Intravitreal Corticosteroids in the Management of Diabetic Macular Edema. Curr Ophthalmol Rep. 2013;1. [PMID: 24224143 DOI: 10.1007/s40135-013-0015-3]

Timing of Switching to Steroid Implants in Cases of Recalcitrant Diabetic Macular Edema Not Responding to Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Therapy: A Real-World Study

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of the timing of the steroid switch on both visual and anatomical outcomes in diabetic macular edema (DME) eyes that have shown an inadequate response to multiple intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections. In the treatment of DME, anti-VEGF injections are typically the initial course of action. However, in cases where DME persists despite anti-VEGF treatment, intravitreal dexamethasone implants (Ozurdex®, Allergan Inc., Irvine, CA) are often utilized. Despite this, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the optimal timing for transitioning to steroid treatment. This study aims to shed light on the potential benefits of adjusting the timing of the steroid switch in cases of recalcitrant DME.  Methods The eyes (n = 105) of 77 patients with recalcitrant DME were included in this retrospective, interventional, comparative study comprising three groups: participants switched to steroid implants after three anti-VEGF injections (Group I), four to six anti-VEGF injections (Group II), and more than six anti-VEGF injections (Group III). Anti-VEGF treatment failure was defined as a central retinal thickness (CRT) of ≥300 microns and/or a lack of visual improvement (≤1 line of visual gain according to Snellen acuity). The last follow-up took place after 10-12 weeks of Ozurdex® injections. Results Improvement was observed in 19 eyes (46%), 17 eyes (50%), and 10 eyes (33%) in Groups I, II, and III, respectively, after switching to dexamethasone implants. The best overall results (an improvement in vision and stabilization) were seen in Group II (32 eyes, 94%). The decrease in CRT was statistically significant in all three groups.  Conclusion Intravitreal dexamethasone implants improved functional and morphological outcomes in anti-VEGF-resistant DME eyes. After four to six anti-VEGF injections, switching to a steroid implant resulted in the best functional results.

Current Insights into Targeting Strategies for the Effective Therapy of Diseases of the Posterior Eye Segment

The eye is one a unique sophisticated human sense organ with a complex anatomical structure. It is encased by variety of protective barriers as responsible for vision. There has been a paradigm shift in the prevalence of several major vision threatening ocular conditions with enhanced reliance on computer-based technologies in our workaday life and work-from-home modalities although aging, pollution, injury, harmful chemicals, lifestyle changes will always remain the root cause. Treating posterior eye diseases is a challenge faced by clinicians worldwide. The clinical use of conventional drug delivery systems for posterior eye targeting is restricted by the ocular barriers. Indeed, for overcoming various ocular barriers for efficient delivery of the therapeutic moiety and prolonged therapeutic effect requires prudent and target-specific approaches. Therefore, for efficient drug delivery to the posterior ocular segment, advancements in the development of sustained release and nanotechnology-based ocular drug delivery systems have gained immense importance. Therapeutic efficacy and patient compliance are of paramount importance in clinical translation of these investigative drug delivery systems. This review provides an insight into the various strategies employed for improving the treatment efficacies of the posterior eye diseases. Various drug delivery systems such as systemic and intraocular injections, implants have demonstrated promising outcomes, along with that they have also exhibited side-effects, limitations and strategies employed to overcome them are discussed in this review. The application of artificial intelligence-based technologies along with an appreciation of disease, delivery systems, and patient-specific outcomes will likely enable more effective therapy for targeting the posterior eye segment.

Hydrogels in Ophthalmology: Novel Strategies for Overcoming Therapeutic Challenges

The human eye's intricate anatomical and physiological design necessitates tailored approaches for managing ocular diseases. Recent advancements in ophthalmology underscore the potential of hydrogels as a versatile therapeutic tool, owing to their biocompatibility, adaptability, and customizability. This review offers an exploration of hydrogel applications in ophthalmology over the past five years. Emphasis is placed on their role in optimized drug delivery for the posterior segment and advancements in intraocular lens technology. Hydrogels demonstrate the capacity for targeted, controlled, and sustained drug release in the posterior segment of the eye, potentially minimizing invasive interventions and enhancing patient outcomes. Furthermore, in intraocular lens domains, hydrogels showcase potential in post-operative drug delivery, disease sensing, and improved biocompatibility. However, while their promise is immense, most hydrogel-based studies remain preclinical, necessitating rigorous clinical evaluations. Patient-specific factors, potential complications, and the current nascent stage of research should inform their clinical application. In essence, the incorporation of hydrogels into ocular therapeutics represents a seminal convergence of material science and medicine, heralding advancements in patient-centric care within ophthalmology.

Impact of Prefilled Syringes and Masking on Postintravitreal Injection Endophthalmitis

Purpose: To compare rates of endophthalmitis (1) following intravitreal injection of antivascular endothelial growth factor therapies with glass-vial preparation (GVP) vs prefilled syringes (PFS) and (2) before and after masking protocols were implemented. Methods: Medical records within a multicenter retina practice in Houston, Texas, from January 2015 to August 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome was rate of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection. Results: A total of 307 349 injections were performed during the study period and 101 cases of endophthalmitis were identified (0.033%). PFS use was associated with a decreased risk of endophthalmitis (relative risk [RR], 0.320; 95% CI, 0.198-0.518, P < .001); 54 cases of endophthalmitis occurred in the GVP group of aflibercept and ranibizumab (0.052%) compared with 24 in the PFS group (0.017%). There was no difference in the endophthalmitis rates with or without universal masking (RR, 0.953; 95% CI 0.616-1.473, P = .91). Discussion: PFS use was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of endophthalmitis while the use of surgical face masks did not appear to significantly impact the rate of endophthalmitis.

Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide for Diabetic Macular Edema and Macular Edema Secondary to Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The comparative safety and efficacy of different doses of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) for diabetic macular edema (DME) and macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of different doses of IVTA in this setting.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted on Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, and EMBASE from January 2005 to May 2022. Studies that reported on patients with DME or ME secondary to RVO that received treatment with different doses of IVTA were included. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Cochrane's Risk of Bias Tool 2 was used to assess the risk of bias, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were used to assess certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Five RCTs reporting on 1,041 eyes at baseline were included in this meta-analysis. In eyes with ME secondary to RVO, high-dose (4 mg) IVTA achieved a significantly better change in best-corrected visual acuity (WMD = -4.75 ETDRS letters, 95% CI = [-7.73, -1.78], p = 0.002) and reduction in retinal thickness (WMD = -93.02 μm, 95% CI = [-153.23, -32.82], p = 0.002) at months 4-6 compared to low-dose (1-2 mg) IVTA. However, high-dose IVTA had a higher risk of intraocular pressure-related adverse events (RR = 2.99, 95% CI = [1.05, 8.50], p = 0.04) and cataract surgery (RR = 5.67, 95% CI = [3.09, 10.41], p < 0.00001) than low-dose IVTA in eyes with ME secondary to RVO. These efficacy and safety differences in high-dose and low-dose IVTA were not observed in DME eyes.

CONCLUSIONS

The RCT evidence in this setting is limited. High-dose IVTA achieved greater improvements in visual acuity and reductions in retinal thickness than low-dose IVTA at months 4-6. However, high-dose IVTA had a less favorable safety profile than low-dose IVTA. The significance of these outcomes was based on patients with ME secondary to RVO, but not DME.

Diabetic Macular Oedema Guidelines: An Australian Perspective

The number of people living with diabetes is expected to rise to 578 million by 2030 and to 700 million by 2045, exacting a severe socioeconomic burden on healthcare systems around the globe. This is also reflected in the increasing numbers of people with ocular complications of diabetes (namely, diabetic macular oedema (DMO) and diabetic retinopathy (DR)). In one study examining the global prevalence of DR, 35% of people with diabetes had some form of DR, 7% had PDR, 7% had DMO, and 10% were affected by these vision-threatening stages. In many regions of the world (Australia included), DR is one of the top three leading causes of vision loss amongst working age adults (20-74 years). In the management of DMO, the landmark ETDRS study demonstrated that moderate visual loss, defined as doubling of the visual angle, can be reduced by 50% or more by focal/grid laser photocoagulation. However, over the last 20 years, antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and corticosteroid therapies have emerged as alternative options for the management of DMO and provided patients with choices that have higher chances of improving vision than laser alone. In Australia, since the 2008 NHMRC guidelines, there have been significant developments in both the treatment options and treatment schedules for DMO. This working group was therefore assembled to review and address the current management options available in Australia.

Cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone compared with aflibercept in naïve diabetic macular edema

BACKGROUND

To assess the cost-effectiveness of the delayed-release device of dexamethasone compared with aflibercept in the treatment of patients with naïve diabetic macular edema (DME) from a societal perspective in the healthcare sector Zaragoza III in Spain.

METHODS

A Markov model with five states defined by visual acuity (VA) in the better-seeing eye (Snellen scale) and an additional death state were constructed. Two cohorts of patients were distributed along the VA states and treated during a year with either dexamethasone or aflibercept. One-year follow-up on each group was performed. Medical costs related to the DME treatment and follow-up, medical costs related to the DME comorbidities, and non-medical-related costs were taken into account. Costs (2020 €), health outcomes (Quality-Adjusted Life Years-QALYs), both discounted at a 3.5% annual rate, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER: €/QALY) were determined for a lifetime horizon in the base case analysis.

RESULTS

Patients treated with dexamethasone were €77,349 more costly and provided 2.667 additional QALYs (€29,002/QALY) than those treated with aflibercept. The variable efficiency per patient was calculated dividing the improvement in quality of life (on the VFQ-25 scale) by the cost of the treatment. With the obtained results it can be concluded that the efficiency of treating the patients with dexamethasone is significantly superior than the efficiency of treating them with aflibercept.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost per QALY gained with the delayed-release device of dexamethasone compared with the one obtained by aflibercept in the naïve DME population is just below the €30,000 threshold, below which, new drugs are sometimes regarded as cost-effective strategies in Spain. In this model, the key variables with greater impact on the cost-effectiveness results were the selected time horizon, the chosen extrapolation method and the number of aflibercept and dexamethasone injections.

Laser irradiation of ocular tissues to enhance drug delivery

Scleral and corneal membranes represent substantial barriers against drug delivery to the eye. Conventional hypodermic needles-based intraocular injections are clinically employed to overcome these barriers. This study, for the first time, investigated a non-invasive alternative to intraocular injections by laser irradiation of ocular tissues. The P.L.E.A.S.E.® laser device was applied on excised porcine scleral and corneal tissues, which showed linear relationships between depths of laser-created micropores and laser fluences at range 8.9-444.4 J/cm². Deeper and wider micropores were observed in scleral relative to corneal tissues. The permeation of rhodamine B and fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-dextran were investigated through ocular tissues at different laser parameters (laser fluences 0-44.4 J/cm² and micropore densities 7.5 and 15%). Both molecules showed enhanced permeation through ocular tissues on laser irradiation. Maximum transscleral permeation of the molecules was attained at laser fluence 8.9 J/cm² and micropore density 15%. Transcorneal permeation of rhodamine B increased with increasing either laser fluence or micropore density, while that of FITC-dextran was not affected by either parameter. The transscleral water loss increased significantly after laser irradiation then returned to the baseline values within 24 h, indicating healing of the laser-created micropores. Laser irradiation is a promising technique to enhance intraocular delivery of both small and large molecule drugs.

Incidence and treatment outcomes of secondary epiretinal membrane following intravitreal injection for diabetic macular edema

The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of secondary epiretinal membrane (ERM) after intravitreal injection and the effect of ERM on visual acuity and central macular thickness (CMT) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). We included 147 eyes of 95 patients over 18 years old who were diagnosed with DME from 2012 to 2016, treated with intravitreal injection, and followed-up more than 24 months. Mean CMT in the ERM group was significantly thicker than in the non-ERM group after 9, 12, 18, and 24 months. Secondary ERM developed in 9.5% of patients during follow-up. Compared to other agents, the incidence of secondary ERM was significantly higher after intravitreal injection of dexamethasone implant. Among patients in the ERM group, the mean decrease of CMT between pre-injection and 2 weeks post-injection was significantly less after secondary ERM formation than before ERM formation. Secondary ERM formation was significantly associated with the number of intravitreal injections and the use of dexamethasone implant. Therefore, secondary ERM develops more frequently as the number of intravitreal injections increases and after intravitreal dexamethasone implant injection. The therapeutic effects of intravitreal injections for DME patients decrease after secondary ERM formation.

Real Life Experience of Dexamethasone Implant in Refractory Diabetic Macular Oedema

Purpose

The purpose of this retrospective study was to examine the efficacy of dexamethasone implant in refractory diabetic macular oedema (DMO) in real life settings.

Methods

In all, 24 eyes of 22 patients that required treatment with single or multiple intravitreal dexamethasone implants for refractory DMO were included in the study. Patients having macular oedema for another retinal disease were excluded from the study. The patient data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. As a demographic data age, gender, the type of diabetes and the duration of DMO were collected. Changes in central foveal thickness and the number of hyper reflective spots (HRS) were analyzed with Heidelberg SD-OCT. Furthermore, the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and changes in the intraocular pressure (IOP) were measured.

Results

In all, 50.0% of the eyes with baseline BCVA 0.45 (±2.4) lines in ETDRS LogMAR scale received only one implant during the follow-up of 332 (±79) days. At the end of the follow-up, BCVA was 0.26 (±2.0) lines. The other 50.0% of the eyes with baseline BCVA 0.64 (±3.0) lines received the second implant in 156 (±38) days. Central retinal thickness (CRT) at baseline was 333 (±44) μm in the eyes with only one implant and 497 (±125) μm in the eyes with 2 or more implants. IOP lowering medication was needed for 8.3% of the eyes. The decrease in the number of HRS was significant (8±17, p=0.048) in response to dexamethasone implantation.

Conclusion

The dexamethasone implant is a useful treatment in refractory DMO and HRS seen in the OCT might indicate inflammation in the retina.

Ocular Syphilis Unmasked Following Bilateral Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant (Ozurdex) Injection

Intraocular corticosteroids are used in ophthalmologic conditions such as macular edema secondary to vascular occlusions, diabetes, and uveitis. Infectious ocular diseases must be ruled out before intravitreal corticosteroid implantation. Here, the authors report a case that has been referred to their clinic for surgical treatment due to dense vitreous hemorrhage in the right eye after bilateral intravitreal dexamethasone implantation. As an intraoperative finding, diffuse changes in the color-like paleness of the retina as well as intraretinal white-colored deposits were observed. Serology tests were performed, and syphilis serology was positive. Intravenous penicillin provides resolution of inflammation. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2019;50:e77-e80.].

Suprachoroidal Space Alterations Following Delivery of Triamcinolone Acetonide: Post-Hoc Analysis of the Phase 1/2 HULK Study of Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To study anatomic changes in the suprachoroidal space (SCS) following suprachoroidal injection of CLS-TA, triamcinolone acetonide injectable suspension.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eyes with diabetic macular edema receiving CLS-TA were imaged serially using anterior segment spectral-domain optical coherence tomography to examine the SCS.

RESULTS

At the final imaging session, the SCS was not significantly different in study eyes (n = 14; 8.4 μm) compared to fellow eyes (n = 10; 8.1 μm; P = .698). Two eyes were imaged immediately before and 30 minutes after suprachoroidal injections; in these eyes, mean suprachoroidal width increased significantly following CLS-TA injection, 9.9 μm to 75.1 μm (P < .001), and subsequently returned to 14.9 μm 1 month after the final injection (P = .221).

CONCLUSION

Suprachoroidal CLS-TA injection caused a measurable increase in the SCS, which returned to preinjection levels by 1 month following injection with no apparent lasting impact on SCS anatomy. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2018;49:692-697.].

Comparison of the Effect of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant in Vitrectomized and Nonvitrectomized Eyes for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness of sustained-release dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant in nonvitrectomized eyes and vitrectomized eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME).

Methods

A retrospective review of the medical records of 40 eyes of 30 consecutive patients with diabetic macular edema who underwent intravitreal DEX implant injection. Patients were divided into 2 subgroups: 31 eyes that were nonvitrectomized (group 1) and 9 eyes that had previously undergone standard pars plana vitrectomy (group 2). The main outcome measures were BCVA and foveal thickness (FT).

Results

A significant improvement was seen in BCVA in both group 1 and group 2 at the 1st, 2nd, and 6th months after treatment with DEX implant (p < 0.05). In group 1, a significant reduction in FT was observed at the 1st, 2nd, and 6th months (p < 0.05). In group 2, a significant reduction in FT was seen at the 1st and 2nd months (p < 0.05), but the reduction rate at the 6th month after the injection was not statistically significant (p = 0.06).

Conclusion

DEX implant is effective for the treatment of diabetic macular edema, and the effectiveness of the drug is similar in vitrectomized and nonvitrectomized eyes.

Glucocorticoid receptor GRβ regulates glucocorticoid-induced ocular hypertension in mice

Prolonged glucocorticoid (GC) therapy can cause GC-induced ocular hypertension (OHT), which if left untreated progresses to iatrogenic glaucoma and permanent vision loss. The alternatively spliced isoform of glucocorticoid receptor GRβ acts as dominant negative regulator of GR activity, and it has been shown that overexpressing GRβ in trabecular meshwork (TM) cells inhibits GC-induced glaucomatous damage in TM cells. The purpose of this study was to use viral vectors to selectively overexpress the GRβ isoform in the TM of mouse eyes treated with GCs, to precisely dissect the role of GRβ in regulating steroid responsiveness. We show that overexpression of GRβ inhibits GC effects on MTM cells in vitro and GC-induced OHT in mouse eyes in vivo. Ad5 mediated GRβ overexpression reduced the GC induction of fibronectin, collagen 1, and myocilin in TM of mouse eyes both in vitro and in vivo. GRβ also reversed DEX-Ac induced IOP elevation, which correlated with increased conventional aqueous humor outflow facility. Thus, GRβ overexpression reduces effects caused by GCs and makes cells more resistant to GC treatment. In conclusion, our current work provides the first evidence of the in vivo physiological role of GRβ in regulating GC-OHT and GC-mediated gene expression in the TM.

Macular oedema as manifestation of diabetic retinopathy

Diabetes mellitus is the third most dangerous disease of our time preceded by cardiovascular diseases and oncologic pathology. According to the International Diabetes Federation (January 1, 2016), worldwide approximately 415 million people aged 2079 years suffer from diabetes. The most significant manifestations of diabetes mellitus are lesions of the retina and blood vessels, which manifest as diabetic retinopathy and macular oedema, which lead to the inevitable loss of vision and disability in patients of working age. The existence of multile diagnostic methods and a broad classification provide an evidence of the complex nature of the pathological process of the macular zone in diabetes mellitus. However, to date, a single, generalised and accepted classification does not exist. Difficulties in the treatment of diabetic maculopathy are attributed to various forms of retinal lesions and ambiguities in the approach used to choose the disease management. It determines the importance of the development of diagnostic methods for the further correction of the standard treatment approach. New directions of surgical treatment allow relying on the best results of diabetic maculopathy treatment.

Diabetic macular edema in proliferative stage treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent and triamcinolone acetonide by laser-based strategies

AIM

To appraise the effect of treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME) in proliferative stage with sufficient panrentinal photocoagulation (PRP) therapy and intravitreal injections (IV) Conbercept and posterior subtenon's triamcinolone acetonide (STTA) sequential therapy.

METHODS

This prospective clinical randomized controlled trial of cross-over design was conducted in three phases. The participants included cases of DME in proliferative stage. They were divided into two groups and treated with PRP before enrollment. Group A were treated with IV-Conbercept 0.5 mg for one month in the 1^st phase. Group B were treated with STTA 40 mg (twice per two weeks). The interventions were exchanged in the second phase (2mo) between the two groups. In the third phase (3-6mo) no other treatment was given. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) measured by OCT and complications were compared.

RESULTS

After phase I: in Group A, BCVA improved from 0.201±0.17 to 0.37±0.24 (F=5.88, P=0.004). CMT changed from 449±155.10 to 304.1±84.70 µm (F=14.9, P<0.01). In Group B, BCVA changed from 0.195±0.19 to 0.26±0.20 (F=0.76, P=0.41) while CMT changed from 463.82±152.92 to 366.00±115.40 µm (F=3.70, P<0.03). The improvement of BCVA was better in Group A (P<0.05). After phase II: in Group A, BCVA raised to 0.47±0.27 (F=0.26, P<0.01), CMT reduced to 260.67±62.97 µm (F=-188.3, P<0.01); in Group B, BCVA raised to 0.51±0.26 (F=0.31, P<0.01), CMT reduced to 261.93±50.15 µm (F=-201.9, P<0.01). But there were no difference between two groups (P>0.05). After phase III: in Group A, BCVA maintained 0.42±0.25 (F=0.22, P=0.001), CMT maintained 267.8±58.34 µm, (F=-0.27, P<0.01); in Group B, BCVA was 0.47±0.25 (F=-0.27, P<0.01), CMT was 272.71±49.16 µm (F=-191.1, P<0.01). No serious complications happened in all phases.

CONCLUSION

PRP+Conbercept is better than PRP+STTA in DME with proliferative stage but PRP+Conbercept+STTA sequential therapy may be a wiser choice for persistent effectiveness on anatomical as well as functional status.

Quantitative Assessment of Optic Nerve Changes in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema Treated With Fluocinolone Acetonide Vitreous Implants

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate glaucomatous changes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) treated with intravitreal implants releasing 0.2 µg/day or 0.5 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) (Iluvien 0.2 µg/day; Alimera Sciences, Alpharetta, GA) or sham control.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fundus photographs were assessed to determine clinically significant changes in glaucomatous indicators.

RESULTS

The mean cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) change was similar with all three treatments. Compared with sham control, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with 0.5 µg/day but not 0.2 µg/day FAc experienced a CDR increase of greater than 0.1. There was no significant increase in the proportion of patients experiencing a CDR increase of greater than 0.2 with either dose of implant versus sham control. Other indicators of glaucomatous change did not differ significantly with treatment. Subgroup analyses showed no differences in cupping based on ocular or baseline characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with FAc for 36 months was not associated with significant glaucomatous optic nerve head changes in patients with DME with or without increased intraocular pressure. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2016;47:418-425.].

Characterization of Intraocular Pressure Increases and Management Strategies Following Treatment With Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implants in the FAME Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To compare elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) management and outcomes among patients with diabetic macular edema who received fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implants versus sham-control treatment and explore the prior ocular steroid exposure impact on IOP outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was measured using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study charts or electronic VA testers. Goldmann applanation tonometry was used to measure IOP.

RESULTS

Elevated IOP was more common in FAc-versus sham control-treated patients. Medication, and less often trabeculoplasty or surgery, was used to lower IOP without affecting VA outcomes. No patient treated with 0.2 µg/day FAc who received prior ocular steroid required IOP-lowering surgery.

CONCLUSION

Elevated IOP may occur following FAc implant receipt; however, in the present study, it was manageable and did not impact vision outcomes. Patients previously treated with ocular steroid did not require IOP-lowering surgery following 0.2 µg/day FAc implant administration. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2016;47:426-435.].

New Drugs and New Posterior Delivery Methods in CME

PURPOSE

To discuss the characteristics, indications and adverse events (AEs) of sustained-release corticosteroid devices for the treatment of cystoid macular edema (CME).

RECENT FINDINGS

Ozurdex® is approved for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME), retinal vein occlusion related-CME and noninfectious posterior uveitis (NIPU). It releases dexamethasone over a maximum period of 6 months making repeated intravitreal injections necessary for recurrent CME. Iluvien® releases fluocinolone for up to 36 months and is effective for the treatment of chronic DME. Retisert® (Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY) also releases fluocinolone, and is approved for chronic NIPU. Both Iluvien® and Retisert® are non-biodegradable devices and are highly associated with cataract and glaucoma.

SUMMARY

Long-acting intraocular corticosteroid formulations offer a more predictable drug-release profile and reduced dosing frequency in comparison to conventional formulations of the same compounds but the risk-benefit ratio must be taken into consideration previous to the implantation of those devices.

Steroid-induced ocular hypertension/glaucoma: Focus on pharmacogenomics and implications for precision medicine

Elevation of intraocular pressure (IOP) due to therapeutic use of glucocorticoids is called steroid-induced ocular hypertension (SIOH); this can lead to steroid-induced glaucoma (SIG). Glucocorticoids initiate signaling cascades ultimately affecting expression of hundreds of genes; this provides the potential for a highly personalized pharmacological response. Studies attempting to define genetic risk factors were undertaken early in the history of glucocorticoid use, however scientific tools available at that time were limited and progress stalled. In contrast, significant advances were made over the ensuing years in defining disease pathophysiology. As the genomics age emerged, it appeared the time was right to renew investigation into genetics. Pharmacogenomics is an unbiased discovery approach, not requiring an underlying hypothesis, and provides a way to pinpoint clinically significant genes and pathways that could not have been discovered any other way. Results of the first genome-wide association study to identify polymorphisms associated with SIOH, and follow-up on two novel genes linked to the disorder, GPR158 and HCG22, is discussed in the second half of the article. However, knowledge of genetic variants determining response to steroids in the eye also has value in its own right as a predictive and diagnostic tool. This article concludes with a discussion of how the Precision Medicine Initiative®, announced by U.S. President Obama in his 2015 State of the Union address, is beginning to touch the practice of ophthalmology. It is argued that SIOH/SIG may provide one of the next opportunities for effective application of precision medicine.

Update on corticosteroids for diabetic macular edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) remains an important cause of visual loss. Although anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents are generally used as first-line treatments for patients with center-involving DME, there is an important role for corticosteroids as well. Corticosteroids may be especially useful in pseudophakic patients poorly responsive to anti-VEGF therapies, in patients wishing to reduce the number of required injections, and in pregnant patients. Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide has been used for many years but is not approved for this indication. An extended-release bioerodable dexamethasone delivery system and an extended-release nonbioerodable fluocinolone acetonide insert have both achieved regulatory approval for the treatment of DME. All intravitreal corticosteroids are associated with risks of cataract progression, elevation of intraocular pressure, and endophthalmitis. There is no current consensus regarding the use of corticosteroids, but they are valuable for selected patients with center-involving DME.

Nonbiological pharmacotherapies for the treatment of diabetic macular edema

INTRODUCTION

During the past decade, there have been significant advances in the pharmacotherapies for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). Among the presently available treatment options, anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) agents are the most favored agents due to their efficacy and safety. The index review focuses on nonbiological therapies that have entered in phase 3 clinical trials for DME.

AREAS COVERED

An extensive review of the literature was performed to identify various nonbiological immunotherapies i.e., drugs other than '-mAbs' (monoclonal antibodies including anti-VEGF agents), '-mibs' (proteasome inhibitors), '-NAbs' (nanoparticle albumin-bound), and '-nibs' (small molecule inhibitor/tyrosine kinase inhibitors), among others. Extended-release low-dose corticosteroid devices have been recently approved for the treatment of DME. Other compounds such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antibody mimetic proteins, nonbiological growth factor inhibitors, and inhibitors of protein kinase C have been described.

EXPERT OPINION

A number of therapies are under development for the pharmacological management of DME. Due to the rising healthcare costs associated with anti-VEGF agents, a number of alternate treatment options have been explored recently. Some of these agents have reached phase 3 in clinical trials and appear to have a promising role in the management of DME. As further research is conducted, the role of each individual agent will become more defined, alone or in combination therapy.

New treatments for diabetic macular edema

This work comprehensively reviews the latest treatment options for diabetic macular edema (DME) used in its management and presents further work on the topic. Diabetic retinopathy is an important and increasingly prevalent cause of preventable blindness worldwide. To meet this increasing burden there has recently been a proliferation of pharmacological therapies being used in clinical practice. A variety of medical treatment options now exist for DME. These include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as nepafenac, as well as intravitreal steroids like triamcinolone (kenalog). Long-term results up to 7 years after commencing treatment are presented for triamcinolone. Studies are reviewed on the use of dexamethasone (ozurdex) and fluocinolone (Retisert and Iluvien implants) including the FAME studies. A variety of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents used in DME are considered in detail including ranibizumab (lucentis) and the RESTORE, RIDE, RISE and Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR.net) studies. Bevacizumab (avastin) and pegaptinib (macugen) are also considered. The use of aflibercept (eylea) is reviewed including the significance of the DA VINCI, VISTA-DME, VIVID-DME and the DRCR.net studies which have recently suggested potentially greater efficacy when treating DME for aflibercept in patients with more severely reduced visual acuity at baseline. Evidence for the anti-VEGF agent bevasiranib is also considered. Studies of anti-tumour necrosis factor agents like infliximab are reviewed. So are studies of other agents targeting inflammation including minocycline, rapamycin (sirolimus) and protein kinase C inhibitors such as midostaurin and ruboxistaurin. The protein kinase C β inhibitor Diabetic Macular Edema Study is considered. Other agents which have been suggested for DME are discussed including cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors like celecoxib, phospholipase A2 inhibitors, recombinant erythropoietin, and monoclonal anti-interleukin antibodies such as canakinumab. The management of DME in a variety of clinical scenarios is also discussed - in newly diagnosed DME, refractory DME including after macular laser, and postoperatively after intraocular surgery. Results of long-term intravitreal triamcinolone for DME administered up to seven years after commencing treatment are considered in the context of the niche roles available for such agents in modern management of DME. This is alongside more widely used treatments available to the practitioner such as anti-VEGF agents like aflibercept (Eylea) and ranibizumab (Lucentis) which at present are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment of DME.

Role of implants in the treatment of diabetic macular edema: focus on the dexamethasone intravitreal implant

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the leading cause of sight-threatening complication in diabetic patients, and several treatment modalities have been developed and evaluated to treat this pathology. Intravitreal agents, such as anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) or corticosteroids, have become more popular in recent years and are widely used for treating DME. Sustained release drugs appear to be mentioned more often nowadays for extending the period of intravitreal activity, and corticosteroids play a key role in inhibiting the inflammatory process in DME. A potent corticosteroid, dexamethasone (Ozurdex(®)), in the form of an intravitreal implant, has been approved for various ocular etiologies among which DME is also one. This review evaluates the role of implants in the treatment of DME, mainly focusing on the dexamethasone intravitreal implant.

Emerging drugs for diabetic macular edema

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the most common cause of visual impairment due to diabetic retinopathy. The treatment of DME has recently undergone a paradigm shift. Traditionally, photocoagulation was standard treatment, but pharmacologic therapies are becoming increasingly used for this purpose. All currently available drug therapies for DME are either anti-VEGF agents or corticosteroids.

AREAS COVERED

The pathogenesis of DME involves angiogenesis, inflammation and oxidative stress. The scientific rationale to treat DME through the pharmacologic blockade of VEGF and other pro-angiogenic factors is discussed. The fluocinolone insert is approved for the treatment of DME in several European countries, but not in the US at this time. Some medications that are already approved for other retinal diseases, most prominently aflibercept and the dexamethasone delivery system, have recently obtained approval for DME in the US. Other compounds are being studied in earlier-phase clinical trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Pharmacologic treatment of DME will likely become increasingly used, especially for patients with edema involving the fovea. At this time, the two main classes of medication for treatment of DME are anti-VEGF agents and corticosteroids. As we continue to collect clinical trials data, the precise role of individual agents, and the continuing role for photocoagulation, will become more clear.

Sustained-release corticosteroid options

Sustained-release corticosteroid treatment has shown to be a promising strategy for macular edema due to retinovascular disease (i.e., diabetes and retinal vein occlusion) and for the treatment of noninfectious posterior uveitis. Clinicians now have the option of three sustained-release corticosteroid implants: Ozurdex (Allergan Inc., Irvine, CA) which releases dexamethasone and two devices that release fluocinolone acetonide, Retisert (Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY), and Iluvien (Alimera Science, Alpharetta, GA). Each has different physical characteristics and duration effect and has been approved for different indications. Herein we provide a summary of the current clinical knowledge regarding these implants.