Intravitreal Aflibercept in Japanese Patients with Neovascular Glaucoma: The VEGA Randomized Clinical Trial

Characterization of the visually impaired patients with diabetes mellitus in Japan

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

To conduct a multicenter survey of visually impaired patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and to identify the physical and ocular characteristics that lead to blindness in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Visually impaired patients with diabetes mellitus in Japan were divided into blind and low-vision groups according to the World Health Organization classification. Data on parameters related to diabetes mellitus and ocular complications in the right and left eyes were collected from 19 highly advanced medical facilities and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Among 408 visually impaired persons (blind group: 257, low-vision group: 151), 72.1% were under 70 years of age. The rates of neovascular glaucoma (NVG) (right eye, P = 0.041; left eye, P = 0.0031) or proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) (right eye: P = 0.014, left eye: P = 0.0047) and the rate of proliferative membrane beyond half of the retinal area (right eye: P = 0.0263, left eye: P = 0.037) were significantly higher in the blind group. The direct cause of visual impairment was retinal atrophy, common in both groups. Neovascular glaucoma and diabetic macular edema were equally prevalent in the blind and low-vision groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In Japan, blind patients with diabetes mellitus are characterized by severe conditions such as neovascular glaucoma and progressive proliferative diabetic retinopathy upon their initial visit to an advanced care facility. These results highlight the importance of monitoring retinopathy through regular ophthalmological examinations, internal medicine, and appropriate therapeutic intervention.

The progress of assessment methods and treatments of neovascular glaucoma secondary to central retinal vein occlusion

Neovascular glaucoma is a condition that results from central retinal vein occlusion and often leads to blindness. Accurate evaluation and appropriate treatment are crucial for patients. However, there is currently no uniform and clear standard to differentiate between ischemic and non-ischemic central retinal vein occlusion. Also, the assessment of neovascular glaucoma progression is uncertain. Meanwhile, although pan-retinal photocoagulation is a standard treatment to prevent the onset of neovascular glaucoma, its actual efficacy and the timing of intervention remain highly controversial. It is still challenging to balance the risks of side effects in the visual field against the uncertain effectiveness of the treatment. This paper delves into the pathogenesis of neovascular glaucoma to understand the development of therapeutic approaches. By taking into account various assessment criteria of central retinal vein occlusion and neovascular glaucoma over the years, combining functional tests and morphological tests provides the most accurate and rigorous solution. The age of patients, the extent, location, and duration of retinal ischemia are the primary factors that affect the severity and extent of ischemic central retinal vein occlusion and induce serious complications. From the perspective of prevention and treatment, the ischemic index is closely related to the development of neovascularization. The paper provides essential insights into the mechanism, efficacy, complications, and optimal timing of pan-retinal photocoagulation. Comparing the treatment effects of pan-retinal photocoagulation and intravitreal anti-VEGF injections, we suggest a combination of both treatments to explore effective treatment with fewer side effects in the long term. This article details the debate on the above issues and explores ideas for the clinical diagnosis and preventive treatment of neovascular glaucoma that results from ischemic central retinal vein occlusion.

Short-Term Outcomes of Trabeculectomy With or Without Anti-VEGF in Patients With Neovascular Glaucoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of trabeculectomy alone or combined with intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents for the treatment of neovascular glaucoma.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects of trabeculectomy alone or combined with intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents for the treatment of neovascular glaucoma. We searched four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science) up to January 2023 and extracted data on three surgical outcomes: postoperative intraocular pressure, success rate and complications. We used a random-effects model to calculate pooled relative risk (RR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed publication bias using Begg and Egger tests.

Results

We included seven studies with 353 eyes. Compared to trabeculectomy alone, trabeculectomy with anti-VEGF had a lower risk of postoperative complications (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41-0.89) and higher success rate (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.40). The intraocular pressure reduction was significantly greater in the trabeculectomy with anti-VEGF augmentation group than the trabeculectomy group from 1 week (SMD, -1.36; 95% CI, -2.76 to 0.04) to 6 months (SMD, -0.79; 95% CI, -1.50 to -0.07) after surgery.

Conclusions

According to current evidence, adding intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents to trabeculectomy may improve the short time outcomes of patients with neovascular glaucoma.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for neovascular glaucoma

BACKGROUND

Neovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a potentially blinding, secondary glaucoma. It is caused by the formation of abnormal new blood vessels, which prevent normal drainage of aqueous from the anterior segment of the eye. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medications are specific inhibitors of the primary mediators of neovascularization. Studies have reported the effectiveness of anti-VEGF medications for the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) in NVG.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of intraocular anti-VEGF medications, alone or with one or more types of conventional therapy, compared with no anti-VEGF medications for the treatment of NVG.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register); MEDLINE; Embase; PubMed; and LILACS to 19 October 2021; metaRegister of Controlled Trials to 19 October 2021; and two additional trial registers to 19 October 2021. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people treated with anti-VEGF medications for NVG.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the search results for trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence. We resolved discrepancies through discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs (356 eyes of 353 participants). Each trial was conducted in a different country: two in China, and one each in Brazil, Egypt, and Japan. All five RCTs included both men and women; the mean age of participants was 55 years or older. Two RCTs compared intravitreal bevacizumab combined with Ahmed valve implantation and panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) with Ahmed valve implantation and PRP alone. One RCT randomized participants to receive an injection of either intravitreal aflibercept or placebo at the first visit, followed by non-randomized treatment according to clinical findings after one week. The remaining two RCTs randomized participants to PRP with and without ranibizumab, one of which had insufficient details for further analysis. We assessed the RCTs to have an unclear risk of bias for most domains due to insufficient information to permit judgment.   Four RCTs examined achieving control of IOP, three of which reported our time points of interest. Only one RCT reported our critical time point at one month; it found that the anti-VEGF group had a 1.3-fold higher chance of achieving control of IOP at one month (RR 1.32, 95% 1.10 to 1.59; 93 participants) than the non-anti-VEGF group (low certainty of evidence). For other time points, one RCT found a three-fold greater achievement in control of IOP in the anti-VEGF group when compared with the non-anti-VEGF group at one year (RR 3.00; 95% CI:1.35 to 6.68; 40 participants). However, another RCT found an inconclusive result at the time period ranging from 1.5 years to three years (RR 1.08; 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.75; 40 participants).  All five RCTs examined mean IOP, but at different time points. Very-low-certainty evidence showed that anti-VEGFs were effective in reducing mean IOP by 6.37 mmHg (95% CI: -10.09 to -2.65; 3 RCTs; 173 participants) at four to six weeks when compared with no anti-VEGFs.  Anti-VEGFs may reduce mean IOP at three months (MD -4.25; 95% CI -12.05 to 3.54; 2 studies; 75 participants), six months (MD -5.93; 95% CI -18.13 to 6.26; 2 studies; 75 participants), one year (MD -5.36; 95% CI -18.50 to 7.77; 2 studies; 75 participants), and more than one year (MD -7.05; 95% CI -16.61 to 2.51; 2 studies; 75 participants) when compared with no anti-VEGFs, but such effects remain uncertain. Two RCTs reported the proportion of participants who achieved an improvement in visual acuity with specified time points. Participants receiving anti-VEGFs had a 2.6 times (95% CI 1.60 to 4.08; 1 study; 93 participants) higher chance of improving visual acuity when compared with those not receiving anti-VEGFs at one month (very low certainty of evidence). Likewise, another RCT found a similar result at 18 months (RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.33 to 12.05; 1 study; 40 participants).  Two RCTs reported the outcome, complete regression of new iris vessels, at our time points of interest. Low-certainty evidence showed that anti-VEGFs had a nearly three times higher chance of complete regression of new iris vessels when compared with no anti-VEGFs (RR 2.63, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.18; 1 study; 93 participants). A similar finding was observed at more than one year in another RCT (RR 3.20, 95% CI 1.45 to 7.05; 1 study; 40 participants).  Regarding adverse events, there was no evidence that the risks of hypotony and tractional retinal detachment were different between the two groups (RR 0.67; 95% CI: 0.12 to 3.57 and RR 0.33; 95% CI: 0.01 to 7.72, respectively; 1 study; 40 participants). No RCTs reported incidents of endophthalmitis, vitreous hemorrhage, no light perception, and serious adverse events. Evidence for the adverse events of anti-VEGFs was low due to limitations in the study design due to insufficient information to permit judgments and imprecision of results due to the small sample size. No trial reported the proportion of participants with relief of pain and resolution of redness at any time point.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Anti-VEGFs as an adjunct to conventional treatment could help reduce IOP in NVG in the short term (four to six weeks), but there is no evidence that this is likely in the longer term. Currently available evidence regarding the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of anti-VEGFs in achieving control of IOP, visual acuity, and complete regression of new iris vessels in NVG is insufficient. More research is needed to investigate the effect of these medications compared with, or in addition to, conventional surgical or medical treatment in achieving these outcomes in NVG.

Recent trends in anti-vascular endothelial growth factor intravitreal injections: a large claims database study in Japan

PURPOSE

To clarify recent trends in the use of intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in Japan.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

We used the DeSC database, a large-scale claims database for Japan, for entries between April 2014 and March 2021. We counted the number of anti-VEGF drug injections (aflibercept, ranibizumab, brolucizumab, and pegaptanib) administered every year, calculated the sex- and age-adjusted injection rates, and stratified these rates according to sex, age categories, anti-VEGF drugs, and diagnoses. We also calculated the number of injections administered within one year after the first injection according to the diagnoses.

RESULTS

In total, 164,451 cases of anti-VEGF injections were identified. The sex- and age-adjusted rates of anti-VEGF injections per 1000 person-years increased from 7.9 in 2014 to 16.1 in 2020. Men were approximately twice as likely to receive anti-VEGF injections than women. The 70-79, 80-89, and ≥90 age categories had the highest rates, accounting for approximately 80%. Neovascular age-related macular degeneration had the highest rate, accounting for 60-70% over the study period. Aflibercept was the most commonly used drug, accounting for approximately 80% over the study period. The average number of injections within one year after the first injection was 4.4 for neovascular age-related macular degeneration, 2.7 for branch retinal vein occlusion, 3.1 for central retinal vein occlusion, and 3.5 for diabetic macular edema in 2020.

CONCLUSION

These findings can be used as a benchmark for the clinical practice of anti-VEGF therapy.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in the management of neovascular glaucoma: absence of consensus and variability in practice

PURPOSE

Neovascular glaucoma (NVG) is characterised by neovascularisation of the angle and therefore elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). This results in progressive optic neuropathy and loss of visual acuity. Treatment aims to reduce IOP in order to prevent optic nerve damage. A systematic review was completed synthesising results from randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing interventions for the management of NVG and their efficacy and safety.

METHODS

Data was sourced from Web of Science, Embase and Medline after 1st January 2000. The primary outcome measures were mean IOP at follow-up and success rate. The secondary outcomes included mean IOP lowering medications and total complications. A meta-analysis was completed on comparative studies using Revman (version 5.4).

RESULTS

For the two studies comparing Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) + pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP) vs AGV + PRP + intra-vitreal bevacizumab (IVB), there was no difference in mean IOP or odds of success from the meta-analysis. From the 4 studies examining the utilisation of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF), one study showed lower mean IOP at 1 (p = 0.002) and 3 months (p = 0.033) for IVB vs sham injection. In the 2 studies studying transcleral diode laser (TDL), there were no significant findings. From the 4 studies looking at trabeculectomy (trab), lower mean IOP at 6 (p = 0.001), 9 (p = 0.01), 12 (p = 0.02) and 18 months (p = 0.004) was shown for intra-vitreal ranibizumab (IVR) + PRP + visco-trabeculectomy vs IVR + PRP + trab, and a significantly lower mean IOP was present in the Baerveldt group vs trab at 6 months (p = 0.03). In the 2 studies investigating the AGV, there was a lower mean IOP at 1 month (p = 0.01) in the AGV + triamcinolone (TCA) group. The risk of bias was low for 4 studies, high for 4 studies and 6 studies had some concerns.

CONCLUSION

This is the first meta-analysis of RCTs in the management of neovascular glaucoma. The lack of high-quality evidence contributes to the lack of consensus in managing NVG. Our results highlight modern treatment strategies and the need for better powered RCTs with long-term follow-up in order to establish optimal treatment modalities and true patient outcomes.

A Review of Neovascular Glaucoma: Etiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Neovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a rare, aggressive, blinding secondary glaucoma, which is characterized by neovascularization of the anterior segment of the eye and leading to elevation of the intraocular pressure (IOP). The main etiological factor is retinal ischemia leading to an impaired homeostatic balance between the angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors. High concentrations of vasogenic substances such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) induce neovascularization of the iris (NVI) and neovascularization of the angle (NVA) that limits the outflow of aqueous humor from the anterior chamber and increases the IOP. NVG clinical, if untreated, progresses from secondary open-angle glaucoma to angle-closure glaucoma, leading to irreversible blindness. It is an urgent ophthalmic condition; early diagnosis and treatment are necessary to preserve vision and prevent eye loss. The management of NVG requires the cooperation of retinal and glaucoma specialists. The treatment of NVG includes both control of the underlying disease and management of IOP. The main goal is the prevention of angle-closure glaucoma by combining panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) and antiangiogenic therapy. The aim of this review is to summarize the current available knowledge about the etiology, pathogenesis, and symptoms of NVG and determine the most effective treatment methods.

A narrative review on the association of high intraocular pressure and glaucoma in patients with retinal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is a major cause of vision loss and elevated intraocular pressure (IOP), high ocular perfusion pressure, and glaucoma are known ophthalmic risk factors for RVO. The aim of this paper is to provide the update on the association and management of high IOP/glaucoma and RVO.

METHODS

A literature review was performed in PubMed and Medline until May 2022 utilizing specific keywords and cross-matched reference lists.

KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS

The association of RVO with high IOP/glaucoma may be attributed to retinal ganglion cell loss due to retinal ischemia in high IOP and glaucoma. As new modalities showed, decreased optic disc perfusion, reduced density of blood vessels in the optic nerve head of glaucoma patients, changes in the peripapillary microvascular parameters, and decreased retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness of the optic nerve head of eyes with RVO suggest a common pathway between RVO and glaucoma. Literature suggests the close follow up for glaucoma development among patients with non-arteriovenous (AV) crossing (optic cup or optic nerve sited) RVO in fellow eye and management of elevated IOP among RVO cases treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibodies/corticosteroids and those with preexisting primary open angle glaucoma (POAG).

CONCLUSIONS

Determining potential patient responses to treatment and considering therapeutic options are challenging among patients with RVO and glaucoma. However, IOP lowering managements in preventing IOP spikes in patients with preexisting glaucoma and early treatment of macular edema in eyes with RVO is recommended.

Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Japanese Patients with Neovascular Glaucoma: Outcomes from the VENERA Study

Introduction

Neovascular glaucoma is characterized by neovascularization of the iris and anterior angle chamber. Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents may decrease intraocular pressure (IOP) and improve neovascularization. The VENERA study assessed the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) in patients with neovascular glaucoma.

Methods

This was a 5-week, single-arm, nonrandomized, open-label, phase 3 study performed at 7 study sites in Japan that enrolled Japanese patients with anterior segment neovascularization and IOP > 25 mmHg who had not undergone (within 30 days prior), nor were imminently scheduled to undergo (within 8 days following) intraocular surgeries, including panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). Patients received background therapy plus 2 mg IVT-AFL at baseline. Background therapy with systemic IOP-lowering drugs was prohibited for 3 days before day 1 and until IOP evaluation at week 1. The primary endpoint was the change in IOP from baseline to week 1 and the secondary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an improvement of ≥ 1 grade of neovascularization of the angle (NVA) from baseline to week 1.

Results

Sixteen patients received treatment (full analysis set); the per-protocol set comprised 15 patients. The mean IOP decreased from 34.1 mmHg at baseline to 25.8 mmHg at week 1 (mean change, −8.3 mmHg [95% confidence interval; CI −12.2 to −4.4; P = 0.0004]). At week 1, 81.3% of patients had an improvement in the grade of neovascularization of the iris (NVI) and 50.0% of patients had an improvement in NVA grade. The proportion of patients with controlled IOP (≤ 21 mmHg) was 43.8% (95% CI 19.8–70.1) at week 1, and increased to 56.3% at week 2 and 86.7% at week 5. The most common ocular treatment-emergent adverse event was eye pain, which occurred in 4 patients (25.0%).

Conclusions

IVT-AFL was associated with statistically significant and clinically meaningful IOP reductions, without concomitant use of systemic IOP-lowering drugs or PRP. The safety profile was consistent with the known safety profile of IVT-AFL. These findings supplement those from the previous VEGA study, and suggest that IVT-AFL may be a potential treatment option for patients with neovascular glaucoma.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03639675.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-020-01580-y.