usually promoted by angiopoietin 2 (Ang2). Several pathological conditions including chronic hyperglycemia lead to Ang2 upregulation. Recent regulatory approval of the bi-specific antibody, faricimab, may improve long term outcomes in DME. It targets both the Ang/Tie and VEGF pathways. The YOSEMITE and RHINE were multicenter, double-masked, randomized non-inferiority phase 3 clinical trials that compared faricimab to aflibercept in eyes with center-involved DME. At 12 months of follow-up, faricimab demonstrated non-inferior vision gains, improved anatomic outcomes and a potential for extended dosing when compared to aflibercept. The 2-year results of the YOSEMITE and RHINE trials demonstrated that the anatomic and functional results obtained at the 1 year follow-up were maintained. Short term outcomes of previously treated and treatment-naive eyes with DME that were treated with faricimab during routine clinical practice suggest a beneficial effect of faricimab over other agents. Targeting of Ang2 has been reported by several other means including VE-PTP inhibitors, integrin binding peptide and surrobodies.

Cardiovascular Outcomes with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy in Patients with Diabetes: A Real-World Data Analysis

BACKGROUND

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy is commonly used intravitreally for diabetic proliferative retinopathy, but when used systemically for treating cancers, an excess of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events has been noted. The latter is of concern for people with diabetes, who are at higher risk of CVD. This study aims to explore the relationship between incident CVD and intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy in patients with diabetes, compared to other therapies, using a large real-world global federated dataset.

METHODS

Data were analysed using TriNetX, a global electronic medical real-world ecosystem. The study included adults with diabetes and excluded those with a history of CVD prior to the time window of data extraction. Patients were categorised into two cohorts: anti-VEGF therapy or control cohort (laser or steroid therapies). The cohorts were 1:1 propensity score-matched for age, sex, ethnicity, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, HbA1c, and cardiovascular medications. Outcomes analysed at 1, 6 and 12 months were: (1) mortality; (2) acute myocardial infarction (MI); (3) cerebral infarction; and (4) heart failure. Relative risk analyses were performed using the built-in R statistical computing platform on TriNetX.

RESULTS

In patients with diabetes (n = 2205; mean age 58.8 ± 15.8, Std diff 0.05; 56% male), anti-VEGF therapy was associated with a numerical but non-statistically significant increased CVD risk over 1, 6, and 12 months: Mortality over 1 month (RR 1; 95% CI 0.42, 2.40), 6 months (RR 1.46; 95% CI 0.72, 2.95) and 12 months (RR 1.41; 95% CI 0.88, 2.27). There was no excess of acute MI over 1 (RR n/a: not applicable; 0/0: 0 events in the anti-VEGF group/0 events in the control group), 6 and 12 months (RR n/a; 0/10 events); cerebral infarction over 1, 6 months (RR n/a; 0/0 events), and 12 months (RR n/a; 0/10); and heart failure over 1 month (RR n/a; 0/0 events), 6 months (RR 1; 95% CI 0.42, 2.40) and 12 months (RR 1; 95% CI 0.42, 2.34).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistically significant risk of cardiovascular-related events in the short or medium term in patients with diabetes who received intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy, despite a small increase in the number of CVD events. Our study supports the real-world safety of intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy in patients with diabetes free of baseline CVD.

The Economic Burden of Diabetic Retinopathy in Jordan: Cost Analysis and Associated Factors

Objective

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of visual loss worldwide in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). The aims of our study are to describe the costs associated with (DR) and to evaluate its economic impact in Jordan.

Methods

Retrospectively, we included all patients with DM and classified them according to the severity of DR. Data regarding medical history, ophthalmic history, stage of DR, presence of DME, and the ophthalmic procedures and operations were collected. The total DR-related cost was measured as a direct medical cost for the outpatient and inpatient services.

Results

Two hundred and twenty-nine patients were included in the study. Only 49.7% of the patients presented without DR, and 21% presented with diabetic macular edema (DME) unilaterally or bilaterally. The DR-related cost was significantly associated with insulin-based regimens, longer duration of DM, higher HbA1c levels, worse stage of DR at presentation, the presence of DME at presentation, the presence of glaucoma, and increased mean number of intravitreal injections, laser sessions, and surgical operations. Multivariate analysis should the presenting stage of DR, presence of DME, and the presence of DME be the independent factors affecting the DR-related cost.

Conclusion

This study is the first study to be conducted in Jordan and encourages us to establish a screening program for DR for earlier detection and treatment. DM control and treatment compliance will reduce the heavy costs of the already exhausted healthcare and financial system.

Management of treatment-naïve diabetic macular edema patients: Review of real-world clinical data

The high prevalence of Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a real global health problem. Its complex pathophysiology involves different pathways. Over the last decade, the introduction of intravitreal treatments has dramatically changed the management and prognosis of DME. Among the different treatment options, inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) and intravitreal steroids implants represent the first-line therapy of DME. We conducted a review of electronic databases to compile the available evidence about the clinical management of DME in a clinical setting, with a special focus on treatment-naïve patients. Anti-VEGF therapies represent a valuable option for treating DME patients. However, many patients do not respond properly to this treatment and, due to its administration regimen, many patients receive suboptimal treatment in real life. Current evidence demonstrated that in patients with DME, DEX-i improved significantly both anatomic and visual outcomes. Besides eyes with insufficient anti-VEGF respond or recalcitrant DME cases, DEX-i can be effectively and safely used in treatment-naïve DME patients as first line therapy. DEX-i may be considered first line therapy in different clinical scenarios, such as DME eyes with a greater inflammatory component, patients with cardiovascular events, vitrectomized eyes, or those requiring cataract surgery. In conclusion, there are still many points for improvement pending in the clinical management of the patient with DME. Since DME treatment must follow a patient-tailored approach, selecting the best therapeutic approach for each patient requires a good understanding of the pathophysiology of DME.

Real-world effects of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injection frequency on visual outcomes in patients with diabetic macular oedema

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections are often administered less frequently in real-world treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO) than what was studied in clinical trials. This study aims to characterise real-world DMO treatment patterns and the effect of treatment intervals on patient outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN/PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 291 patients with DMO treated with anti-VEGF therapy. 12- and 24-month best visual acuity (BVA) and central subfield thickness (CST) were compared between injection interval groups, which were determined by averaging the two most recent injection intervals. Multiple linear regressions were performed to identify factors associated with injection interval, BVA, and CST.

RESULTS

48.8% of patients received injections less than or equal to every 8 weeks (≤ q8w), 27.5% between every 8 to 12 weeks (q8-12w), and 23.7% greater than every 12 weeks (> q12w). Baseline CST was similar (p = 0.32), but BVA differed significantly in q8-12w patients (p = 0.0095). BVA and CST at 12 months were similar, but q8-12w patients experienced greater 12-month BVA improvement (7.36 ± 12.4 letters) than > q12w patients (1.26 ± 12.3 letters; p = 0.0056). 24-month BVA and CST changes were similar between groups (p = 0.30 and 0.87). Baseline BVA, HbA1c, and sex were associated with 12-month BVA, and baseline BVA and CST were associated with 12-month CST.

CONCLUSION

Many patients experienced improvements in BVA and CST over 12 months of treatment despite receiving less frequent anti-VEGF therapy than recommended in the pivotal trials. The present study showed that extended treatment intervals with bevacizumab were effective in preserving vision of many individuals with high baseline BVA.

The Treatment of Diabetic Retinal Edema with Intravitreal Steroids: How and When

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a common complication of diabetes mellitus and a leading cause of visual impairment worldwide. It is defined as the diabetes-related accumulation of fluid, proteins, and lipids, with retinal thickening, within the macular area. DME affects a significant proportion of individuals with diabetes, with the prevalence increasing with disease duration and severity. It is estimated that approximately 25-30% of diabetic patients will develop DME during their lifetime. Poor glycemic control, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes duration, and genetic predisposition are recognized as risk factors for the development and progression of DME. Although the exact pathophysiology is still not completely understood, it has been demonstrated that chronic hyperglycemia triggers a cascade of biochemical processes, including increased oxidative stress, inflammation, activation of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), cellular dysfunction, and apoptosis, with breakdown of the blood-retinal barriers and fluid accumulation within the macular area. Early diagnosis and appropriate management of DME are crucial for improving visual outcomes. Although the control of systemic risk factors still remains the most important strategy in DME treatment, intravitreal pharmacotherapy with anti-VEGF molecules or steroids is currently considered the first-line approach in DME patients, whereas macular laser photocoagulation and pars plana vitrectomy may be useful in selected cases. Available intravitreal steroids, including triamcinolone acetonide injections and dexamethasone and fluocinolone acetonide implants, exert their therapeutic effect by reducing inflammation, inhibiting VEGF expression, stabilizing the blood-retinal barrier and thus reducing vascular permeability. They have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing macular edema and improving visual outcomes in DME patients but are associated with a high risk of intraocular pressure elevation and cataract development, so their use requires an accurate patient selection. This manuscript aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the pathology, epidemiology, risk factors, physiopathology, clinical features, treatment mechanisms of actions, treatment options, prognosis, and ongoing clinical studies related to the treatment of DME, with particular consideration of intravitreal steroids therapy.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy and retinal non-perfusion in diabetic retinopathy: A meta-analysis of randomised trials

PURPOSE

Retinal non-perfusion (RNP) is fundamental to disease onset and progression in diabetic retinopathy (DR). Whether anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy can modify RNP progression is unclear. This investigation quantified the impact of anti-VEGF therapy on RNP progression compared with laser or sham at 12 months.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were performed; Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 4th March 2022. The change in any continuous measure of RNP at 12 months and 24 months was the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Outcomes were reported utilising standardised mean differences (SMD). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version-2 and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines informed risk of bias and certainty of evidence assessments.

RESULTS

Six RCTs (1296 eyes) and three RCTs (1131 eyes) were included at 12 and 24 months, respectively. Meta-analysis demonstrated that RNP progression may be slowed with anti-VEGF therapy compared with laser/sham at 12 months (SMD: -0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.29, -0.06; p = 0.003; I2  = 0; GRADE rating: LOW) and 24-months (SMD: -0.21; 95% CI: -0.37, -0.05; p = 0.009; I2  = 28%; GRADE rating: LOW). The certainty of evidence was downgraded due to indirectness and due to imprecision.

CONCLUSION

Anti-VEGF treatment may slightly impact the pathophysiologic process of progressive RNP in DR. The dosing regimen and the absence of diabetic macular edema may impact this potential effect. Future trials are needed to increase the precision of the effect and inform the association between RNP progression and clinically important events.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42022314418.

Diabetic Macular Edema Management: A Review of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Therapies

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a major cause of vision impairment in diabetic individuals, characterized by fluid accumulation in the macula due to a breakdown of the blood-retinal barrier (BRB). This review article explores the role of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies in the management of DME. Anti-VEGF treatments, including ranibizumab, bevacizumab, and aflibercept, have revolutionized DME management by targeting VEGF, a key mediator in DME pathogenesis. We critically examined the efficacy of these therapies in reducing macular edema and improving visual acuity, assessed their safety and tolerability, and explored the variability in treatment response. The review highlights the latest advancements and future directions in anti-VEGF therapy, including novel drug delivery systems and emerging treatment paradigms. By providing a comprehensive overview of current anti-VEGF therapies, this review seeks to inform clinical practice, guide future research, and contribute to improved patient outcomes in DME management.

[Pharmacoeconomic analysis of anti-angiogenic drugs for diabetic macular edema]

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a degenerative disease of the macular area in diabetes mellitus and can lead to vision loss, disability, and significantly reduced quality of life. Faricimab is the only bispecific antibody for DME therapy that targets two pathogenic pathways (Ang-2 and VEGF-A).

PURPOSE

This study comparatively evaluates the clinical and economic feasibility of faricimab and other angiogenesis inhibitors in patients with DME.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This article analyzed literature on the efficacy and safety of intravitreal injections (IVI) of ranibizumab 0.5 mg, aflibercept 2 mg, and faricimab 6 mg. A model of medical care was developed for patients with DME receiving anti-angiogenic therapy. Pharmacoeconomic analysis was performed using cost minimization and budget impact analysis (BIA) methods. Modeling time horizon was 2 years. The research was performed from the perspective of the healthcare system of the Russian Federation.

RESULTS

The efficacy and safety of faricimab in a personalized regimen (up to one IVI in 16 weeks) are comparable to those of aflibercept and ranibizumab, administered in various regimens. The use of faricimab is associated with the lowest number of IVIs. Over 2 years, the maximum costs of drug therapy were associated with the use of ranibizumab (about 914 thousand rubles), while the minimum costs were associated with the use of faricimab (614 thousand rubles). The reduction in inpatient care costs with faricimab therapy was 36% compared to aflibercept (216 and 201 thousand rubles in inpatient and day hospitals, respectively) and 82% compared to ranibizumab (486 and 451 thousand rubles in inpatient and day hospitals, respectively). BIA demonstrated that the use of faricimab will reduce the economic burden on the healthcare system by 11.3 billion rubles (9.8%) over 2 years.

CONCLUSION

The use of faricimab is a cost-effective approach to treatment of adult patients with DME in Russia.

Exploring the role of retinal fluid as a biomarker for the management of diabetic macular oedema

Anti-VEGF therapies are associated with significant gains in visual acuity and fluid resolution in the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO) and have become the standard of care. However, despite their efficacy, outcomes can be unpredictable, vary widely between individual eyes, and a large proportion of patients have persistent fluid following initial treatment, with a negative impact on visual outcomes. Anatomical parameters measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), in addition to visual acuity, are key to monitoring treatment effectiveness and guiding retreatment decisions; however, existing guidelines on the management of DMO lack clear recommendations for interpretation of OCT parameters, or proposed thresholds of various markers to guide retreatment decisions. Although central subfield thickness (CSFT) has been widely used as a marker for retreatment decisions in clinical trials in DMO, and a reduction in CSFT has generally been shown to accompany improvements in best-corrected visual acuity with treatment, analyses of the relationship between these parameters show that the correlation is small to moderate. A more direct relationship can be seen between an increased magnitude of CSFT fluctuations over time and poorer visual acuity, suggesting that control of CSFT could be important in maximising visual outcomes. The relationship between visual outcomes and qualitatively assessed intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid is also unclear, although quantitative assessments of fluid parameters suggest that untreated intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid negatively impact visual outcomes. These findings highlight a need for clearer guidelines on the management of retinal fluid to improve visual outcomes for patients with DMO.

Switching to Conbercept in Diabetic Macular Edema After Unsatisfactory Response to Previous Intravitreal Injection of Ranibizumab

Objective

To assess the functional and anatomical effects of transitioning to conbercept intravitreal injection (IVC) treatment in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) who had inadequate responses to prior anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections.

Methods

We retrospectively included eyes with persistent DME after at least 3 injections of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR). The analysis included the assessment of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) during 6 months after the switch.

Results

A total of 30 patients (30 eyes) were included. CMT dropped sharply from 437.8±40.67μm at baseline to 363.59±45.09,312.52 ± 39.15, 278.51 ± 37.92, and 292.59 ± 38.09 after 1, 2, 3 and 6 months of IVC, respectively (p <0.001). BCVA in log MAR units was significantly improved from 0.73±0.15 at baseline to 0.50±0.09,0.46±0.72, 0.40±0.06 and 0.48±0.04 after 1, 2, 3 and 6 months, respectively (p <0.001).

Conclusion

Switching to Conbercept effectively improved visual and anatomical structure in DME patients who had not responded satisfactorily to previous anti-VEGF injections.

From randomised controlled trials to real-world data: Clinical evidence to guide management of diabetic macular oedema

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are generally considered the gold-standard for providing scientific evidence for treatments' effectiveness and safety but their findings may not always be generalisable to the broader population treated in routine clinical practice. RCTs include highly selected patient populations that fit specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Although they may have a lower level of certainty than RCTs on the evidence hierarchy, real-world data (RWD), such as observational studies, registries and databases, provide real-world evidence (RWE) that can complement RCTs. For example, RWE may help satisfy requirements for a new indication of an already approved drug and help us better understand long-term treatment effectiveness, safety and patterns of use in clinical practice. Many countries have set up registries, observational studies and databases containing information on patients with retinal diseases, such as diabetic macular oedema (DMO). These DMO RWD have produced significant clinical evidence in the past decade that has changed the management of DMO. RWD and medico-administrative databases are a useful resource to identify low frequency safety signals. They often have long-term follow-up with a large number of patients and minimal exclusion criteria. We will discuss improvements in healthcare information exchange technologies, such as blockchain technology and FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources), which will connect and extend databases already available. These registries can be linked with existing or emerging retinal imaging modalities using artificial intelligence to aid diagnosis, treatment decisions and provide prognostic information. The results of RCTs and RWE are combined to provide evidence-based guidelines.

The evolving therapeutic landscape of diabetic retinopathy

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness worldwide. Recent decades have seen rapid progress in the management of diabetic eye disease, evolving from pituitary ablation to photocoagulation and intravitreal pharmacotherapy. The advent of effective intravitreal drugs inhibiting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) marked a new era in DR therapy. Sustained innovation has since produced several promising biologics targeting angiogenesis, inflammation, oxidative stress, and neurodegeneration.

AREAS COVERED

This review surveys traditional, contemporary, and emerging therapeutics for DR, with an emphasis on anti-VEGF therapies, receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, angiopoietin-Tie2 pathway inhibitors, integrin pathway inhibitors, gene therapy 'biofactory' approaches, and novel systemic therapies. Some of these investigational therapies are being delivered intravitreally via sustained release technologies for extended durability. Other investigational agents are being delivered non-invasively via topical and systemic routes. These strategies hold promise for early and long-lasting treatment of DR.

EXPERT OPINION

The evolving therapeutic landscape of DR is rapidly expanding our toolkit for the effective and durable treatment of blinding eye disease. However, further research is required to validate the efficacy of novel therapeutics and characterize real world outcomes.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular oedema: a network meta-analysis

Background

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) can reduce oedema, improve vision, and prevent further visual loss. These drugs have replaced laser photocoagulation as the standard of care for people with DMO. In the previous update of this review, we found moderate-quality evidence that, at 12 months, aflibercept was slightly more effective than ranibizumab and bevacizumab for improving vision in people with DMO, although the difference may have been clinically insignificant (less than 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), or five Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters, or one ETDRS line).

Objectives

The objective of this updated review was to compare the effectiveness and safety of the different anti-VEGF drugs in RCTs at longer followup (24 months).

Search methods

We searched various electronic databases on 8 July 2022.

Selection criteria

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any anti-angiogenic drug with an anti-VEGF mechanism of action versus another anti-VEGF drug, another treatment, sham, or no treatment in people with DMO.

Data collection and analysis

We used standard Cochrane methods for pairwise meta-analysis and we augmented this evidence using network meta-analysis (NMA) methods. We used the Stata 'network' meta-analysis package for all analyses. We used the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) web application to grade the certainty of the evidence.

Main results

We included 23 studies (13 with industry funding) that enrolled 3513 people with DMO (median central retinal thickness (CRT) 460 microns, interquartile range (IQR) 424 to 482) and moderate vision loss (median best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) 0.48 logMAR, IQR 0.42 to 0.55. One study that investigated ranibizumab versus sham and one study that mainly enrolled people with subclinical DMO and normal BCVA were not suitable for inclusion in the efficacy NMA. Consistent with the previous update of this review, we used ranibizumab as the reference drug for efficacy, and control (including laser, observation, and sham) as the reference for systemic safety. Eight trials provided data on the primary outcome (change in BCVA at 24 months, in logMAR: lower is better). We found no evidence of a difference between the following interventions and ranibizumab alone: aflibercept (mean difference (MD) -0.05 logMAR, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.12 to 0.02; moderate certainty); bevacizumab (MD -0.01 logMAR, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.10; low certainty), brolucizumab (MD 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.07; low certainty), ranibizumab plus deferred laser (MD 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.10; low certainty), and ranibizumab plus prompt laser (MD 0.03 logMAR, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.09; very low certainty). We also analysed BCVA change at 12 months, finding moderate-certainty evidence of increased efficacy with brolucizumab (MD -0.07 logMAR, 95%CI -0.10 to -0.03 logMAR), faricimab (MD -0.08 logMAR, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.05), and aflibercept (MD -0.07 logMAR, 95 % CI -0.10 to -0.04) compared to ranibizumab alone, but the difference could be clinically insignificant. Compared to ranibizumab alone, NMA of six trials showed no evidence of a difference with aflibercept (moderate certainty), bevacizumab (low certainty), or ranibizumab with prompt (very low certainty) or deferred laser (low certainty) regarding improvement by three or more ETDRS lines at 24 months. There was moderate-certainty evidence of greater CRT reduction at 24 months with brolucizumab (MD -23 microns, 95% CI -65 to -1 9) and aflibercept (MD -26 microns, 95% CI -53 to 0.9) compared to ranibizumab. There was moderate-certainty evidence of lesser CRT reduction with bevacizumab (MD 28 microns, 95% CI 0 to 56), ranibizumab plus deferred laser (MD 63 microns, 95% CI 18 to 109), and ranibizumab plus prompt laser (MD 72 microns, 95% CI 25 to 119) compared with ranibizumab alone. Regarding all-cause mortality at the longest available follow-up (20 trials), we found no evidence of increased risk of death for any drug compared to control, although effects were in the direction of an increase, and clinically relevant increases could not be ruled out. The certainty of this evidence was low for bevacizumab (risk ratio (RR) 2.10, 95% CI 0.75 to 5.88), brolucizumab (RR 2.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 12.58), faricimab (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.45 to 8.00), ranibizumab (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.34), and very low for conbercept (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.81) and aflibercept (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.77). Estimates for Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration arterial thromboembolic events at 24 months did not suggest an increase with any drug compared to control, but the NMA was overall incoherent and the evidence was of low or very low certainty. Ocular adverse events were rare and poorly reported and could not be assessed in NMAs.

Authors' conclusions

There is limited evidence of the comparative efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF drugs beyond one year of follow-up. We found no clinically important differences in visual outcomes at 24 months in people with DMO, although there were differences in CRT change. We found no evidence that any drug increases all-cause mortality compared to control, but estimates were very imprecise. Evidence from RCTs may not apply to real-world practice, where people in need of antiangiogenic treatment are often under-treated, and the individuals exposed to these drugs may be less healthy than trial participants.

Real-World Outcomes of Anti-VEGF Therapy in Diabetic Macular Oedema: Barriers to Treatment Success and Implications for Low/Lower-Middle-Income Countries

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is the leading cause of vision loss associated with diabetic eye disease. The exponential increase in the diabetic population and thus, of DMO is an impetus for optimizing the management of DMO. One major challenge in DMO management is the discrepancy between treatment outcomes seen in clinical trials and the real world. Contrary to the homogeneity, better patient motivation and shorter study durations seen in randomised control trials, routine clinical practice is fraught with more diverse populations, undertreatment and variable compliance with long-term therapy. Under both circumstances, this review aims to compare efficacy outcomes and adverse events of DMO therapies within the scope of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medications, specifically the commonly used ones-bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept. Impediments and methods to achieve better treatment outcomes in the real world will be addressed to achieve better outcomes. Low- to lower-middle-income countries are faced with even more barriers which range from paucity of data on epidemiology and treatment response to scarce human and financial resources to poorer national level attention and then basic issues like transportation. Additionally, to address the lack of a global consensus in DMO treatment, this review generates and recommends, for clinical and research purposes, an up-to-date consensus algorithm for DMO management universally. Underpinned by results from clinical trials and recent guidelines, this therapeutic flowchart can be utilised in various resource settings including low- and lower-middle-income countries where affordability is a major deterrent to treatment access.

Prospective, Observational, Multicenter, Real-World Study of the Efficacy, Safety, and Pattern of Use of the Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant in Diabetic Macular Edema in France: Short-Term Outcomes of LOUVRE 3

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate real-world efficacy, safety, and treatment patterns with the dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX) in diabetic macular edema (DME) in France.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicenter, observational, noncomparative, post-reimbursement study, consecutively enrolled patients with DME had a baseline evaluation on day 0. Those treated with DEX on day 0 were to be reevaluated at week 6 and months 6, 12, 18, and 24. DEX retreatment and/or alternative therapies were allowed during follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the maximum best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gain from baseline during follow-up. Secondary outcome measures included time to maximum BCVA gain, patients (%) with prespecified BCVA gains from baseline at each visit, maximum central retinal thickness (CRT) reduction from baseline, patients (%) with CRT reduction ≥ 20% from baseline at each visit, patients (%) with DME resolution (per investigator judgement), and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Of 112 patients/eyes with DME for 3.5 years (mean) at baseline, 80 (including 86.1% previously treated) received DEX on day 0 and were analyzed for efficacy. Early study termination precluded collection of ≥ 12-month efficacy data. Patients received 1.4 DEX injections over 8.3 months (averages). The maximum BCVA gain from baseline was 3.6 letters, reached after 77.2 days (averages); 24.6% (week 6) and 15.0% (month 6) of patients experienced ≥ 10-letter BCVA gains from baseline. The mean maximum CRT reduction from baseline was -146.4 µm; 61.4% (week 6) and 36.0% (month 6) of patients had CRT reductions ≥ 20% from baseline, and 68.1% reported DME resolution at least once during follow-up. Ocular hypertension (n = 8, 12.1%) was the most frequent treatment-related AE.

CONCLUSIONS

LOUVRE 3 confirmed that DEX improves BCVA and CRT, even in a patient population that had predominantly received DEX before enrollment in the study, and showed that DME resolution was observed during follow-up. DEX tolerability was consistent with published data, supporting treatment benefits in DME.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03003416.

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in treatment-naïve diabetic macular oedema: findings from the prospective, multicentre, AUSSIEDEX study

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX; Ozurdex) monotherapy in the patient subgroup of the AUSSIEDEX study with treatment-naïve diabetic macular oedema (DME).

METHODS

The open-label, prospective, phase 4, real-world study included pseudophakic eyes and phakic eyes scheduled for cataract surgery that were treatment-naïve or non-responsive to antivascular endothelial growth factors. No eyes were excluded based on baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) or central subfield retinal thickness (CRT). After the initial DEX injection at the baseline visit, reinjection was permitted at ≥16-week intervals. Week-16 and week-52 visits were mandatory. Primary endpoints were changes in mean BCVA and CRT from baseline to 52 weeks.

RESULTS

Of 200 eyes enrolled in the AUSSIEDEX study, 57 were treatment-naïve. Baseline mean BCVA was 58.8 letters and baseline mean CRT was 418.6 µm; changes in mean BCVA and CRT from baseline to 52 weeks in this subgroup were 3.4 letters (p=0.042) and -89.6 µm (p<0.001), respectively, with a mean 2.5 injections. The change in mean CRT from baseline was -55.8 µm at week 16 (p<0.001). The most common adverse event was increased intraocular pressure (IOP), with 20.0% of eyes requiring IOP-lowering medication. One patient was discontinued due to increased IOP. No eyes required filtration surgery. No serious, treatment-related ocular adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

In this largest prospective, real-world study of DEX monotherapy for DME to date, DEX significantly improved CRT and BCVA at 52 weeks in treatment-naïve eyes, without new safety concerns, supporting DEX use in treatment-naïve DME.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02731911.

Treatment results of diabetic macular edema with different choroidal thickness with intravitreal anti vascular endothelial growth factor

PURPOSE

To compare the results of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) with different choroidal thicknesses.

METHODS

The files of patients diagnosed with DME and treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF were reviewed retrospectively. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), choroidal thickness (CT), and macular thickness (MT) measurements were recorded before and after treatment. All patients included in the study were divided into 3 groups according to the initial subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT). Group 1 included 35 patients with SFCT ≤ 220, group 2 included 27 patients with SFCT > 220 ≤ 270, and group 3 included 30 patients with SFCT > 270. The total number of anti-VEGF administered during the follow-up at the last examination, baseline and post-treatment CT, MT, and BCVA measurements were statistically compared in all 3 groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 61.9 ± 10.2 in group 1, 58.7 ± 8.7 in group 2, and 57.0 ± 6.5 in group 3. The mean anti-VEGF count in group 1 was significantly lower than group 2 and group 3 (p = 0.004, p = 0.006). In Group 1, BCVA improved significantly after treatment compared to baseline (p = 0.001). In Groups 2 and 3, BCVA did not change significantly after treatment compared to baseline (p = 0.320, p = 0.104). After treatment, central macular thickness decreased significantly in group 1 compared to baseline, while central macular thickness did not show a significant change from baseline in group 2 and group 3 after treatment (p = 0.003, p = 0.059, p = 0.590).

CONCLUSION

In our study, we observed that the treatment needs of our DME patients with different choroidal thicknesses were different. In patients with DME, the initial choroidal thickness may help determine the need for follow-up and treatment.

VEGF-targeting drugs for the treatment of retinal neovascularization in diabetic retinopathy

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the most common microangiopathic complication of diabetes mellitus, representing a major cause of visual impairment in developed countries. Proliferative DR (PDR) represents the last stage of this extremely complex retinal disease, characterized by the development of neovascularization induced by the abnormal production and release of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The term VEGF includes different isoforms; VEGF-A represents one of the most important pathogenic factors of DR. Anti-VEGF intravitreal therapies radically changed the outcome of DR, due to combined anti-angiogenic and anti-edematous activities. Nowadays, several anti-VEGF molecules exist, characterized by different pharmacological features and duration. With respect to PDR, although anti-VEGF treatments represented a fundamental step forward in the management of this dramatic complication, a big debate is present in the literature regarding the role of anti-VEGF as substitute of panretinal photocoagulation or if these two approaches may be used in combination. In the present review, we provided an update on VEGF isoforms and their role in DR pathogenesis, on current anti-VEGF molecules and emerging new drugs, and on the current management strategies of PDR. There is an overall agreement regarding the relative advantage provided by anti-VEGF, especially looking at the management of PDR patients requiring vitrectomy, with respect to laser. Based on the current data, laser approaches might be avoided when a perfectly planned anti-VEGF therapeutic strategy can be adopted. Conversely, laser treatment may have a role for those patients unable to guarantee enough compliance to anti-VEGF injections.Key messagesVEGF increased production, stimulated by retinal hypoperfusion and ischaemia, is a major pathogenic factor of neovascular complication onset in diabetic retinopathy and of DR stages progression.Nowadays, several anti-VEGF molecules are available in clinical practice and other molecules are currently under investigation. Each anti-VEGF molecule is characterized by different targets and may interact with multiple biochemical pathways within the eye.All the data agreed in considering anti-VEGF molecules as a first line choice for the management of diabetic retinopathy. Laser treatments may have a role in selected advanced cases and for those patients unable to guarantee enough compliance to intravitreal treatments schemes.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of intravitreal VEGF inhibitors on cardiorenal outcomes

BACKGROUND

Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFi) have transformed the treatment of many retinal diseases, including diabetic maculopathy. Increasing evidence supports systemic absorption of intravitreal VEGFi and development of significant cardiorenal side effects.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42020189037) of randomised controlled trials of intravitreal VEGFi treatments (bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept) for any eye disease. Outcomes of interest were cardiorenal side effects (hypertension, proteinuria, kidney function decline and heart failure). Fixed-effects meta-analyses were conducted where possible.

RESULTS

There were 78 trials (81 comparisons; 13 175 participants) that met criteria for inclusion: 47% were trials in diabetic eye disease. Hypertension (29 trials; 8570 participants) was equally common in VEGFi and control groups (7.3 versus 5.4%; RR 1.08 [0.91; 1.28]). New or worsening heart failure (10 trials; 3384 participants) had similar incidence in VEGFi and control groups (RR 1.03 [0.70; 1.51]). Proteinuria (5 trials; 1902 participants) was detectable in some VEGFi-treated participants (0.2%) but not controls (0.0%; RR 4.43 [0.49; 40.0]). Kidney function decline (9 trials; 3471 participants) was similar in VEGFi and control groups. In participants with diabetic eye disease, risk of all-cause mortality was higher in VEGFi-treated participants (RR 1.62 [1.04; 2.46]).

CONCLUSION

In trials of intravitreal VEGFi, we did not identify an increased risk of cardiorenal outcomes, though these outcomes were reported in only a minority of cases. There was an increased risk of death in VEGFi-treated participants with diabetic eye disease. Additional scrutiny of post-licensing observational data may improve recognition of safety concerns in VEGFi-treated patients.

Diabetic Macular Edema: Current Understanding, Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications

Diabetic retinopathy (DR), with increasing incidence, is the major cause of vision loss and blindness worldwide in working-age adults. Diabetic macular edema (DME) remains the main cause of vision impairment in diabetic patients, with its pathogenesis still not completely elucidated. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of DR and DME. Currently, intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents remains as the first-line therapy in DME treatment due to the superior anatomic and functional outcomes. However, some patients do not respond satisfactorily to anti-VEGF injections. More than 30% patients still exist with persistent DME even after regular intravitreal injection for at least 4 injections within 24 weeks, suggesting other pathogenic factors, beyond VEGF, might contribute to the pathogenesis of DME. Recent advances showed nearly all the retinal cells are involved in DR and DME, including breakdown of blood-retinal barrier (BRB), drainage dysfunction of Müller glia and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), involvement of inflammation, oxidative stress, and neurodegeneration, all complicating the pathogenesis of DME. The profound understanding of the changes in proteomics and metabolomics helps improve the elucidation of the pathogenesis of DR and DME and leads to the identification of novel targets, biomarkers and potential therapeutic strategies for DME treatment. The present review aimed to summarize the current understanding of DME, the involved molecular mechanisms, and the changes in proteomics and metabolomics, thus to propose the potential therapeutic recommendations for personalized treatment of DME.

Efficacy and safety of intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy in diabetic retinopathy: what we have learned and what should we learn further?

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the most frequent microvascular complications of diabetes that can lead to blindness. Laser treatment has been the gold standard treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) for many years. Recently, the role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has been established in the pathogenesis of DR, and the use of intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy has gained popularity for the management of DR.

AREAS COVERED

This review includes a brief overview of the efficacy and safety of currently available (bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept) and potential future (brolucizumab, faricimab, and KSI-301) anti-VEGF agents in patients with DR based mainly on publicly available data from phase 1, 2 and 3 clinical trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical trials investigating the efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept injections demonstrated favorable functional and anatomical outcomes in patients with DME. Moreover, the use of these anti-VEGF agents showed a significant improvement in the severity of DR. Recent clinical research for future anti-VEGF molecules aims to provide higher target-protein binding affinity and prolonged therapeutic effect. Brolucizumab, faricimab, and KSI-301 are three novel anti-VEGF agents that demonstrate promising data for the management of DME and potentially DR.

Therapeutic Effects of Combination Therapy and Photobiomodulation Therapy on Retinal Regeneration

Introduction: Many systemic and ocular diseases cause macular edema (ME). Macular edema is seen in two primary forms; the first is diffuse thickening of the macula, and the other is a macula with a distinct petaloid (cloverleaf) appearance called cystoid macular edema. Macular edema has a known role in the reduction of visual equity, and many options have been proposed for the reversal of this condition. Methods: Articles on the effects of macular laser grid photocoagulation on diabetic macular edema (DME) or cystoid macular edema published between 2000 and 2022 were collected from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. The following keywords were used for the search: "macular laser photocoagulation", "macular edema", "cystoid macular edema", "intravitreal pharmacotherapies", and "antivascular endothelial growth factor". Two hundred nineteen articles were found in google scholar and 165 articles in PubMed, and a total of 58 articles were included in the study after applying the exclusion criteria. Results: We investigated the effects of various lasers photocoagulation such as Focal and/or grid macular laser, subthreshold micropulse laser (SMPL), as well as intravitreal pharmacotherapies with triamcinolone acetonide, and fluocinolone, and extended released intraocular implants such as Ozurdex, Retisert, Iluvien, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors such as bevacizumab (Avastin), Eyela, and Lucentis. Corticosteroids were more effective than lasers, although some researchers have found that lasers and combined lasers and corticosteroids are more effective. In addition, some studies have shown that the frequency and concentrations of intravitreal pharmacotherapies are effective in increasing visual outcomes. Conclusion: The results of the studies showed that the combined intravitreal corticosteroids are much more effective in improving visual acuity (VA) than a single corticosteroid, and the low concentration of the drug is safer. Still, corticosteroids have side effects such as increased intraocular pressure and glaucoma. Therefore, combining the medication with a laser is much more reasonable than each alone. Also, the subthreshold photocoagulation laser (670 nm) is better at reducing the central macular thickness (CMT) and improving VA than the micro pulse yellow laser and pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP).

Switching to ziv-aflibercept in resistant diabetic macular edema non responsive to ranibizumab injection

Background

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of visual loss in diabetic patients and is managed using multiple anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents such as bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept. The present study evaluates effectiveness of intravitreal injection of ziv-aflibercept in resistant diabetic macular edema.

Methods

This is a prospective interventional study that was carried out on 59 eyes of 40 diabetic patients with diabetic macular edema resistant to three prior consecutive ranibizumab injections. On all patients, thorough ophthalmic evaluation including optical coherence tomography was performed. In patients with persistent intraretinal or subretinal fluid, ziv- aflibercept 1.25 mg (0.05 ml) was administered by intravitreal injection monthly during the 6 month study period from June to December 2019.

Results

The central macular thickness (CMT) decreased significantly from 395.08 ± 129.9 um at baseline to 282.39 ± 95.278, 245.36 ± 79.861 and 201.17 ± 54.042 after 1, 3 and 6 months of treatment respectively (p < 0.001). Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in log MAR units was significantly improved from 0.95 ± 0.21 to 0.51 ± 0.23 after 6 months (p = 0.001). After treatment, negative correlations were detected between age, number of injections, duration of DM and level of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and variation of both CMT and BCVA. The only significant predictor for low final CMT after 6 months of injection was the CMT after 3 months of injection (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

Ziv-aflibercept is a highly effective and safe drug in cases of DME resistant to previous ranibizumab injections especially in low-income countries.

Trial registration

This study was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT04290195) on 28-2-2020.

Different Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor for Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is commonly used to treat diabetic macular edema (DME), which can reduce edema, improve vision, and prevent further visual loss. There is little head-to-head trial data to guide the selection of an individual VEGF inhibitor. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF for patients with DME and to assess the differences between clinically relevant options by using network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and VIP databases were searched for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their inception to November 2020. We included RCTs of anti-VEGF drugs (intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL), intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR), and intravitreal conbercept (IVC)) treating adult patients who were diagnosed with DME, regardless of stage or duration of the disease. We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) using a Bayesian NMA. This study’s registration number is CRD42021259335.

Results: We identified 43 RCTs comprising 8,234 patients. Beneficial effects were observed in patients who used IVT-AFL compared with those who used other anti-VEGF therapies at 1-year follow-up on corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvements (all patients: versus IVR: MD 2.83, 95% CrIs 1.64, 4.01, versus IVC: MD 2.41, 95% CrIs −0.52, 5.32; patients with worse baseline visual acuity (VA): versus IVR: MD 3.39, 95% CrIs 1.89, 4.9, versus IVC: MD 3.49, 95% CrIs 0.49, 6.44) and the proportion of patients with a gain of at least 15 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters (all patients: versus IVR: OR 1.55, 95% CrIs 1.11, 2.17, versus IVC: OR 2.78, 95% CrIs 1.23, 6.04; patients with worse baseline VA: versus IVR: OR 2.05, 95% CrIs 1.18, 3.58, versus IVC: OR 2.85, 95% CrIs 1.24, 6.41). The effect of improvement in BCVA was identified for IVT-AFL compared to intravitreal bevacizumab. Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), IVT-AFL had the highest probability of being the most effective option (99.9% and 99.5% in terms of the two primary outcomes, respectively). At the 2-year follow-up, numerical differences were identified favoring IVT-AFL; however, they did not reach statistical significance when comparing IVT-AFL to IVR. In the analysis of adverse events, IVT-AFL showed a lower risk of incidence of ocular adverse events compared to other anti-VEGF therapies at 1-year follow-up (versus IVR: OR 0.45, 95% CrIs 0.28, 0.7; versus IVC: OR 0.36, 95% CrIs 0.21, 0.63).

Conclusion: IVT-AFL resulted in greater beneficial effects on BCVA and a higher proportion of patients with a gain of at least 15 ETDRS letters compared to IVR or IVC one year after treatment (especially in DME patients with worse baseline VA). In addition, fewer ocular adverse events occurred in the IVT-AFL group compared to the IVR or IVC groups. After two years, there was insufficient evidence to identify which anti-VEGF has superior efficacy or safety.

Clinical Trial Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, PROSPERO; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021259335, CRD42021259335

Current and Novel Therapeutic Approaches for Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a major ocular complication of diabetes mellitus (DM), leading to significant visual impairment. DME’s pathogenesis is multifactorial. Focal edema tends to occur when primary metabolic abnormalities lead to a persistent hyperglycemic state, causing the development of microaneurysms, often with extravascular lipoprotein in a circinate pattern around the focal leakage. On the other hand, diffusion edema is due to a generalized breakdown of the inner blood–retinal barrier, leading to profuse early leakage from the entire capillary bed of the posterior pole with the subsequent extravasation of fluid into the extracellular space. The pathogenesis of DME occurs through the interaction of multiple molecular mediators, including the overexpression of several growth factors, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), insulin-like growth factor-1, angiopoietin-1, and -2, stromal-derived factor-1, fibroblast growth factor-2, and tumor necrosis factor. Synergistically, these growth factors mediate angiogenesis, protease production, endothelial cell proliferation, and migration. Treatment for DME generally involves primary management of DM, laser photocoagulation, and pharmacotherapeutics targeting mediators, namely, the anti-VEGF pathway. The emergence of anti-VEGF therapies has resulted in significant clinical improvements compared to laser therapy alone. However, multiple factors influencing the visual outcome after anti-VEGF treatment and the presence of anti-VEGF non-responders have necessitated the development of new pharmacotherapies. In this review, we explore the pathophysiology of DME and current management strategies. In addition, we provide a comprehensive analysis of emerging therapeutic approaches to the treatment of DME.

Visual outcomes of observation, macular laser and anti-VEGF in diabetic macular edema in type 1 diabetes: a real-world study

Background

The treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME) has revolutionized during the last 15 years after the introduction of intravitreal anti-VEGF agents. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the real-world visual outcomes of diabetic macular edema (DME) treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in long-term follow-up.

Methods

A real-world, descriptive, population-based cohort and follow-up of all patients with T1D and DME in 2006-2020 in 34 communities of the Northern Ostrobothnia Hospital District. The main outcome measures included age, gender, duration of T1D at the onset of DME, stage of retinopathy, treatment of DME (observation, laser, intravitreal treatments, combination), and visual outcomes.

Results

A total of 304 eyes of 206 T1D patients with DME were included. 75% (n=155) had non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy during the onset of DME. 15% of the cases were observed, 33% had macular laser, 41% intravitreal anti-VEGF and 12% combination of laser and intravitreal injections. Patients in anti-VEGF and in combination groups gained 4.9 and 5.5 ETDRS letters after the initial DME episode (p<0.001 and p<0.001), and the long-term visual improvements were 4.1 and 5.1 ETDRS letters (p<0.001 and p<0.001), respectively. In observation and laser groups the initial gain of 0.1 (p>0.90) and loss of 0.4 ETDRS letter (p=0.61), respectively, was noted. After the follow-up, a 3.7 ETDRS letter decrease was documented in the observation group (p>0.90) and a 1.1 (p=0.14) ETDRS letter decline in the laser group of patients. At the beginning of treatment, eyes subjected to anti-VEGF alone or in combination with laser had lower visual acuity compared to eyes subjected to observation or macular laser. The average of a 6.1±4.8 anti-VEGF injections were needed to dry DME. Visual impairment due to DME decreased from 2.4% to 1.0% during the 15-year period.

Conclusions

Anti-VEGF alone or in combination with macular laser seems to be beneficial in terms of visual outcomes and treatment stability in T1D patients with central DME.

Moreover, satisfying long-term visual outcomes were achieved with anti-VEGF treatment in a real-world setting.

Efficacy of Intravitreal Injection of Filtered Modified Low-Dose Triamcinolone Acetonide and Ranibizumab on Pseudophakic Cystoid Macular Edema

Purpose

To compare the visual and morphological effects between intravitreal injection of filtered modified 2 mg triamcinolone acetonide (TA) and 0. 5 mg ranibizumab in patients with pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (PCME).

Methods

A retrospective, interventional study was conducted from January 2015 to February 2020 involving patients with PCME after uneventful cataract surgery. A total of 25 patients (25 eyes) with PCME received an intravitreal injection of 0.22 μm filtered modified 2 mg TA, while 15 patients (15 eyes) received 0.5 mg ranibizumab injection. Central macular thickness (CMT), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), times of repeated injections, and other side effects were observed at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after injection; then, the data were compared with preinjection information in each group and between the two groups.

Results

Both the TA and ranibizumab intravitreal injection can achieve improved BCVA and reduced CMT in patients with PCME (P < 0.05), with a trend toward greater improvement in the TA group, but the difference was only significant at 3 months (P < 0.05). IOP was in the normal range without any significant difference (P > 0.05). Thirty-three percent of patients in the ranibizumab group required repeated intravitreal injection compared to 4% in the TA group. Further stratified analysis showed that the better therapeutic effect of the TA group at 3 months after injection only existed in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), while not in patients without DM. There was no repeat injection in the TA group and 12.5% in the ranibizumab group for patients without DM, while 16.7% in the TA group and 57.1% in the ranibizumab group required repeated injection for patients with DM, which had a significant difference (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Intravitreal injection of filtered modified 2 mg TA is safe, effective, and an inexpensive alternative to antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents for patients with PCME, especially for patients concurrently with DM. A large number of clinical randomized controlled studies along with long-term follow-up observations are needed.

One-year outcomes of the treat-and-extend regimen using aflibercept for the treatment of diabetic macular edema

BACKGROUND

Optimal regimen using intravitreal aflibercept injections for diabetic macular edema (DME) in clinical practice remains to be elucidated. The purpose of this study is to evaluate a treat-and-extend (TAE) approach using intravitreal aflibercept in participants with center-involved DME.

METHODS

A 52-week open-label, prospective, multicenter, interventional study was conducted between August 2015 and November 2017 in Taiwan. Adults with diabetes mellitus and center-involved DME who have best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 73 to 24 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters and central retinal thickness (CRT) >300 μm were included. Participants received five monthly loading doses of 2 mg intravitreal aflibercept, followed by a TAE regimen with a four-week increment/decrement interval over 48 weeks; the maximum interval was 12 weeks. Main outcomes included changes in BCVA and CRT from baseline to week 52, additional anatomical outcomes, and treatment burden parameters.

RESULTS

Forty-five participants with mean (SD) age of 63.7 (8.3) years were analyzed. At baseline, mean (SD) BCVA and CRT were 58.3 (11.9) letters and 434.4 (116.8) μm, respectively. Changes from baseline in BCVA and CRT were +8.3 (9.3) letters and -138.2 (150.0) μm (both p < 0.001) at week 52, respectively. In addition, 22% (10/45) of patients gained ≥15 letters, 14% (6/44) of participants achieved ≥2-level improvement in diabetic retinopathy severity, and 51% (23/45) demonstrated dry retina at week 52 compared with 13% (6/45) at baseline. In total, 87% (39/45) of patients reached disease stability, entering TAE at week 20. Subsequently, 89% (40/45) of patients reached maximum interval at week 52. Mean (SD) number of injections was 7.7 (1.5) over a period of 52 weeks.

CONCLUSION

This straightforward and practical TAE regimen using intravitreal aflibercept injections resulted in favorable clinical outcomes with minimal treatment burden for DME at week 52.

Novel Treatments for Diabetic Macular Edema and Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetic retinopathy (DR), a common cause of vision loss, is projected to increase worldwide, and is associated with significant morbidity. The current standard-of-care treatments can preserve and significantly improve vision in many patients affected by DR. However, challenges such as heavy treatment burden and refractory disease remain. The purpose of this review is to highlight and discuss investigative agents in development for the treatment of DR.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are several novel agents with unique mechanisms that may offer greater durability and efficacy compared to existing drugs. Some target new pathways, others leverage a slow-release delivery system, and some modify gene expression through a single-dose treatment. While unfavorable adverse events, such as intraocular inflammation, have been observed with longer-durability agents, many investigational products show excellent efficacy and safety profiles. The outcomes of ongoing and future trials may revolutionize the current treatment paradigm for DR.

One-year results of switching to aflibercept for persistent diabetic macular edema resistant to bevacizumab

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the functional and anatomical effects of switching from bevacizumab to aflibercept in patients with persistent diabetic macular edema (DME) resistant to bevacizumab.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with DME refractory to bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) were subsequently switched to aflibercept. The included patients received five loading doses of intravitreal aflibercept (2 mg/0.05 mL) given monthly. After the loading dose, aflibercept was injected every 2 months. The follow-up duration was 1 year.

RESULTS

The study consisted of 37 eyes of 37 patients. The mean age of the participants was 56.81 ± 7.11 years. The mean central macular thickness at baseline was 428.32 ± 84.89 μm, which decreased significantly to 275.54 ± 50.24 μm (P < 0.003). There was a significant improvement in the mean best-corrected logMAR visual acuity from 0.627 ± 0.307 at baseline to 0.203 ± 0.235 (P < 0.017) at the end of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Aflibercept is effective in patients with persistent DME not responsive to bevacizumab.

Review on Recent Trials Evaluating the Effect of Intravitreal Injections of Anti-VEGF Agents on the Macular Perfusion of Diabetic Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema

Background

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a major cause of vision loss in diabetics worldwide. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents have become the mainstay of treatment of vision loss due to DME. Long-term effects of these agents on the macular perfusion (MP) are a current concern.

Objective

To review recently published studies that evaluated the effect of intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents on the MP of diabetics with DME.

Methods

Different databases were searched including PubMed, Medline, Ovid, Science Direct, and Google Scholar for relevant studies published between 2010 and 2019. All studies found were compared regarding methodology and results and included in this review. Some studies relating to retinal perfusion in general and not strictly MP were also included for comprehensiveness.

Results

Several studies utilizing different anti-VEGF agents were identified. All the large randomized controlled clinical trials identified utilized primarily fluorescein angiography (FA) and human graders and found generally no worsening of MP associated with anti-VEGF agents use in diabetic patients with DME. Some of these studies, however, depended on post-hoc analysis. Several more recent, but smaller case series, have utilized the relatively new and non-invasive optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) in this evaluation and found more conflicting results.

Conclusion

The large clinical trials recently performed depended mainly on FA in the analysis of MP changes following injections and generally found no worsening of MP. More recently, smaller case series have utilized OCTA in this analysis, yielding more conflicting results. Large randomized controlled trials using OCTA are thus needed.

The Influence of COVID-19 Lockdown in Jordan on Patients with Diabetic Retinopathy: A Case-Control Study

Background

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of vision impairment in working-age adults. Patients with DR need extensive follow-ups with timely proper treatment. In Jordan, a complete lockdown was decided during the COVID-19 pandemic including the closure of outpatients' clinic. In this study, we assess the effect of the lockdown on the progression and visual outcome for patients with DR who had interruption in their plan.

Methods

Retrospectively, we identified all patients who were scheduled for procedures for the management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) during the COVID-19-related quarantine period in Jordan from March 16th to June 6th, 2020. All demographics and clinical data, procedure information, and visual outcome were collected. Another control group of patients with similar characteristics who were scheduled for procedures related to DR before the COVID-19 pandemic from October 15th to December 31st, 2019 were included.

Results

One hundred and thirty-seven eyes planned for procedures from 89 patients were included. The case group comprises 56 eyes (40.9%). The mean age of the patients was 61.4 years. The right eye was involved in 69 procedures (50.4%). The mean change in visual acuity for the case group in the procedure eye was 0.176 in LogMAR (drop of almost 9 LogMAR letters) and the mean change in visual acuity for the control group in the procedure eye was -0.103 LogMAR (gain of about 5 LogMAR letters). Also, the central subfield thickness (CST) values were significantly worse in the case group. Furthermore, patients in the case group had significantly more disease progression (new findings and worsening of the already established findings).

Conclusion

Interrupting the important procedures for DR patients and delaying their follow-up may adversely affect their visual outcome. National decisions should consider conducting these procedures and exempt those patients from any lockdown with proper precautions. Moreover, certain measures would be considered, such as treat-and-extend protocol, home screening and portable OCT examination, and newer long-acting anti-VEGF drugs.

Efficacy of topical dorzolamide 2% in diabetic cystoid macular edema

AIM

To study the effect of topical dorzolamide 2% on macular thickness reduction in diabetic cystoid macular edema (CME).

METHODS

This was a prospective, non-randomized, open study including eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME). All eyes received topical dorzolamide 2% three times daily for one month. Changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central macular thickness (CMT) by optical coherence tomography) were evaluated at 1wk, 1, and 3mo post-treatment.

RESULTS

Ninety-three eyes (84 patients) were included. Mean±SD (logMAR) BCVA improved significantly from 1.08±0.26 pretreatment to 0.66±0.24 at 1mo and 0.87±0.26 at 3mo post-treatment (P<0.001 both). The mean±SD CMT was significantly reduced from 535.27±97.4 µm at baseline to 357.43±125.8 µm at 1mo and 376.23±114.5 µm at 3mo post-treatment (P<0.001 both). No significant ocular or systemic side effects were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Topical dorzolamide 2% results in significant improvement of mean BCVA and reduction of mean CMT at 3mo post-treatment. It can be used as an effective, affordable, and safe therapy for treatment of non-refractory diabetic CME.

Review of the management of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy during pregnancy

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a noncommunicable disease reaching epidemic proportions around the world. It affects younger individuals, including women of childbearing age. Diabetes can cause diabetic retinopathy (DR), which is potentially sight threatening when severe nonproliferative DR (NPDR), proliferative DR (PDR), or sight-threatening diabetic macular oedema (STDME) develops. Pregnancy is an independent risk factor for the progression of DR. Baseline DR at the onset of pregnancy is an important indicator of progression, with up to 10% of women with baseline NPDR progressing to PDR. Progression to sight-threatening DR (STDR) during pregnancy causes distress to the patient and often necessitates ocular treatment, which may have a systemic effect. Management includes prepregnancy counselling and, when possible, conventional treatment prior to pregnancy. During pregnancy, closer follow-up is required for those with a long duration of DM, poor baseline control of blood sugar and blood pressure, and worse DR, as these are risk factors for progression to STDR. Conventional treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents for STDME can potentially lead to foetal loss. Treatment with laser photocoagulation may be preferred, and surgery under general anaesthesia should be avoided. This review provides a management plan for STDR from the perspective of practising ophthalmologists. A review of strategies for maintaining the eyesight of diabetic women with STDR with emphasis on prepregnancy counselling and planning, monitoring and safe treatment during pregnancy, and management of complications is presented.

Retrospective Analysis of Treatment Patterns in Pseudophakic Diabetic Macular Oedema Eyes Treated with Anti-VEGF

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of outcomes in 81 pseudophakic eyes with DMO that received at least 6 anti-VEGF injections. We reviewed baseline and posttreatment optical coherence tomography images, visual acuity, prescribing patterns, time taken to deliver anti-VEGF injections, and structural and functional outcomes.

Results

It took an average of 913 ± 454.1 days to deliver a mean of 11.1 ± 4.7 anti-VEGF injections. Time from baseline to receiving the first 6 anti-VEGF injections was longer than 9 months in 74.7% (n = 59/79) of eyes. There was a mean gain of 1.6 letters (−0.03 logMAR) from baseline to the end point. After 5 anti-VEGF intravitreal injections, the mean CMT was 391.9 μm from 474.4 μm at baseline (p < 0.0001). In 52 of 79 eyes (65.8%), more than one type of anti-VEGF agent was used.

Conclusions

The anti-VEGF treatment used to treat these eyes with DMO was suboptimal, a finding consistent with recently published “real-world” data. There was a strong tendency for patients to be switched within the class to a second anti-VEGF agent.

Diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular oedema pathways and management: UK Consensus Working Group

The management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) has evolved considerably over the past decade, with the availability of new technologies (diagnostic and therapeutic). As such, the existing Royal College of Ophthalmologists DR Guidelines (2013) are outdated, and to the best of our knowledge are not under revision at present. Furthermore, there are no other UK guidelines covering all available treatments, and there seems to be significant variation around the UK in the management of diabetic macular oedema (DMO). This manuscript provides a summary of reviews the pathogenesis of DR and DMO, including role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and non-VEGF cytokines, clinical grading/classification of DMO vis a vis current terminology (of centre-involving [CI-DMO], or non-centre involving [nCI-DMO], systemic risks and their management). The excellent UK DR Screening (DRS) service has continued to evolve and remains world-leading. However, challenges remain, as there are significant variations in equipment used, and reproducible standards of DMO screening nationally. The interphase between DRS and the hospital eye service can only be strengthened with further improvements. The role of modern technology including optical coherence tomography (OCT) and wide-field imaging, and working practices including virtual clinics and their potential in increasing clinic capacity and improving patient experiences and outcomes are discussed. Similarly, potential roles of home monitoring in diabetic eyes in the future are explored. The role of pharmacological (intravitreal injections [IVT] of anti-VEGFs and steroids) and laser therapies are summarised. Generally, IVT anti-VEGF are offered as first line pharmacologic therapy. As requirements of diabetic patients in particular patient groups may vary, including pregnant women, children, and persons with learning difficulties, it is important that DR management is personalised in such particular patient groups. First choice therapy needs to be individualised in these cases and may be intravitreal steroids rather than the standard choice of anti-VEGF agents. Some of these, but not all, are discussed in this document.

Comparison of two-year treatment outcomes between subthreshold micropulse (577 nm) laser and aflibercept for diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE

To compare two-year treatment outcomes of subthreshold micropulse (577 nm) laser and aflibercept for diabetic macular edema (DME).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study.

METHODS

A total 164 eyes in 164 DME patients treated with either micropulse laser (86 eyes) or intravitreal aflibercept monotherapy (78 eyes) were recruited. Main outcome measures included at least five Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters' improvement from baseline at 6, 12 and 24 months.

RESULTS

Rescue aflibercept was initiated in 24% of eyes in micropulse laser group. At 6-month visit the aflibercept group achieved a higher percentage of eyes with at least 5-letter visual acuity improvement than micropulse laser group (56% vs 38%, P = 0.044), however, this was not the case at 12-month (45% vs 49%, P = 0.584) and 24-month visits (49% vs 57%, P = 0.227). At 6-month visit the aflibercept group achieved a higher percentage of eyes with at least 10% improvement of central macular thickness (73% vs 49%, P = 0.005), but this was not the case at 12-month (73% vs 70%, P = 0.995) and 24-month visits (85% vs 84%, P = 0.872).

CONCLUSION

Aflibercept achieved faster and higher rates of anatomical and functional improvement than micropulse laser in DME patients. Long term efficacy of treatment did not result in significant differences between aflibercept monotherapy and micropulse laser in DME patients. Primary treatment of micropulse laser with deferred rescue aflibercept might be the treatment option without reducing the chance of visual improvement in DME eyes.

Association Between Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Diabetic Macular Edema in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relationship between obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and diabetic macular edema (DME) and the effect of OSA on refractory DME in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

DESIGN

Retrospective clinical cohort study.

METHODS

A population-based study was conducted at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital from March 1, 2009, to March 1, 2020. Among 14,152 patients who had undergone polysomnography (PSG) and whose data were registered on the sleep center's PSG database, 121 patients (242 eyes) with T2DM were enrolled according to the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) code 3620 for diabetic retinopathy (DR). Patients with a secondary cause of macular edema and those lacking medical records were excluded. All patients with T2DM enrolled in our study received both optical coherence tomography (OCT) and PSG. The prevalence of severe (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] ≥30) and nonsevere (AHI <30) OSA was compared between patients with and without DME and refractory DME.

RESULTS

In total, 102 eyes (54 patients) were divided into groups of 40 eyes with DME or 62 eyes without DME. Severe OSA (odds ratio, 7.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.32-40.96; P = .023) was significantly associated with DME. Refractory DME was significantly more frequent in patients with severe OSA (27%) than in those with nonsevere OSA (0%; P = .009). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed that OSA (hazard ratio, 2.97; CI, 1.08-8.16; P = .034) independently increased the DME risk after adjustment for age, sex, glycohemoglobin level, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe OSA is a risk factor for DME and is associated with having refractory DME.

Topical ketorolac as an adjunctive treatment with intravitreal bevacizumab in the management of diabetic macular edema: A double-masked placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the additional effect of ketorolac eye drops on therapeutic effects of intravitreal Bevacizumab in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) METHODS: In a randomized clinical trial, 50 patients with center involved DME (macular thickness ≥ 300 microns accompanied by decreased VA (24 < BCVA ≤ 70 ETDRS letters) were enrolled consecutively and randomized 1:1 to receive either bevacizumab plus topical ketorolac (25 patients) or bevacizumab plus artificial tears (25 patients). Patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy, history of intraocular surgery, intravitreal injection in less than three months, macular photocoagulation less than 6 months and any other concomitant ocular pathologies were excluded from the study. All the patients received three consecutive monthly injections of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB). After that, patients were examined every 6 weeks and reinjection was administered based on the "as needed" protocol if macular thickness was 300 microns or more and VA was 70 ETDRS letters or less.. Patients also received either topical ketorolac or artificial tears three times a day over the study period (6 months). Changes in central subfield thickness (CST), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, ETDRS letters), and number of IVB injections were compared between the study groups.

RESULTS

Fifty eyes of 50 patients were included (25 eyes in each group). Mean CST was significantly decreased in both study groups at 14^th week (-87 ± 98 µm, P = 0.012 and -100 ± 147 µm, P = 0.006 in bevacizumab plus ketorolac and bevacizumab plus artificial tears groups, respectively). Nevertheless, the changes of mean CST remained significant only in bevacizumab plus ketorolac group up to 26^th week (-147 ± 124 µm, P < 0.001 and -51 ± 145 µm, P = 0.245, respectively). Comparing two groups, reduction of mean CST from baseline was significantly greater in bevacizumab plus ketorolac group compared with the control group at 26^th week. (difference = -97 µm, 95%CI = -182 to -11, P = 0.017). In the study group, mean BCVA significantly increased at both 20^th week (6.2 ± 10.1, P = 0.04) and 26^th week (8.2 ± 10.9, P = 0.03). In contrast, visual acuity did not significantly improve at any time points in bevacizumab plus artificial tears group, While insignificant, the 26-week mean change of visual acuity from baseline was greater in bevacizumab plus ketorolac group (difference = 6.5 ETDRS letter; 95%CI = -14.4 to 1.4) Two groups were comparable regarding number of IVB injections (P = 0.99).

CONCLUSION

Topical ketorolac 0.5% three times a day could enhance and sustain the efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab in the treatment of DME.

Questionnaire to Assess Life Impact of Treatment by Intravitreal Injections (QUALITII): Development of a patient-reported measure to assess treatment burden of repeat intravitreal injections

Objective

To understand patient burden of treatment of repeated intravitreal injections (IVI) in the management of exudative retinal diseases.

Methods and analysis

Participants were sampled from a large urban retina specialty practice in Houston, Texas, USA, based on history of ongoing receipt of IVI. The 50-item Questionnaire to Assess Life Impact of Treatment by Intravitreal Injections questionnaire was developed to evaluate the patient experience including discomfort, anxiety, inconvenience and satisfaction. Categorial principal components analysis (CATPCA) was performed to assess construct validity and internal consistency. A subset of these items was used to establish a measure of total treatment burden, referred to as the IVI Treatment Burden Score (TBS).

Results

142 patients participated in this study. CATPCA analysis revealed five dimensions of patient burden: disruption of normal routine or capacity, anxiety, frequency of visits, chronicity of disease and perceived treatment value or satisfaction. Together, these dimensions accounted for 67% of variance explained. Cronbach's alpha was 0.97. The most frequently cited cause of discomfort was the feeling after anaesthetic wore off. The most common source of anxiety was fear of injection and associated discomfort or pain. Regarding inconvenience, patients reported temporary postinjection debilitation, requiring an average of 8 hours for recovery per treatment. The most frequently identified sources of satisfaction were confidence in the provider or treatment and interactions with staff.

Conclusions

Understanding and quantifying the patient burden associated with repeated IVI for exudative retinal diseases can reveal opportunities to improve delivery methods. The TBS could serve to inform strategies to maximise treatment adherence and optimise patient experiences.

Association Between First- and Third-Month Responses to Intravitreal Ranibizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose:

This work examines the relationship between first- and third-month anatomical and visual response with antivascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular edema.

Methods:

We prospectively evaluated 58 eyes with center-involved diabetic macular edema. Response was categorized upon the anatomical status after 3 monthly doses based on the reduction of central macular thickness (CMT) from baseline (≥20% or not). Correlation analysis between the anatomical response status, gained letters, optical coherence tomography morphological features, and other baseline characteristics were obtained.

Results:

Twenty-five eyes (43.1%) achieved an anatomical reduction of ≥20% at the third month. Those with a reduction of ≥20% of CMT had subretinal fluid ( P < .01), lower hemoglobin A1c values ( P < .01), lower proportion of intraretinal cysts ( P < .01), a greater anatomical reduction, and visual improvement at the first month of treatment. Multiple logistic regression analysis, showed that the change of CMT after the first injection was an independent predictor for the anatomical reduction of ≥20% after the loading phase ( P < .05). Best corrected visual acuity gain after the first dose showed a significant association with an improvement of ≥10 letters after the loading phase ( P < .05), but not for macular thickness reduction.

Conclusions:

First month anatomical reduction was associated with the anatomical response at 3 months ( P = .042) after monthly ranibizumab therapy. Visual improvement at the first month was predictive only for the visual outcome after the 3 monthly doses ( P = .032).

Intravitreal Therapy for Diabetic Macular Edema: An Update

Diabetic macular edema (DME) represents a prevalent and disabling eye condition. Despite that DME represents a sight-threatening condition, it is also among the most accessible to treatment. Many different treatment options including photocoagulation, intravitreal medical treatment (either vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors or corticosteroids therapies), and surgical removal are currently available. Although laser has been considered as the gold standard for many years, over the past several years vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (anti-VEGFs) have become first-line therapy. However, many patients do not adequately respond to them. With the development of sustained-release corticosteroid devices, steroids have gained a presence in the management of the DME. We review and update the role of anti-VEGF and intravitreal sustained-release corticosteroid management of DME. According to the currently available scientific evidence, the choice of one anti-VEGF over another critically depends on the baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). While aflibercept may be the drug of choice in low baseline BCVA, the three anti-VEGFs (bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept) provided similar functional outcomes when the baseline BCVA was higher. DEX implants are a valuable option for treating DME, although they are usually seen as a second choice, particularly in those eyes that have an insufficient response to anti-VEGF. The new evidence suggested that, in eyes that did not adequately respond to anti-VEGF, switching to a DEX implant at the time to 3 monthly anti-VEGF injections provided better functional outcomes.