The importance of monitoring wet age-related macular degeneration patients during Coronavirus disease 19 pandemic: A retrospective study of assessment of functional and structural outcomes

Comparing visual outcomes of nAMD treatment during and after the COVID-19 restrictions period

MAIN OBJECTIVE

Compare treatment outcomes of newly diagnosed neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) during and after the COVID-19 restrictions.

METHODS

This retrospective study at the Retina Group of Washington analyzed nAMD patients treated with anti-VEGF therapy with ≥ 12 months of follow-up. Two groups were identified: 258 subjects diagnosed between March 2020-March 2022 (Group 1) and 376 subjects diagnosed after (Group 2). Primary outcomes were 12-month and final best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and number of injections in the first 12 months.

RESULTS

Initial mean BCVA was 20/71 and 20/68 in Group 1 and Group 2, with median BCVA of 20/60 and 20/50, respectively. At 12 months, mean BCVA improved to 20/65 and 20/54 in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (p = 0.086). Final mean BCVA was 20/76 for Group 1 and 20/58 for Group 2 (p = 0.010). The mean change in LogMAR BCVA from the time of conversion to last follow-up was + 0.03 for Group 1 and -0.08 for Group 2 (p = 0.007). Group 1 had fewer injections in the first year of therapy (8.67 vs. 9.21, p = 0.004). 38.8% of Group 1 reached BCVA ≥20/40 at 12 months, versus 48.9% for Group 2 (p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Patients diagnosed during the COVID-19 restrictions period had worse visual outcomes than those diagnosed thereafter. Multiple factors, including, but not limited to reduced treatment frequency, likely contributed to worse visual outcomes.

Patient adherence to therapy after switch to aflibercept from bevacizumab or ranibizumab for treatment-refractory neovascular age-related macular degeneration

PURPOSE

Clinical trials have demonstrated that switching patients from intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) or ranibizumab (IVR) to aflibercept (IVA) for treatment-refractory neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) can decrease the injection frequency. This study evaluated whether there was a difference in the rate of injections or nonadherent events after switching therapies.

METHODS

The study comprised a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of patients treated for nAMD from 2010 to 2018 who received ≥3 intravitreal injections of IVB/IVR prior to switching to IVA because of treatment-refractory nAMD. The treatment index, outcomes, and adherence to treatment were compared between both treatment regimens.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients (67 eyes) met inclusion criteria. There was no change in the treatment index (0.65 versus 0.66, P = 0.650) or the number of nonadherent events (33 versus 36, P = 0.760) after the switch from IVB/IVR to IVA. Central macular thickness (CMT) increased 7.7%±13.8% in eyes that had a nonadherent event (283±69 µm to 304±75 µm after resuming care, P = 0.039). There was no short-term impact on visual acuity (VA) for this subset of eyes (0.387±0.202 LogMAR versus 0.365±0.156 LogMAR, P = 0.636). Patients who had nonadherent events ended the study with similar VA compared with patients who had no treatment lapses (0.370±0.616 LogMAR versus 0.337±0.638 LogMAR, P = 0.843).

CONCLUSION

Switching from IVB/ IVR to IVA for treatment-refractory nAMD in a real-world setting does not reduce the treatment index or increase adherence to treatment. Although there were short-term anatomical effects resulting from missed treatments, VA remained stable.

Patient Perspective on the Monitoring of Their Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration during Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Retrospective Study

Background and Objectives: The purpose was to provide the patients’ perspective on the monitoring of their wet age-related macular degeneration (wet AMD) during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the importance of telemedicine. Materials and Methods: Wet AMD patients that underwent intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections in two Swiss ophthalmology clinics, completed two questionnaires after the first confinement due to COVID-19 in Switzerland. The first evaluated their views concerning their adherence to scheduled injections during the confinement, and the application of telemedicine in the future. The second, adapted from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25, assessed their opinions on visual function change during confinement. Results: From a total of 130 patients, 8.5% responded they did not respect their assigned schedule (group 1) while 91.5% responded they did (group 2). A total of 78.7% of group 2 considered treatment reception as more relevant compared to the risk of COVID-19 contraction. During the pre-lockdown period, group 2 patients required more help from others than group 1 patients (p = 0.02). In the possibility of another lockdown, 36.3% of group 1 and 8.7% of group 2 would choose telemedicine to monitor their wet AMD (p = 0.02), 54.5% and 86.9% would rather visit the clinic (p = 0.02), while 9.0% and 4.3% would cancel their appointment, respectively. It was found that 70% of group 1 and 33.6% of group 2 would prefer to use the telemedicine services than visiting a telemedicine centre (p = 0.04). Conclusions: During circumstances similar to the COVID-19 confinement, most patients would prefer to visit the clinic. Group 1 would prefer wet AMD monitoring via telemedicine at a higher rate than group 2.