Antagonism of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor for Macular Edema Caused by Retinal Vein Occlusions: Two-Year Outcomes

Role of Novel Inflammatory Factors in Central Retinal Vein Occlusion with Macular Edema

Background and Objectives: To investigate associations among the aqueous humor levels of novel inflammatory factors, including FMS-related tyrosine kinase 3 ligand (Flt-3L), fractalkine, CXC chemokine ligand 16 (CXCL-16), and endocan-1; the severity of macular edema in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO); and the prognosis of CRVO with macular edema after antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy. Materials and Methods: Aqueous humor was obtained during anti-VEGF treatment with intravitreal ranibizumab injection (IRI) in patients with CRVO and macular edema (n = 19) and during cataract surgery in patients with cataracts (controls, n = 20), and the levels of VEGF and novel inflammatory factors were measured. Macular edema was evaluated by central macular thickness (CMT) and neurosensory retinal thickness (TNeuro), and improvement was evaluated by calculating the percentage change in CMT and TNeuro from before to 1 month after IRI. Results: The levels of VEGF and the novel inflammatory factors were significantly higher in the CRVO group, and the levels of Flt-3L, CXCL-16, and endocan-1 were significantly correlated with each other and with the aqueous flare value. Baseline levels of Flt-3L, CXCL-16, and endocan-1 had a significantly negative correlation with the change in CMT, and the baseline level of CXCL-16 was significantly negatively correlated with the change in TNeuro. Conclusions: Relations among novel inflammatory factors should be further investigated. These findings may help improve understanding of macular edema in CRVO patients and aid the development of new treatments targeting novel inflammatory factors.

Mechanisms of macular edema

Macular edema is the pathological accumulation of fluid in the central retina. It is a complication of many retinal diseases, including diabetic retinopathy, retinal vascular occlusions and uveitis, among others. Macular edema causes decreased visual acuity and, when chronic or refractory, can cause severe and permanent visual impairment and blindness. In most instances, it develops due to dysregulation of the blood-retinal barrier which permits infiltration of the retinal tissue by proteins and other solutes that are normally retained in the blood. The increase in osmotic pressure in the tissue drives fluid accumulation. Current treatments include vascular endothelial growth factor blockers, corticosteroids, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. These treatments target vasoactive and inflammatory mediators that cause disruption to the blood-retinal barrier. In this review, a clinical overview of macular edema is provided, mechanisms of disease are discussed, highlighting processes targeted by current treatments, and areas of opportunity for future research are identified.

Which Explanatory Variables Contribute to the Classification of Good Visual Acuity over Time in Patients with Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion with Macular Edema Using Machine Learning?

This study’s goal is to determine the accuracy of a linear classifier that predicts the prognosis of patients with macular edema (ME) due to a branch retinal vein occlusion during the maintenance phase of antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy. The classifier was created using the clinical information and optical coherence tomographic (OCT) findings obtained up to the time of the first resolution of ME. In total, 66 eyes of 66 patients received an initial intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF followed by repeated injections with the pro re nata (PRN) regimen for 12 months. The patients were divided into two groups: those with and those without good vision during the PRN phase. The mean AUC of the classifier was 0.93, and the coefficients of the explanatory variables were: best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at baseline was 0.66, BCVA at first resolution of ME was 0.51, age was 0.21, the average brightness of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) was −0.12, the intactness of the external limiting membrane (ELM) was −0.14, the average brightness of the ELM was −0.17, the brightness value of EZ was −0.17, the area of the outer segments of the photoreceptors was −0.20, and the intactness of the EZ was −0.24. This algorithm predicted the prognosis over time for individual patients during the PRN phase.

Predictors of visual recovery in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion after treatment with Conbercept

Background

The use of Spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) to evaluate the predictors of visual acuity-recovery in patients treated with conbercept for macular edema (ME) secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) has rarely been seen. We collected 26 CRVO-ME patients with different OCT measures at 6 months follow-up to identify the factors that are most strongly correlated with the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) post-treatment in CRVO-ME patients treated with conbercept.

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of intravitreal conbercept injections for the treatment of CRVO-ME and to determine the major predictors of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) post-treatment.

Methods

A retrospective study methodology was used. Twenty-six eyes from 26 patients with CRVO-ME were enrolled in the study. After an initial intravitreal injection of conbercept (0.5 mg/0.05 ml), monthly injections for up to 6 months were given following a 1 + PRN (pro re nata) regimen. Data collected at monthly intervals included measurements of the logMAR BCVA, central subfield thickness (CST), macular volume (MV), photoreceptor layer thickness (PLT), outer nuclear layer thickness (ONLT), and the disrupted ellipsoid zone (DEZ). The correlation between BCVA, before and after injections, and each of CST, MV, PLT, ONLT, DEZ was analyzed.

Results

The logMAR BCVA in months 3 and 6 post-injection was significantly improved relative to the baseline. In this same period the CST, MV, PLT, ONLT and DEZ were also significantly improved relative to the baseline. There was a negative correlation between PLT and logMAR BCVA at months 3 and 6 after treatment (r = − 0.549, P < 0.001; r = − 0.087, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Intravitreal injection of conbercept is an effective treatment for CRVO-ME. With 6 months of follow-up, logMAR BCVA and CST, MV, PLT, ONLT, DEZ improved. PLT was negatively correlated with the visual function in CRVO-ME patients after conbercept treatment, which may be a predictor of vision recovery in patients with CRVO-ME.

Classification of good visual acuity over time in patients with branch retinal vein occlusion with macular edema using support vector machine

PURPOSE

To identify the eyes with macular edema (ME) due to a branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) that have good visual acuity during the continuous anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment based on the patients' clinical information and optical coherence tomography (OCT) images by using machine learning.

METHODS

Sixty-six eyes of 66 patients received 1 anti-VEGF injection followed by repeated injections in the pro re nata (PRN) regimen for 12 months. The patients were divided into two groups: those with and those without good vision during the 1-year experimental period. Handcraft features were defined from the OCT images at the time of the first resolution of the ME. Variables with a significant difference between the groups were used as explanatory variables. A classifier was created with handcrafted features based on a support vector machine (SVM) that adjusted parameters for increasing maximal precision.

RESULTS

The age, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at the baseline, BCVA at the first resolution of the ME, integrity and reflectivity of the external limiting membrane (ELM), the ellipsoid zone (EZ), and area of the outer segments of the photoreceptors were selected as explanatory variables. The classification performance was 0.806 for accuracy, 0.768 for precision, 0.772 for recall, and 0.752 for the F-measure.

CONCLUSION

The use of the SVM of the patient's clinical information and OCT images can be helpful for determining the prognosis of the BCVA during continued pro re nata anti-VEGF treatment in eyes with ME associated with BRVO.

Photocoagulation for retinal vein occlusion

The role of photocoagulation in retinal vein occlusion (RVO) has been studied since 1974. The most serious complications of central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) and branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) are: (i) visual deterioration, most commonly due to macular edema, and (ii) the development of ocular neovascularization (NV), particularly neovascular glaucoma (NVG), with hazardous consequences for vision and even the eye itself. Before discussing the role of photocoagulation in the management of NV and macular edema in RVO, it is crucial to gain a basic scientific understanding of the following relevant issues: classification of RVO, ocular NV in RVO, and the natural history of macular edema and visual outcome of RVO. These topics are discussed. In CRVO, ocular NV is a complication of ischemic CRVO but not of nonischemic CRVO. Photocoagulation has been advocated to prevent and/or treat the development of ocular NV and NVG. Since NVG is the most dreaded, intractable and blinding complication of ischemic CRVO, the role of photocoagulation and its management are discussed. Findings of three randomized, prospective clinical trials dealing with photocoagulation in ischemic CRVO are discussed. The role of photocoagulation in the management of ocular NV and macular edema in BRVO, and three randomized, prospective clinical trials dealing with those are discussed. Recent advent of intravitreal anti-VEGF and corticosteroid therapies has drastically changed the role of photocoagulation in the management of macular edema and NV in CRVO and BRVO. This is discussed in detail.

Ocular microcirculation changes, measured with laser speckle flowgraphy and optical coherence tomography angiography, in branch retinal vein occlusion with macular edema treated by ranibizumab

PURPOSE

This study searched for early predictive vascular biomarkers for visual outcomes in eyes with macular edema caused by branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVOME).

METHODS

Twenty-four eyes of 24 subjects with BRVOME were treated with the intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (IVR) for at least 6 months. We measured mean blur rate (MBR) in the optic nerve head (ONH) and vessel density (VD) in the macula with laser speckle flowgraphy and optical coherence tomography angiography, respectively.

RESULTS

Six-month post-IVR best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was correlated positively with age, pre-IVR BCVA, 1-month post-IVR BCVA, 3-month post-IVR BCVA and pre-IVR systolic blood pressure (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively) and negatively with pre-IVR overall MBR, 1-month post-IVR overall MBR, 6-month post-IVR overall MBR, 3-month post-IVR deep retinal capillary plexus (DCP) VD and 6-month post-IVR DCP VD (P = 0.03, P = 0.03, P = 0.02, P = 0.01 and P = 0.005, respectively). Furthermore, a multiple regression analysis showed that pre-IVR overall MBR (β =  - 0.67, P = 0.009) was among independent prognostic factors predicting 6-month post-IVR BCVA. Six-month post-IVR DCP VD was also correlated with overall MBR at all time points.

CONCLUSION

ONH blood flow may be a pre-IVR biomarker of both visual outcomes and post-IVR deep macular microcirculation in eyes with BRVOME.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND

Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is one of the most commonly occurring retinal vascular abnormalities. The most common cause of visual loss in people with BRVO is macular oedema (MO). Grid or focal laser photocoagulation has been shown to reduce the risk of visual loss. Limitations to this treatment exist, however, and newer modalities may have equal or improved efficacy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) has recently been used successfully to treat MO resulting from a variety of causes.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and gather evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the potential harms of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents for the treatment of macular oedema (MO) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2019, Issue 6); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the last search was 12 June 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating BRVO. Eligible trials had to have at least six months' follow-up where anti-VEGF treatment was compared with another treatment, no treatment, or placebo. We excluded trials where combination treatments (anti-VEGF plus other treatments) were used; and trials that investigated the dose and duration of treatment without a comparison group (other treatment/no treatment/sham).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data using standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with an improvement from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity of greater than or equal to 15 letters (3 lines) on the Early Treatment in Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart at six months and 12 months of follow-up. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of participants who lost greater than or equal to 15 ETDRS letters (3 lines) and the mean visual acuity (VA) change at six and 12 months, as well as the change in central retinal thickness (CRT) on optical coherence tomography from baseline at six and 12 months. We also collected data on adverse events and quality of life (QoL).

MAIN RESULTS

We found eight RCTs of 1631 participants that met the inclusion criteria after independent and duplicate review of the search results. These studies took place in Europe, North America, Eastern Mediterranean region and East Asia. Included participants were adults aged 18 or over with VA of 20/40 or worse. Studies varied by duration of disease but permitted previously treated eyes as long as there was sufficient treatment-free interval. All anti-VEGF agents (bevacizumab, ranibizumab and aflibercept) and steroids (triamcinolone and dexamethasone) were included. Overall, we judged the studies to be at moderate or unclear risk of bias. Four of the eight studies did not mask participants or outcome assessors, or both. One trial compared anti-VEGF to sham. At six months, eyes receiving anti-VEGF were significantly more likely to have a gain of 15 or more ETDRS letters (risk ratio (RR) 1.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 2.49; 283 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean VA was better in the anti-VEGF group at six months compared with control (mean difference (MD) 7.50 letters, 95% CI 5.29 to 9.71; 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Anti-VEGF also proved more effective at reducing CRT at six months (MD -57.50 microns, 95% CI -108.63 to -6.37; 281 participants; lower CRT is better; moderate-certainty evidence). There was only very low-certainty evidence on adverse effects. There were no reports of endophthalmitis. Mean change in QoL (measured using the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire VFQ-25) was better in people treated with anti-VEGF compared with people treated with sham (MD 7.6 higher score, 95% CI 4.3 to 10.9; 281 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Three RCTs compared anti-VEGF with macular laser (total participants = 473). The proportion of eyes gaining 15 or more letters was greater in the anti-VEGF group at six months (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.05; 2 studies, 201 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean VA in the anti-VEGF groups was better than the laser groups at six months (MD 9.63 letters, 95% CI 7.23 to 12.03; 3 studies, 473 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was a greater reduction in CRT in the anti-VEGF group compared with the laser group at six months (MD -147.47 microns, 95% CI -200.19 to -94.75; 2 studies, 201 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was only very low-certainty evidence on adverse events. There were no reports of endophthalmitis. QoL outcomes were not reported. Four studies compared anti-VEGF with intravitreal steroid (875 participants). The proportion of eyes gaining 15 or more ETDRS letters was greater in the anti-VEGF group at six months (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.10; 2 studies, 330 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 12 months (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.28; 1 study, 307 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mean VA was better in the anti-VEGF group at six months (MD 8.22 letters, 95% CI 5.69 to 10.76; 2 studies, 330 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 12 months (MD 9.15 letters, 95% CI 6.32 to 11.97; 2 studies, 343 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mean CRT also showed a greater reduction in the anti-VEGF arm at 12 months compared with intravitreal steroid (MD -26.92 microns, 95% CI -65.88 to 12.04; 2 studies, 343 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). People receiving anti-VEGF showed a greater improvement in QoL at 12 months compared to those receiving steroid (MD 3.10, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.98; 1 study, 307 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Moderate-certainty evidence suggested increased risk of cataract and raised IOP with steroids. There was only very low-certainty evidence on APTC events. No cases of endophthalmitis were observed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available RCT evidence suggests that treatment of MO secondary to BRVO with anti-VEGF improves visual and anatomical outcomes at six and 12 months.

Chorioretinal Anastomosis for Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Review of Its Development, Technique, Complications, and Role in Management

Treatments for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) have improved dramatically with the advent of intravitreal agents aimed at blocking the effects of the dominant hypoxia-induced upreglulated cytokine, which is vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). This cytokine breaks down the capillary endothelial barriers and is a major component of the macular edema in this condition. These treatments although impressive only address some of the sequelae of CRVO and have no effect on the underlying cause which is an obstruction to venous outflow leading to retinal blood flow stagnation and an elevation of the retinal central venous pressure (CVP). The creation of a laser-induced chorioretinal anastomosis (L-CRA) between the obstructed high pressure retinal venous circulation and the unobstructed low pressure choroidal venous circulation is a means addressing the causal pathology. The L-CRA will help lower the elevated CVP, which has been up until now an unaddressed component of the macular edema in this condition.This article reviews the preclinical and clinical development of the L-CRA and the results of the studies into its effect on the natural history of CRVO. It now can be used in combination with existing anti-VEGF treatments with the intravitreal agents addressing the component of the CRVO-induced macular edema due to the cytokine dysregulation, and the L-CRA addressing the component due to the elevated CVP and retinal venous stagnation. Improvements in laser technology have led to higher success rates in L-CRA creation and potential complications are now minimized and better controlled. The combination of L-CRA with intravitreal anti-VEGF agents offers the potential of a permanent cure with a significant reduction in the burden of therapy and improved visual outcomes in this condition.

Two-Year Efficacy of Ranibizumab Plus Laser-Induced Chorioretinal Anastomosis vs Ranibizumab Monotherapy for Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Adding a laser-induced chorioretinal anastomosis (L-CRA) to current treatments for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) may improve outcomes and lessen therapy burdens.

Objective

To determine the 2-year efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab with an L-CRA vs ranibizumab alone for patients with macular edema caused by CRVO.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this randomized clinical trial conducted at a single university clinic from March 2012 to June 2015, 58 participants with macular edema caused by CRVO were randomized 1:1 to either an L-CRA or sham procedure at baseline. All participants received monthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab, 0.5 mg. Data were analyzed from April 2017 to September 2017.

Interventions

Random assignment to L-CRA plus monthly injections of intravitreal ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, (combination group; n = 29) or to a sham L-CRA procedure plus monthly injections of intravitreal ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, (ranibizumab alone group; n = 29) for 6 months. From month 7 to month 24, participants were evaluated monthly and received an injection of ranibizumab if a loss of 5 or more letters of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) on ETDRS chart from previous highest score occurred or if there was evidence of residual macular edema on optical coherence tomography.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mean number of injections from month 7 to month 24, change in BCVA, and change in central subfield thickness (CST).

Results

Of the 58 included participants, 38 (66%) were men, and the mean (SD) age was 68.6 (11.8) years; participants had a mean (SD) BCVA of 57.09 (11.87) ETDRS letters (Snellen equivalent, 20/73) and a mean (SD) CST of 738.36 (175.54) μm. A successful L-CRA was created in 24 of 29 participants (83%) in the combination group. The mean number of injections from month 7 to month 24 was 3.2 (95% CI, 2.5-3.8) in the combination group and 7.1 (95% CI, 6.0-8.0) in the ranibizumab alone group. The ratio of the number of injections in the combination group compared with the ranibizumab alone group was 0.46 (95% CI, 0.36-0.61; P < .001). Mixed-effects regression modeling showed a difference in mean BCVA at 2 years between the combination and ranibizumab alone groups (combination, 70.3 letters [Snellen equivalent, 20/40]; ranibizumab alone, 61.6 letters [Snellen equivalent, 20/60]; difference, 8.8 letters; 95% CI, 0.2-17.3; P = .05). There was also a difference in CST at 2 years between the combination and ranibizumab alone groups (mean CST: combination, 303.6 μm; ranibizumab alone, 394.5 μm; difference, 90.9 μm; 95% CI, 24.3-157.5; P = .01). Four participants (14%) in the combination group required a vitrectomy for early macular traction or vitreous hemorrhage.

Conclusions and Relevance

For macular edema caused by CRVO, an L-CRA significantly reduced the number of ranibizumab injections required.

Trial Registration

anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12612000004864.

Different Factors Associated with 2-Year Outcomes in Patients with Branch versus Central Retinal Vein Occlusion Treated with Ranibizumab

PURPOSE

To investigate characteristics associated with visual and anatomic outcomes in branch and central retinal vein occlusion (BRVO and CRVO) patients treated with ranibizumab.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of patients with BRVO and CRVO from 2 multicenter clinical trials who completed month 12 of the HORIZON extension trial.

PARTICIPANTS

205 patients with BRVO and 181 patients with CRVO who completed month 12 of the extension trial.

METHODS

With the use of logistic regression, covariates with a P value < 0.20 from univariate analysis were included in multivariate models to identify independent factors associated with a given outcome (at P < 0.05), with preset variables of disease duration and original treatment assignment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) ≥20/40 (≥70 letters), gain ≥15 letters, and central subfield thickness (CST) ≤250 μm at HORIZON month 12.

RESULTS

In patients with BRVO, good baseline BCVA (odds ratio [OR], 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-1.79), male sex (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.20-5.13), and normal hematocrit (low vs. normal, OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.12-0.59) predicted BCVA ≥20/40; high central foveal thickness (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04) and normal hematocrit (low vs. normal, OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15-0.66) predicted BCVA improvement ≥15 letters; and extensive baseline subretinal fluid modestly predicted CST ≤250 μm (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.00-1.16). In patients with CRVO, good baseline BCVA (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.35-1.89), never smoking (OR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.27-6.17), and young age (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.82) predicted BCVA ≥20/40; never smoking (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.03-4.39), young age (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28-0.59), poor baseline BCVA (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93), hypertension (OR, 4.47; 95% CI, 1.70-11.75), and low diastolic ocular perfusion pressure (OPP) throughout the study (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.21-0.72) predicted BCVA improvement ≥15 letters; and young age (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47-0.90), lower mean hematocrit (low vs. normal, OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.06-7.49), high systolic OPP throughout the study (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.14-2.27), large areas of central hemorrhage (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.04-2.00), and no subretinal fluid (OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.06-4.40) predicted CST ≤250 μm.

CONCLUSIONS

There are substantial differences in good outcome factors in CRVO versus BRVO, suggesting differences in pathophysiology. Young age, never smoking, hemodilution, and hypertension/high systolic perfusion pressure are more beneficial in CRVO, suggesting that avoidance of sluggish blood flow and maintenance of perfusion may be particularly important in CRVO.

Loss of Peak Vision in Retinal Vein Occlusion Patients Treated for Macular Edema

PURPOSE

To evaluate long-term visual and anatomic outcomes in patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents.

DESIGN

Prospective, interventional case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with central RVO (CRVO) or branch RVO (BRVO).

METHODS

Number of anti-VEGF injections and improvement from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield thickness (CST) were prospectively recorded in 40 eyes of 39 CRVO patients and 50 eyes of 47 BRVO patients.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 58 months for BRVO and 78 months for CRVO. Within 6 months of last follow-up, 58% of BRVO patients and 75% of CRVO patients required anti-VEGF injections to control edema. Analysis of the course of each patient over time showed that for BRVO patients, BCVA letter score increased by a mean of 24, from baseline of 52 (20/100) to peak of 76 (20/32), and subsequently decreased by 13, to 63 (20/50), at final visit; and for CRVO patients, BCVA letter score increased by a mean of 26, from baseline of 48 (20/100) to peak of 74 (20/32), and subsequently decreased by 18, to 56 (20/80), at last follow-up. Loss from peak BCVA occurred primarily owing to persistent/recurrent edema and related foveal damage.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RVO showed large improvements in BCVA after initiation of anti-VEGF injections, but in many patients some visual gains were lost over time owing to bouts of recurrent edema. Sustained suppression of VEGF may help to provide optimal outcomes in RVO and reduce treatment burden.

Intravitreal PRN ranibizumab treatment for macular edemadue to branch retinal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND/AIM

To evaluate the effect of intravitreal pro re nata (PRN) ranibizumab treatment from the start on the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the central retinal thickness (CRT) in macular edema (ME) due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with ME secondary to BRVO, who were treated on a PRN basis after a single intravitreal ranibizumab injection, were retrospectively evaluated. The main outcome measures were changes in BCVA and CRT as measured by optical coherence tomography.

RESULTS

The number of injections over 6 months was 2.43 ± 1.16. The mean BCVA of the patients was 0.84 ± 0.10 logMAR at baseline and 0.41 ± 0.06 at the 6th month (P < 0.001). Mean BCVA of the ischemic BRVO group was 1.06 ± 0.68 logMAR at baseline and 0.44 ± 0.30 logMAR at the 6th month (P < 0.05). Similarly, the mean BCVA of the nonischemic BRVO group was 0.77 ± 0.53 logMAR at baseline and 0.41 ± 0.36 logMAR at the 6th month (P < 0.05). Between groups, there was no significant difference in mean BCVA at any examination.

CONCLUSION

Intravitreal ranibizumab is a safe and effective treatment option for ME due to ischemic and nonischemic BRVO using PRN from the start.

Efficacy of single bevacizumab injection as adjuvant therapy to laser photocoagulation in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Background

Macular grid laser photocoagulation remains the standard treatment for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). One possible strategy for treating macular edema is to inhibit VEGF activity by competitive binding of VEGF with an anti-VEGF antibody, suggesting the therapy option with bevacizumab. However, multiple injections of anti-VEGF may lead to complications and high cost.

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the improvement in visual acuity and central macular thickness after combination therapy of laser photocoagulation with single intravitreal bevacizumab injection in macular edema secondary to BRVO.

Methods

Nineteen patients with macular edema secondary to BRVO were assigned to either the group of nine patients in combination therapy of laser photocoagulation with intravitreal bevacizumab or the group of ten patients in the laser photocoagulation therapy. Complete ophthalmologic examinations were performed just before the therapy and at 1 month following the therapy. Changes in visual acuity were tested with the logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), and central macular thickness was measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT).

Results

Combination therapy of laser photocoagulation and single intravitreal bevacizumab injection resulted in a significantly better visual acuity compared to laser photocoagulation therapy (0.35 versus 0.13 logMAR; P=0.041) and reduced macular thickness by 120.33 µm versus 71.50 µm (P=0.277), although this difference was not significant.

Conclusion

Laser photocoagulation combined with a single intravitreal bevacizumab has a substantial effect on increasing visual acuity in macular edema secondary to BRVO.

Importance of Central Retinal Sensitivity for Prediction of Visual Acuity after Intravitreal Bevacizumb in Eyes with Macular Edema Associated with Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion

Objective

To determine whether the baseline retinal sensitivity can predict the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 1 month after intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) in eyes with macular edema (ME) associated with a branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

Subjects and Methods

We evaluated 16 eyes of 16 patients who had ME associated with a BRVO. The mean ± standard deviation age was 69.1 ± 8.9 years, and all had a single IVB injection. The BCVA, central macular thickness (CMT), integrity of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) of the photoreceptors, and retinal sensitivity were determined before (baseline) and at 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month following the IVB. The average threshold retinal sensitivity (AT) within the central 10° was determined by Macular Integrity Assessment. The correlations between the BCVA at 1 month and the CMT, integrity of the EZ, and AT at each visit were determined.

Results

One month after IVB, the BCVA improved significantly from 0.56 ± 0.27 logMAR units to 0.32 ± 0.28 logMAR units, and the CMT from 611.4 ± 209.3 μm to 258.7 ± 64.0 μm (P <0.05). The AT improved significantly from 17.9 ± 5.3 dB to 21.2 ± 5.0 dB (P <0.05). At 1 day after the treatment, both the integrity of the EZ (r = 0.59) and the retinal sensitivity (r = 0.76) were moderately correlated with the BCVA at 1 month.

Conclusion

These results indicate that both the integrity of the EZ and the AT at 1 day after the IVB can predict the BCVA after treatment for ME associated with BRVO. There is a possibility that these parameters will predict the effectiveness of IVB for each case.

Anti-VEGF treatment in branch retinal vein occlusion: a real-world experience over 4 years

PURPOSE

To determine long-term outcome of intraocular antagonism of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in macular oedema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

METHODS

A total of 28 consecutive patients were treated with either intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) or intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) in the first series and were evaluated after a mean follow-up of 5 years for their functional and anatomical outcome.

RESULTS

Time between onset of macular oedema and initial treatment was 5.2 ± 0.4/0.1 ± 0.1 (IVB/IVR) months. A mean of 4 intravitreal injections were given per patients in the first 6 months. In months 7-12 intravitreal injections decreased to 2 and further decreased in the second year (months 13-18: 1.14; months 19-24: 0.5) and third year (months 25-30: 0.4; months 31-36: 0.2). After the fourth year, only two of the 28 patients received further treatment. Average visual acuity (VA) increased by 16 letters after 1 year (p < 0.01) and although not statistically significantly, by a mean of 5 letters (p = 0.3) at long-term evaluation (IVB-group). However, after mean of 5 years, central retinal sensitivity (CRS) improved by 3.6 dB (p = 0.01) and central retinal thickness (CRT) decreased by 161 μm (p = 0.02). In the IVR-group, VA and CRS increased significantly (31 letters and respectively 4.4 dB, p < 0.001) and CRT decreased by 229 μm (p < 0.001) after long-term follow-up. Final functional results were significantly better in patients with treatment initiation <3 months (79 versus 55 letters, p = 0.01). Microvascular abnormalities were detected in 88% (21 of 24 patients), hyperfluorescence in 42% (10 of 24 patients) on wide-field fluorescein angiography in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhibition of VEGF provides substantial long-term benefits for patients with ME secondary to BRVO. Early treatment with anti-VEGF agents and extended therapeutic surveillance was associated with improved visual recovery.

Pro-Permeability Factors After Dexamethasone Implant in Retinal Vein Occlusion; the Ozurdex for Retinal Vein Occlusion (ORVO) Study

PURPOSE

To correlate aqueous vasoactive protein changes with macular edema after dexamethasone implant in retinal vein occlusion (RVO).

DESIGN

Prospective, interventional case series.

METHODS

Twenty-three central RVO (CRVO) and 17 branch RVO (BRVO) subjects with edema despite prior anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment had aqueous taps at baseline and 4 and 16 weeks after dexamethasone implant. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and center subfield thickness were measured every 4 weeks. Aqueous vasoactive protein levels were measured by protein array or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Thirty-two vasoactive proteins were detected in aqueous in untreated eyes with macular edema due to RVO. Reduction in excess foveal thickness after dexamethasone implant correlated with reduction in persephin and pentraxin 3 (Pearson correlation coefficients = 0.682 and 0.638, P = .014 and P = .003). Other protein changes differed among RVO patients as edema decreased, but ≥50% of patients showed reductions in hepatocyte growth factor, endocrine gland VEGF, insulin-like growth factor binding proteins, or endostatin by ≥30%. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in 18 eyes (12 CRVO, 6 BRVO) showed baseline levels of hepatocyte growth factor and VEGF of 168.2 ± 20.1 pg/mL and 78.7 ± 10.0 pg/mL, and each was reduced in 12 eyes after dexamethasone implant.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone implants reduce several pro-permeability proteins providing a multitargeted approach in RVO. No single protein in addition to VEGF can be implicated as a contributor in all patients. Candidates for contribution to chronic edema in subgroups of patients that deserve further study include persephin, hepatocyte growth factor, and endocrine gland VEGF.

Scatter Photocoagulation Does Not Reduce Macular Edema or Treatment Burden in Patients with Retinal Vein Occlusion: The RELATE Trial

PURPOSE

To determine whether scatter and grid laser photocoagulation (laser) adds benefit to ranibizumab injections in patients with macular edema from retinal vein occlusion (RVO) and to compare 0.5-mg with 2.0-mg ranibizumab.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-masked, controlled clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-nine patients with central RVO (CRVO) and 42 with branch RVO (BRVO).

METHODS

Subjects were randomized to 0.5 mg or 2.0 mg ranibizumab every 4 weeks for 24 weeks and re-randomized to pro re nata ranibizumab plus laser or ranibizumab alone.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mean change from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at week 24 for BCVA at weeks 48, 96, and 144 for second randomization.

RESULTS

Mean improvement from baseline BCVA at week 24 was 15.5 and 15.8 letters in the 0.5-mg and 2.0-mg CRVO groups, and 12.1 and 14.6 letters in the 0.5-mg and 2.0-mg BRVO groups. For CRVO, but not BRVO, there was significantly greater reduction from baseline mean central subfield thickness (CST) in the 2.0-mg versus 0.5-mg group (396.1 vs. 253.5 μm; P = 0.03). For the second randomization in CRVO patients, there was no significant difference from week 24 BCVA in the ranibizumab plus laser versus the ranibizumab only groups at week 48 (-3.3 vs. 0.0 letters), week 96 (+0.69 vs. -1.6 letters), or week 144 (+0.4 vs. -6.7 letters), and a significant increase from week 24 mean CST at week 48 (+94.7 vs. +15.2 μm; P = 0.05) but not weeks 96 or 144. For BRVO, there was a significant reduction from week 24 mean BCVA in ranibizumab plus laser versus ranibizumab at week 48 (-7.5 vs. +2.8; P < 0.01) and week 96 (-2.0 vs. +4.8; P < 0.03), but not week 144, and there were no differences in mean CST change from week 24 at weeks 48, 96, or 144. Laser failed to increase edema resolution or to reduce the ranibizumab injections between weeks 24 and 144.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with macular edema resulting from RVO, there was no short-term clinically significant benefit from monthly injections of 2.0-mg versus 0.5-mg ranibizumab injections and no long-term benefit in BCVA, resolution of edema, or number of ranibizumab injections obtained by addition of laser treatment to ranibizumab.

Comparative efficacy and safety of approved treatments for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of approved treatments for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of approved treatments for macular oedema secondary to BRVO were identified from an updated systematic review.

SETTING

A Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs of treatments for macular oedema secondary to BRVO.

INTERVENTIONS

Ranibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata, aflibercept 2 mg monthly (2q4), dexamethasone 0.7 mg implant, laser photocoagulation, ranibizumab+laser, or sham intervention. Bevacizumab and triamcinolone were excluded.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Efficacy outcomes were mean change in best corrected visual acuity (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study scale) and the percentage of patients gaining ≥ 15 letters. Safety outcome was the percentage of patients with increased intraocular pressure (IOP)/ocular hypertension (OH).

RESULTS

8 RCTs were identified for inclusion with 1743 adult patients. The probability of being the most efficacious treatment at month 6 or 12 based on letters gained was 54% for ranibizumab monotherapy, 30% for aflibercept, 16% for ranibizumab plus laser (adjunctive or prompt), and 0% for dexamethasone implant, laser or sham. The probability of being the most efficacious treatment for patients gaining ≥ 15 letters was 39% for aflibercept, 35% for ranibizumab monotherapy, 24% for ranibizumab plus laser, 2% for dexamethasone implant, and less than 1% for laser or sham. There was no statistical difference between ranibizumab monotherapy and aflibercept for letters gained (+1.4 letters for ranibizumab vs aflibercept with 95% credible interval (CrI) of -5.2 to +8.5 letters) or the OR for gaining ≥ 15 letters: 1.06 (95% CrI 0.16 to 8.94)). Dexamethasone implant was associated with significantly higher IOP/OH than antivascular endothelial growth factor agents (OR 13.1 (95% CrI 1.7 to 116.9)).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistically significant difference between ranibizumab and aflibercept.

[Management of macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion]

BACKGROUND

In recent years, intravitreal injections have added to the treatment modalities available for macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO). This article aims to provide an update regarding the management of ME secondary to RVO.

METHODS

A work group met in order to analyze the literature available on Embase/PubMed, regarding treatments for venous occlusion that have received market approval and are reimbursed in France. In total, 33 articles were selected. Consensus within the group for recommendations was based on this data from the literature review and clinical experience and was reported in this article.

RESULTS

The management of ME secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) or central vein occlusion of the retina (CRVO) differs on a number of points. Methods of best practice were discussed separately for BRVO and CRVO, taking into account various ocular and associated parameters.

DISCUSSION

Ranibizumab and dexamethasone implant are the first-line treatments for visual impairment due to ME secondary to RVO. The choice of either of these drugs may take into account various ocular and extraocular parameters. A change of treatment to one or the other or to laser may also be considered during follow-up.

Long-term outcome after vitrectomy for macular edema with retinal vein occlusion dividing into the occlusion site

Purpose. To investigate the efficacy of treatment for macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) with vitrectomy. Methods. This retrospective study identified patients with macular edema associated with RVO between January 2004 and April 2006. Inclusion criteria were eyes with (1) preoperative visual acuity (VA) of 20/40 or worse, (2) a central foveal thickness (CFT) greater than 250 μm, and (3) vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Each patient had their RVO classified as a major or macular BRVO or hemispheric RVO (HSRVO). Results. Forty-six eyes with major BRVO, 18 eyes with macular BRVO, and 17 eyes with HSRVO were investigated. VA was significantly improved at 24 months after surgery for each group (P < 0.05). Vision in the macular BRVO group 24 months after surgery was significantly better than that in other groups (P < 0.05). For each group, a concomitant reduction of CFT was noted at every time point when compared to preoperative values (P < 0.001). Conclusions. In macular BRVO, the postoperative vision 24 months after surgery was significantly better than the other groups. These findings suggest that additional and earlier treatments might be more important for patients with major BRVO and HSRVO than for those with macular BRVO.

Ranibizumab in retinal vein occlusion: treatment recommendations by an expert panel

Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is a common cause of retinal vascular disease, resulting in potentially irreversible loss of vision despite the existence of several therapeutic options. The humanised monoclonal antibody fragment ranibizumab binds to and inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor, a key driver of macular oedema in RVO. In 2010, ranibizumab was approved in the USA for the treatment of macular oedema in RVO and, in 2011, ranibizumab was approved in the European Union for the treatment of visual impairment caused by macular oedema secondary to RVO in branch and central RVO. Ranibizumab provides an additional therapeutic option for this complex disease: an option that was not fully considered during the preparation of current international guidelines. An expert panel was convened to critically evaluate the evidence for treatment with ranibizumab in patients with visual impairment caused by macular oedema secondary to RVO and to develop treatment recommendations, with the aim of assisting physicians to optimise patient treatment.

Monthly versus as-needed ranibizumab injections in patients with retinal vein occlusion: the SHORE study

OBJECTIVE

To compare pro re nata (PRN) and monthly injections of 0.5 mg ranibizumab in retinal vein occlusion (RVO) patients stabilized by monthly injections.

DESIGN

Randomized, open-label, vision-examiner masked, 15-month study.

PARTICIPANTS

Subjects with macular edema secondary to branch or central RVO.

METHODS

Subjects received monthly injections of 0.5 mg ranibizumab for 7 months and those meeting stability criteria between months 7 and 14 were randomized (1:1) to PRN injections versus continued monthly injections. Non-randomized (NR) subjects (never met stability criteria) received monthly injections.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint was the slope of change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between months 7 and 15.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the slope of change in BCVA between months 7 and 15 in patients treated PRN versus those treated with monthly injections (P = 0.509). Mean (± standard deviation) change from baseline BCVA in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letter score at month 15 was 21.0 ± 14.1 in the PRN group (n = 82) versus 18.7 ± 14.1 in the monthly group (n = 80) and 14.5 ± 14.7 in NR subjects (n = 13). The percentage of subjects who achieved BCVA ≥ 20/40 at month 15 was 76.8% in the PRN group, 71.3% in the monthly group, and 46.2% in NR subjects. The mean (± standard deviation) change from baseline central subfield thickness was -247.8 ± 207.5 μm in the PRN group, -289.9 ± 177.2 μm in the monthly group, and -93.2 ± 225.2 μm in NR subjects. There were no significant differences in mean BCVA gains or central subfield thickness reductions at month 15 between the PRN and monthly injection groups (all > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

After edema resolution from 7 or more monthly ranibizumab injections in RVO subjects, visual outcomes at month 15 were excellent and not significantly different in subjects treated PRN versus those who continued monthly injections.

Interleukin-18 has antipermeablity and antiangiogenic activities in the eye: reciprocal suppression with VEGF

Interleukin-18 (IL-18) is increased along with IL-1β by activation of the inflammasome and has been implicated in inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, but its role in the eye is uncertain. In patients with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion, intraocular IL-18 levels increased significantly (P < 0.001) after treatment with ranibizumab particularly in patients with high baseline IL-18 which correlated with good visual outcome (P < 0.05). In mice with ischemic retinopathy, suppression of VEGF caused an increase in IL18 mRNA due to an increase in IL-18-positive myeloid cells. VEGF significantly and specifically inhibited IL-18 production by myeloid cells stimulated with lipopolysaccharide (P < 0.001). Intraocular injection of IL-18 reduced VEGF-induced leakage and neovascularization, and reversed VEGF-induced suppression of Claudin5 expression and Claudin 5 labeling of vascular tight junctions. Injection of IL-18 also increased expression of Thrombospondin 1 and reduced ischemia-induced retinal neovascularization relevant to diabetic retinopathy and subretinal neovascularization relevant to neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Thus, VEGF and IL-18 suppress each other's production and effects on the vasculature suggesting that IL-18 may provide benefit in multiple retinal/choroidal vascular diseases.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for macular oedema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND

Central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) is a relatively common retinal vascular disorder in which macular oedema may develop, with a consequent reduction in visual acuity. Until recently there has been no treatment of proven benefit, but growing evidence supports the use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of anti-VEGF therapies for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to CRVO.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (January 1950 to October 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to October 2013), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (January 1937 to October 2013), OpenGrey, OpenSIGLE (January 1950 to October 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en) and Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S). There were no language or date restrictions in the electronic search for trials. The electronic databases and clinical trials registers were last searched on 29th October 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared intravitreal anti-VEGF agents of any dose or duration to sham injection or no treatment. We focused on studies that included individuals of any age or gender and a minimum of six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with a gain in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline of greater than or equal to 15 letters (3 lines) on the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants with a loss of 15 letters or more of BCVA, the mean change from baseline BCVA, the mean change in central retinal thickness (CRT), the number and type of complications or adverse outcomes, and the number of additional interventions administered. Where available, we also presented quality of life and economic data.

MAIN RESULTS

We found six RCTs that met the inclusion criteria after independent and duplicate review of the search results. These RCTs included 937 participants and compared outcomes at six months to sham injection for four anti-VEGF agents: aflibercept (VEGF Trap-Eye, Eylea), bevacizumab (Avastin), pegaptanib sodium (Macugen) and ranibizumab (Lucentis). Three trials were conducted in Norway, Sweden and the USA, and three trials were multicentre, one including centres in the USA, Canada, India, Israel, Argentina and Columbia, a second including centres in the USA, Australia, France, Germany, Israel, and Spain, and a third including centres in Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Australia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. We performed meta-analysis on three key visual outcomes, using data from up to six trials. High-quality evidence from six trials revealed that participants receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment were 2.71 times more likely to gain at least 15 letters of visual acuity at six months compared to participants treated with sham injections (risk ratio (RR) 2.71; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 2.10 to 3.49). High-quality evidence from five trials suggested anti-VEGF treatment was associated with an 80% lower risk of losing at least 15 letters of visual acuity at six months compared to sham injection (RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.34). Moderate-quality evidence from three trials (481 participants) revealed that the mean reduction from baseline to six months in central retinal thickness was 267.4 µm (95% CI 211.4 µm to 323.4 µm) greater in participants treated with anti-VEGF than in participants treated with sham. The meta-analyses demonstrate that treatment with anti-VEGF is associated with a clinically meaningful gain in vision at six months. One trial demonstrated sustained benefit at 12 months compared to sham. No significant ocular or systemic safety concerns were identified in this time period.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to no treatment, repeated intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents in eyes with CRVO macular oedema improved visual outcomes at six months. All agents were relatively well tolerated with a low incidence of adverse effects in the short term. Future trials should address the relative efficacy and safety of the anti-VEGF agents and other treatments, including intravitreal corticosteroids, for longer-term outcomes.

Treat-and-extend intravitreal bevacizumab for branch retinal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness and direct medical costs of treat-and-extend (TAE) intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) for the treatment of branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO)-associated macular edema (ME).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective chart review of 52 consecutive patients diagnosed with BRVO-associated ME treated with IVB using a TAE protocol.

RESULTS

Mean change in logMAR vision was -0.30 (P < .001), and mean change in central macular thickness was -244.0 μm (P < .001). The mean number of injections was 8.2 (95% CI; 7.8 to 8.6). The yearly average direct cost of the TAE regimen was calculated to be $2,580.26 per patient.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of BRVO-associated ME with IVB using a TAE regimen resulted in similar visual outcomes and number of intravitreal injections as did as-needed treatment with 0.5 mg ranibizumab conducted in phase 3 trials but with fewer visits and lower annual medical costs.

Intravitreal bevacizumab combined with grid photocoagulation in recurrent macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion

PURPOSE

To evaluate improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the reduction of central retinal thickness (CRT) in patients with macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) after intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection combined with macular grid photocoagulation.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 54 consecutive eyes with macular edema associated with RVO. The BCVA and CRT, recorded with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography, were evaluated at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment onset. Intravitreal bevacizumab injection was administered at baseline, and macular grid photocoagulation 15 days later. During follow-up, additional IVB, at 1-month intervals, was administered if persistent or recurrent macular edema was observed on optical coherence tomography.

RESULTS

Best-corrected visual acuity was improved and CRT was reduced at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up. Compared with initial values, the final CRT was significantly reduced in patients with branch RVO (35 patients) and in patients with central RVO (19 patients) (p<0.05). Also, BCVA was significantly improved in both groups of patients (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal bevacizumab injection combined with macular grid photocoagulation reduces recurrent macular edema associated with branch RVO and central RVO.

Randomized controlled trial of intravitreal ranibizumab versus standard grid laser for macular edema following branch retinal vein occlusion

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of intravitreal 0.5 mg ranibizumab for the treatment of center-involving macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) over 1 year compared with standard-of-care grid laser.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 36 patients with vision loss in 1 eye attributable to macular edema following BRVO were recruited from 5 institutions. Patients were randomized 1:1 to a treatment group that received 6 monthly injections of 0.5 mg ranibizumab and thereafter monthly as needed based on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT) assessments on optical coherence tomography scans, or a standard-of-care group that received monthly sham injections for the 1-year duration of the study. Grid laser was administered at 13 and 25 weeks in both groups if criteria for laser treatment were met. Main outcome measures included mean change in BCVA in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letter scores from baseline to month 12. Secondary outcomes included anatomic outcomes and the percentage of patients requiring grid laser in both groups.

RESULTS

Mean BCVA change from baseline was significantly greater in the treatment compared with the standard-of-care group at 12 months (12.5 ETDRS letters vs -1.6 ETDRS letters, P = .032). The mean CFT was significantly reduced in the treatment compared with standard-of-care group (361.7 μm vs 175.6 μm, P = .025). At 13 and 25 weeks, more patients in the standard-of-care group (68.4%, 50.0%) received grid laser than in the treatment group (6.7%, 8.3%). No new ocular or systemic adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with standard grid laser, intravitreal ranibizumab provided significant and sustained benefits in visual acuity gain and anatomic improvement in eyes with macular edema secondary to BRVO.

Two-year outcomes of intravitreal bevacizumab therapy for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Aim

To determine the 2-year outcomes of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injections in eyes with macular oedema (ME) following branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

Methods

Of 105 consecutive eyes (105 treatment-naïve patients) with ME following BRVO, 89 eyes were followed for 2 years after the first injection. During the 2-year follow-up period, patients were examined at least every 3 months and received an IVB injection (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) if they met prespecified retreatment criteria. Rescue grid laser was permitted based on the findings of the Branch Vein Occlusion Study.

Results

The baseline logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity (VA) was 0.64±0.24 (mean±SD), which significantly (p=0.001) improved 1 month after the first injection to 0.39±0.22. One year after the first injection, VA improved significantly (p=0.001) to 0.33±0.21 and remained 0.34±0.21 until 2 years after the first injection (p=0.001). The changes in foveal thickness were correlated with those of VA during the 2-year follow-up period with a mean of 3.8±1.5 injections (including the first injection).

Conclusions

This relatively large case series study showed favourable 2-year outcomes using bevacizumab to treat ME following BRVO. Bevacizumab provides substantial long-term benefits in the treatment of ME following BRVO.

Branch retinal vein occlusion: treatment modalities: an update of the literature

BACKGROUND

Retinal vein occlusion is the second most common retinal vascular disorder after diabetic retinopathy and is considered to be an important cause of visual loss. In this review, our purpose is to update the literature about the treatment alternatives for branch retinal vein occlusion.

METHODS

Eligible papers were identified by a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, using the terms "branch retinal vein occlusion," "therapy," "intervention," "treatment," "vitrectomy," "sheathotomy," "laser," "anti-VEGF," "pegaptanib," "bevacizumab," "ranibizumab," "triamcinolone," "dexamethasone," "corticosteroids," "non-steroids," "diclofenac," "hemodilution," "fibrinolysis," "tPA," and "BRVO." Additional papers were also selected from reference lists of papers identified by the electronic database search.

RESULTS

Treatment modalities were analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

There are several treatment modalities for branch retinal vein occlusion and specifically for its complications, such as macular edema, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal neovascularization, and retinal detachment, including anti-aggregative therapy and fibrinolysis, isovolemic hemodilution, vitrectomy with or without sheathotomy, peripheral scatter and macular grid retinal laser therapy, non-steroid agents, intravitreal steroids, and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs).

Long-term outcomes in ranibizumab-treated patients with retinal vein occlusion; the role of progression of retinal nonperfusion

PURPOSE

To determine the percentage of ranibizumab-treated patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) who had resolution of edema for at least 6 months after the last injection, along with factors and outcomes that correlate with resolution.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of open-label clinical trial.

METHODS

Twenty patients with branch RVO (BRVO) and 20 with central RVO (CRVO) received ranibizumab monthly for 3 months and as needed for recurrent/persistent macular edema, no more frequently than every 2 months. Patients still requiring injections after month 40 received scatter and grid laser photocoagulation to try to reduce the need for injections. Main outcome measures included the percentage of patients who had resolution of edema, change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline, and change in area of retinal nonperfusion in central subfields.

RESULTS

Nine patients with BRVO (45%) had edema resolution from injections alone after a mean of 20.2 months, 4 resolved after addition of laser, 4 were unresolved through 72 months, and 3 exited prior to resolution. Five patients with CRVO (25%) resolved from injections alone after a mean of 14.0 months, 8 remained unresolved through 72 months despite addition of laser, and 7 exited prior to resolution. For BRVO or CRVO, there was a negative correlation between posterior retinal nonperfusion area and BCVA at months 18, 24, and 36 (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with RVO, infrequent ranibizumab injections to control edema may not be sufficient to prevent progression of retinal nonperfusion, which may contribute to loss of visual gains.

Initial dose of three monthly intravitreal injections versus PRN intravitreal injections of bevacizumab for macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Purpose. To compare visual and anatomic outcomes of intravitreal bevacizumab injections administered as needed (PRN group) and initial treatment with 3 monthly injections followed by as-needed injections (3 monthly initial dose group) in patients with macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). Methods. This retrospective study included 69 and 26 patients in the PRN and 3 monthly initial dose groups, respectively. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) were compared between the 2 groups 6 months after initial injection. Results. At month 6, BCVA change from baseline was −0.27 ± 0.28 (mean ± standard deviation) logMAR in the PRN group and −0.28 ± 0.20 logMAR in the 3 monthly initial dose group. Mean CRT changes were −204 ± 168 in the PRN group and −161 ± 149 μm in the 3 monthly initial dose group at month 6. There were no statistically significant differences in BCVA or CRT changes between groups at any time point. The number of intravitreal injections over 6 months was significantly lower in the PRN group (1.8 ± 0.8 injections) than in the 3 monthly initial dose group (3.4 ± 0.5 injections; P < 0.001). Conclusions. Our results suggest that as-needed intravitreal bevacizumab injections are more tolerable for patients with ME secondary to BRVO.

Ranibizumab as adjuvant in the treatment of rubeosis iridis and neovascular glaucoma--results from a prospective interventional case series

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the capability of adjuvant intraocular ranibizumab (Lucentis) injections in the treatment of rubeosis and intraocular pressure in patients with rubeosis and neovascular glaucoma.

METHODS

Ten eyes with rubeosis (R) and ten eyes with neovascular glaucoma (NVG) received Lucentis injections (ranibizumab 0.5 mg/0.05 ml) in this prospective, monocenter, 12-months, interventional case series. The primary efficacy outcome measure was the change of degree of iris rubeosis as documented by iris fluorescein angiography measured after 12 months. Secondary outcomes were intraocular pressure (IOP), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, logMAR), numbers of additional interventions or antiglaucoma medications administered after injection, the gonioscopic status of the anterior chamber angle, and central retinal thickness.

RESULTS

In the R group, 3.6 injections and in the NVG group 2.3 injections of Lucentis were administered. Additional treatments were photocoagulation (n = 19), cyclodestructive procedures (n = 9), cryopexy (n = 3), and vitrectomy (n = 1). The mean stage of rubeosis was 3.4 ± 0.7 in the R group and 3.6 ± 0.8 in the NVG group at baseline. At month 12, the rubeosis was almost resolved in the R group (0.1 ± 0.3, p < 0.001), and decreased significantly in the NVG group (0.7 ± 1.1, p < 0.001). In the NVG subgroup, mean IOP was 41.4 ± 13.4 mmHg at baseline, which decreased rapidly (18.2 ± 12.3, day-14, p = 0.005) and stabilized during the follow-up (15.6 ± 2.0 mmHg, p < 0.05). BCVA improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.05, at month 12).

CONCLUSIONS

Injection of 0.5 mg ranibizumab appears to be beneficial as an adjuvant treatment in neovascular glaucoma and rubeosis due to its anti-angiogenic properties and its ability to prevent establishment or progression of anterior chamber angle obstruction. Conventional therapeutic procedures addressing the retinal ischemia are still required in a stage-wise treatment approach.

A Dedicated Low-Cost Fluorescence Microfluidic Device Reader for Point-of-Care Ocular Diagnostics

Microfluidic fluorescence assay devices show great promise as preclinical and clinical diagnostic instruments. Normally, fluorescence signals from microfluidic chips are quantified by analysis of images obtained with a commercial fluorescence microscope. This method is unnecessarily expensive, time consuming, and requires significant operator training, particularly when considering future clinical translation of the technology. In this work, we developed a dedicated low cost fluorescence microfluidic device reader (FMDR) to read sandwich immunofluorescence assay (sIFA) devices configured to detect vascular endothelial growth factor ligand concentrations in ocular fluid samples. Using a series of sIFA calibration standards and a limited set of human ocular fluid samples, we demonstrated that our FMDR reader has similar sensitivity and accuracy to a fluorescence microscope for this task, with significantly lower total cost and reduced reading time. We anticipate that the reader could be used with minor modifications for virtually any fluorescence microfluidic device.

Advances in our understanding of diabetic retinopathy

Diabetic retinopathy remains the most common complication of diabetes mellitus and is a leading cause of visual loss in industrialized nations. The clinicopathology of the diabetic retina has been extensively studied, although the precise pathogenesis and cellular and molecular defects that lead to retinal vascular, neural and glial cell dysfunction remain somewhat elusive. This lack of understanding has seriously limited the therapeutic options available for the ophthalmologist and there is a need to identify the definitive pathways that initiate retinal cell damage and drive progression to overt retinopathy. The present review begins by outlining the natural history of diabetic retinopathy, the clinical features and risk factors. Reviewing the histopathological data from clinical specimens and animal models, the recent paradigm that neuroretinal dysfunction may play an important role in the early development of the disease is discussed. The review then focuses on the molecular pathogenesis of diabetic retinopathy with perspective provided on new advances that have furthered our understanding of the key mechanisms underlying early changes in the diabetic retina. Studies have also emerged in the past year suggesting that defective repair of injured retinal vessels by endothelial progenitor cells may contribute to the pathogenesis of diabetic retinopathy. We assess these findings and discuss how they could eventually lead to new therapeutic options for diabetic retinopathy.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND

Branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) is one of the most common occurring retinal vascular abnormalities. The pathogenesis of BRVO is thought to involve both retinal vein compression and damage to the vessel wall, possibly leading to thrombus formation at sites where retinal arterioles cross retinal veins. The most common cause of visual loss in patients with BRVO is macular oedema (MO). Grid or focal laser photocoagulation has been shown to reduce the risk of visual loss and improve visual acuity (VA) in up to two thirds of individuals with MO secondary to BRVO, however, limitations to this treatment exist and newer modalities have suggested equal or improved efficacy. Recently, antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) has been used successfully to treat MO resulting from a variety of causes. As elevated intraocular levels of VEGF have been demonstrated in patients with retinal vein occlusions there is a strong basis for the hypothesis that anti-VEGF agents may be beneficial in the treatment of vascular leakage and MO.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal anti-VEGF agents for preserving or improving vision in the treatment of MO secondary to BRVO.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to August 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2012), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to August 2012, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 7 August 2012 and the clinical trials registers on 10 September 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTS of at least six months duration where anti-VEGF treatment was compared with another treatment, no treatment, or placebo. We excluded trials where combination treatments (anti-VEGF plus other treatments) were used and trials that investigated the dose and duration of treatment without a comparison group (other treatment/no treatment/sham).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with an improvement from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of greater than or equal to 15 letters (3 lines) on the Early Treatment in Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart at six months and at 12 months of follow-up. The secondary outcomes we report are the proportion of participants who lost greater than or equal to 15 ETDRS letters (3 lines) and the mean VA change at six months and any additional follow-up intervals as well as the change in central retinal thickness on optical coherence tomography (OCT) from baseline and final reported follow-up, the number and type of complications, the number of additional interventions administered and any adverse outcomes. Where available, the cost benefit and quality of life data reported in the primary studies is presented.

MAIN RESULTS

We found one RCT and one quasi-RCT that met the inclusion criteria after independent and duplicate review of the search results. The studies used different anti-VEGF agents and different study groups which were not directly comparable.One multi-centre RCT (BRAVO) conducted in the USA randomised 397 individuals and compared monthly intravitreal ranibizumab (0.3 mg and 0.5 mg) injections with sham injection. The study only included individuals with non-ischaemic BRVO. Although repeated injections of ranibizumab appeared to have a favourable effect on the primary outcome, approximately 50% of the ranibizumab 0.3 mg group and 45% of the ranibizumab 0.5 mg group received rescue laser treatment which may have an important effect on the primary outcome. In addition, during the six-month observation period 93.5% of individuals in the sham group received intravitreal ranibizumab (0.5 mg). This cross-over design limits the ability to compare the long-term impact of ranibizumab versus a pure control group.The second trial was a small study (n = 30) from Italy with limitations in study design that reported a benefit of as-required intravitreal bevacizumab (1.25 mg) over laser photocoagulation in MO secondary to BRVO. We present the evidence from these trials and other interventional case series.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available RCT evidence suggests that repeated treatment of non-ischaemic MO secondary to BRVO with the anti-VEGF agent ranibizumab may improve clinical and visual outcomes at six and 12 months. However, the frequency of re-treatment has not yet been determined and the impact of prior or combined treatment with laser photocoagulation on the primary outcome is unclear. Results from ongoing studies should assess not only treatment efficacy but also, the number of injections needed for maintenance and long-term safety and the effect of any prior treatment.

Suprachoroidal drug infusion for the treatment of severe subfoveal hard exudates

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of suprachoroidal drug delivery with a microcatheter for the treatment of severe subfoveal hard exudates (SHE) in retinal vasculopathies. Definitive treatments for SHE have not yet been identified and prognosis is unfavorable.

METHODS

In this prospective, interventional pilot study, six eyes of six patients with central or branch retinal vein occlusion or diffuse diabetic macular edema accompanied by massive refractory SHE underwent a single treatment with bevacizumab and triamcinolone administered to the submacular suprachoroidal space via a microcatheter introduced at the pars plana and advanced posteriorly. The main outcome measures included best-corrected visual acuity, vascular leakage, macular thickness, extent of SHE, and complications.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 12 months. Three eyes had central retinal vein occlusion, one had branch retinal vein occlusion, and two had chronic diabetic macular edema. Best-corrected visual acuity improved by ≥2 lines in 4 eyes and remained stable in 2 eyes. At 1 month to 2 months postprocedure, SHE was almost completely resolved in all eyes and macular edema was significantly reduced. There were no surgical or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Suprachoroidal infusion of drugs can be effective in reabsorbing massive SHE.

Safety and Efficacy of Ranibizumab in Macular Edema following Retinal Vein Occlusion

Macular edema is the leading cause of visual impairment in patients with retinal vein occlusion. Limited improvements may be obtained with laser photocoagulation or intravitreal triamcinolone. However, according to the data provided by randomized clinical trials, intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (Lucentis; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) constitute a new effective and safe option for the management of these vision-threatening diseases. The aim of the present review is to summarize the clinical evidence of ranibizumab for macular edema due to retinal vein occlusions.

Gene transfer for ocular neovascularization and macular edema

Diseases complicated by abnormal growth of vessels or excessive leakage are the most prevalent cause of moderate or severe vision loss in developed countries. Recent progress unraveling the molecular pathogenesis of several of these disease processes has led to new drug therapies that have provided major benefits to patients. However, those treatments often require frequent intraocular injections, and despite monthly injections, some patients have a suboptimal response. Gene transfer of antiangiogenic proteins is an alternative approach that has the potential to provide long-term suppression of neovascularization (NV) and/or excessive vascular leakage in the eye. Studies in animal models of ocular NV have demonstrated impressive results with a number of transgenes, and a clinical trial in patients with advanced neovascular age-related macular degeneration has provided proof-of-concept. Two ongoing clinical trials, one using an adeno-associated viral (AAV) vector to express a vascular endothelial growth factor-binding protein and another using a lentiviral vector to express endostatin and angiostatin, will provide valuable information that should help to inform future trials and provide a foundation on which to build.