Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) versus triamcinolone (Volon A) for treatment of diabetic macular edema: one-year results

Comparing the efficacy of glucocorticoids and anti-VEGF in treating diabetic macular edema: systematic review and comprehensive analysis

Introduction

The aim of this study was to better understand the efficacy of various drugs, such as glucocorticoids and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME), and to evaluate various clinical treatment regimens consisting of different therapeutic measures.

Methods

This study included randomized controlled trials up to February 2023 comparing the efficacy of corticosteroid-related therapy and anti-VEGF therapy. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched, and the quality of the studies was carefully assessed. Finally, 39 studies were included.

Results

Results at 3-month followup showed that intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (IVB) + triamcinolone acetonide (TA) was the most beneficial in improving best-corrected visual acuity and reducing the thickness of macular edema in the center of the retina in patients with DME. Results at 6-month follow-up showed that intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) was the most effective in improving patients' bestcorrected visual acuity and reducing the thickness of central macular edema.

Discussion

Overall, IVB+TA was beneficial in improving best-corrected visual acuity and reducing central macular edema thickness over a 3-month follow-up period, while DEX implants had a better therapeutic effect than anti-VEGF agents at 6 months, especially the patients with severe macular edema and visual acuity impaired.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=397100, identifier CRD42023397100.

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

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

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

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

Chitosan as a promising materials for the construction of nanocarriers for diabetic retinopathy: an updated review

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a condition that causes swelling of the blood vessels of the retina and leaks blood and fluids. It is the most severe form of diabetic eye disease. It causes vision loss in its advanced stage. Diabetic retinopathy is responsible for causing 26% of blindness. Very insufficient therapies are accessible for the treatment of DR. As compared to the conventional therapies, there should be enhanced research on the controlled release, shorter duration, and cost-effective therapy of diabetic retinopathy. The expansion of advanced nanocarriers-based drug delivery systems has been now employed to exploit as well as regulate the transport of many therapeutic agents to target sites via the increase in penetration or the extension of the duration of contact employing production by enclosing as well as distributing tiny molecules in nanostructured formulation. Various polymers have been utilized for the manufacturing of these nanostructured formulations. Chitosan possesses incredible biological and chemical properties, that have led to its extensive use in pharmaceutical and biomedical applications. Chitosan has been used in many studies because of its enhanced mucoadhesiveness and non-toxicity. Multiple studies have used chitosan as the best candidate for manufacturing nanocarriers and treating diabetic retinopathy. Numerous nanocarriers have been formulated by using chitosan such as nanostructured lipid carriers, solid lipid nanoparticles, liposomes, and dendrimers for treating diabetic retinopathy. This current review elaborates on the recent advancements of chitosan as a promising approach for the manufacturing of nanocarriers that can be used for treating diabetic retinopathy.

Current Treatments for Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic retinopathy is a major retinal disorder and a leading cause of blindness. Diabetic macular edema (DME) is an ocular complication in patients with diabetes, and it can impair vision significantly. DME is a disorder of the neurovascular system, and it causes obstructions of the retinal capillaries, damage of the blood vessels, and hyperpermeability due to the expression and action of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). These changes result in hemorrhages and leakages of the serous components of blood that result in failures of the neurovascular units (NVUs). Persistent edema of the retina around the macula causes damage to the neural cells that constitute the NVUs resulting in diabetic neuropathy of the retina and a reduction in vision quality. The macular edema and NVU disorders can be monitored by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Neuronal cell death and axonal degeneration are irreversible, and their development can result in permanent visual loss. Treating the edema before these changes are detected in the OCT images is necessary for neuroprotection and maintenance of good vision. This review describes the effective treatments for the macular edema that are therefore neuroprotective.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Risk of Death Associated With Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Although intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment represents the first-line therapy for many retinal diseases, the issue of their systemic safety is debatable.

Objectives

To assess whether intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy might be associated with increased risk of mortality and which variables are associated with the increase.

Data Sources

PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched from inception to May 6, 2019.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials comparing intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment with control groups and with follow-up of at least 6 months were selected.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were independently collected by 2 investigators. Meta-analyses were conducted using the frequentist and Bayesian methods. For the frequentist approach, random- and fixed-effects models were used, with random-effects models considered the primary technique. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were computed. For the bayesian approach, uninformative and informative priors were used. Odds ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were computed. Meta-regression analyses were based on random-effects models.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome measure was the all-cause death rate. Secondary outcomes included meta-regression analyses on the following variables: type of drug, number of injections, follow-up time, diagnosis, and cardiovascular risk.

Results

Of 2336 studies identified, 34 unique studies with 8887 unique participants were included in the present meta-analysis. For the frequentist analysis, fixed- and random-effects models yielded similar estimates (ORs, 1.34 [95% CI, 0.95-2.07; P = .09] and 1.34 [95% CI, 0.89-2.01; P = .17], respectively). For the Bayesian approach, noninformative and informative priors yielded similar results (ORs, 1.34 [95% CrI, 0.79-2.34; 0.13 probability of OR≤1.00] and 1.40 [95% CrI, 0.82-2.32; 0.11 probability of OR≤1.00], respectively). Meta-regression analyses showed the following risk for 1 injection more: frequentist OR of 1.12 (95% CI, 1.04-1.22; P = .005) and Bayesian OR of 1.06 (95% CrI, 0.98-1.15; 0.06 probability of OR≤1.00).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, no difference was found in the mortality rate between intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment and control groups. Additional data seem warranted to determine whether the mortality rate is increased in patients receiving a greater number of injections.

Recent trends in drug-delivery systems for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy and associated fibrosis

Diabetic retinopathy is a frequent microvascular complication of diabetes and a major cause of visual impairment. In advanced stages, the abnormal neovascularization can lead to fibrosis and subsequent tractional retinal detachment and blindness. The low bioavailability of the drugs at the target site imposed by the anatomic and physiologic barriers within the eye, requires long term treatments with frequent injections that often compromise patient's compliance and increase the risk of developing more complications. In recent years, much effort has been put towards the development of new drug delivery platforms aiming to enhance their permeation, to prolong their retention time at the target site and to provide a sustained release with reduced toxicity and improved efficacy. This review provides an overview of the etiology and pathophysiology of diabetic retinopathy and current treatments. It addresses the specific challenges associated to the different ocular delivery routes and provides a critical review of the most recent developments made in the drug delivery field.

An antibody-like peptidic network for anti-angiogenesis

Different from chemical (small molecular inhibitor) and biological (monoclonal antibody) drugs, herein, based on angiogenesis-related neuropilin-1 (NRP-1), we develop a biomimetic superstructure drug, i.e. an antibody-like peptidic network (ALPN) to achieve the high-efficient treatment of choroidal neovascularization (CNV). The ALPN in nanoparticulated formulation (ALPN-NP_S) can bind NRP-1 through targeting unit and form fibrous peptidic networks trapping NRP-1 on the surface of endothelial cells (ECs), leading to anti-angiogenesis. The ALPN shows high-efficacy against angiogenesis in CNV rat model ascribed to the superstructure-enhanced binding and blockage of NRP-1. The very low dose of ALPN (0.263 μg/Kg) exhibits similar anti-angiogenesis effect comparing with monoclonal antibody bevacizumab (23.5 μg/Kg), which shows potential advantages over traditional monoclonal antibodies.

Intravitreal Therapy for Diabetic Macular Edema: An Update

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

Clinical Perspectives and Trends: Microperimetry as a trial endpoint in retinal disease

Endpoint development trials are underway across the spectrum of retinal disease. New validated endpoints are urgently required for the assessment of emerging gene therapies and in preparation for the arrival of novel therapeutics targeting early stages of common sight-threatening conditions such as age-related macular degeneration. Visual function measures are likely to be key candidates in this search. Over the last two decades, microperimetry has been used extensively to characterize functional vision in a wide range of retinal conditions, detecting subtle defects in retinal sensitivity that precede visual acuity loss and tracking disease progression over relatively short periods. Given these appealing features, microperimetry has already been adopted as an endpoint in interventional studies, including multicenter trials, on a modest scale. A review of its use to date shows a concurrent lack of consensus in test strategy and a wealth of innovative disease and treatment-specific metrics which may show promise as clinical trial endpoints. There are practical issues to consider, but these have not held back its popularity and it remains a widely used psychophysical test in research. Endpoint development trials will undoubtedly be key in understanding the validity of microperimetry as a clinical trial endpoint, but existing signs are promising.

Managing Diabetic Macular Edema in Clinical Practice: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Current Strategies and Treatment Options

Purpose

This meta-analysis aims to summarize 12-month best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) outcomes in response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy and dexamethasone implant for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) and to identify factors affecting treatment response using evidence generated from meta-regression.

Methods

A systematic review of electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-life/observational studies that reported 12-month changes in BCVA in patients with DME on anti-VEGF or dexamethasone implant treatment in monotherapy. Study factors that were analyzed are baseline patient characteristics, study type, drug employed, number of injections and 12-month change in BCVA. Data were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis with BCVA change as the main outcome. Meta-regression was conducted to assess the impact of multiple covariates.

Results

One-hundred-five heterogeneous study populations (45,032 eyes) were identified and included in the analysis. The use of anti-VEGFs and dexamethasone implant induced an overall increase of +8.13 ETDRS letters in BCVA at 12 months of follow-up. Meta-regression provided evidence that mean BCVA change using anti-VEGFs was not statistically higher for RCTs (p=0.35) compared to observational studies. Dexamethasone implant showed a trend for better results in observational studies over RCTs. Populations following a fixed aflibercept regimen performed better than those following a reactive treatment regimen. Mean BCVA gain was higher in younger populations (p<0.001), with lower baseline BCVA (p<0.0001) and longer diabetes duration (p<0.0001), receiving a higher number of injections (p<0.0001).

Conclusion

Intravitreal therapy with anti-VEGFs or dexamethasone implant produces a significant improvement in BCVA at 12 months in patients with DME. Meta-regression identified the modifiable covariates that can be targeted in order to maximize functional results.

Intravitreal bevacizumab versus intravitreal triamcinolone for diabetic macular edema-Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

Background

The most frequent cause of vision loss from diabetic retinopathy is diabetic macular edema (DME). Earlier clinical trials tried to examine the role of intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) and intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) in DME; they either qualified IVT over IVB or IVB over IVT or did not exhibit a significant difference.

Objective

This paper aims to compare the efficacy and safety of IVB versus IVT alone or combined IVB+IVT in the treatment of DME.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, Science Direct, OVID, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials of IVB versus IVT alone or combined IVB+IVT and IVT versus the combined IVB+IVT in DME patients.

Results

A total of 1243 eyes of 17 trials were included in our meta-analysis and regression. Repeated injections of IVB were superior at improving VA comparing with those of IVT at 12, 24, 48-weeks, and IVB+IVT at 12, 24, 48-weeks. Single injections were comparable across the three arms regarding BCVA improvement. CMT reductions were also comparable across the three arms. Meanwhile, the overall safety regarding intraocular pressure and intraocular hypertension significantly favored the IVB group. Improvement in VA was best modified with CMT reduction from 480 um to 320um. This association was significant at 12-weeks in the three arms and persisted till 24-weeks and 48-weeks exclusively in the IVB group.

Conclusions and relevance

Our analysis reveals that repeated successive injections associate with better BCVA compared to single injection. Current evidence affirms that IVB is superior to IVT and IVB+IVT at improving BCVA, comparable at reducing CMT, and presents a better safety profile in the treatment of DME.

Intravitreal steroids for macular edema in diabetes

BACKGROUND

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is secondary to leakage from diseased retinal capillaries with thickening of central retina, and is an important cause of poor central visual acuity in people with diabetic retinopathy. Intravitreal steroids have been used to reduce retinal thickness and improve vision in people with DME.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal steroid therapy compared with other treatments for DME.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase on 15 May, 2019. We also searched reference lists, Science Citation Index, conference proceedings, and relevant trial registers. We conducted a top up search on 21 October, 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated any type of intravitreal steroids as monotherapy against any other intervention (e.g. observation, laser photocoagulation, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (antiVEGF) for DME.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (4348 participants, 4505 eyes). These trials compared intravitreal steroid therapies versus other treatments, including intravitreal antiVEGF therapy, laser photocoagulation, and sham injection. Most trials had an overall unclear or high risk of bias. One trial (701 eyes ) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with sham. We found moderate-certainty evidence that dexamethasone leads to slightly more improvement of visual acuity than sham at 12 months (mean difference [MD] -0.08 logMAR, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.12 to -0.05 logMAR). Regarding improvement of three or more lines of visual acuity, there was moderate-certainty evidence in favor of dexamethasone at 12 months, but the CI covered the null value (risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.12). Regarding adverse events, dexamethasone increased by about four times the risk of cataract progression and the risk of using intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering medications compared to sham (RR 3.89, 95% CI 2.75 to 5.50 and RR 4.54, 95% CI 3.19 to 6.46, respectively; moderate-certainty evidence); about 4 in 10 participants treated with dexamethasone needed IOP-lowering medications. Two trials (451 eyes) compared intravitreal dexamethasone implant 0.7mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab and ranibizumab). There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly less with dexamethasone compared with antiVEGF at 12 months (MD 0.07 logMAR, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.09 logMAR; 2 trials; 451 participants/eyes; I² = 0%). The RR of gain of three or more lines of visual acuity was inconsistent between trials, with one trial finding no evidence of a difference between dexamethasone and bevacizumab at 12 months (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.40; 1 trial; 88 eyes), and the other, larger trial finding the chances of vision gain were half with dexamethasone compared with ranibizumab (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.79; 1 trial; 432 participants). The certainty of evidence was low. Cataract progression and the need for IOP-lowering medications increased more than 4 times with dexamethasone implant compared to antiVEGF (moderate-certainty evidence). One trial (560 eyes) compared intravitreal fluocinolone implant 0.19mg with sham. There was moderate-certainty evidence that visual acuity improved slightly more with fluocinolone at 12 months (MD -0.04 logMAR, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.01 logMAR). There was moderate-certainty evidence that an improvement in visual acuity of three or more lines was more common with fluocinolone than with sham at 12 months (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.78). Fluocinolone also increased the risk of cataract progression (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.97; participants = 335; moderate-certainty evidence), which occurred in about 8 in 10 participants, and the use of IOP-lowering medications (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.98; participants = 558; moderate-certainty evidence), which were needed in 2 to 3 out of 10 participants. One small trial with 43 participants (69 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4 mg with sham. There may be a benefit in visual acuity at 24 months (MD -0.11 logMAR, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.03 logMAR), but the certainty of evidence is low. Differences in adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Two trials (615 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with laser photocoagulation and reached discordant results. The smaller trial (31 eyes followed up to 9 months) found more visual acuity improvement with triamcinolone (MD -0.18 logMAR, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07 logMAR), but a larger, multicenter trial (584 eyes, 12-month follow-up) found no evidence of a difference regarding change in visual acuity (MD 0.02 logMAR, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.07 logMAR) or gain of three or more lines of visual acuity (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.30) (overall low-certainty evidence). Cataract progression was about three times more likely (RR 2.68, 95% CI 2.21 to 3.24; moderate-certainty evidence) and the use of IOP-lowering medications was about four times more likely (RR 3.92, 95% CI 2.59 to 5.96; participants = 627; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) with triamcinolone. About 1 in 3 participants needed IOP-lowering medication. One small trial (30 eyes) compared intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection 4mg with intravitreal antiVEGF (bevacizumab or ranibizumab). Visual acuity may be worse with triamcinolone at 12 months (MD 0.18 logMAR, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.26 logMAR); the certainty of evidence is low. Adverse effects were poorly reported in this trial. Four trials reported data on pseudophakic participants, for whom cataract is not a concern. These trials found no decrease in visual acuity in the second treatment year due to cataract progression.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal steroids may improve vision in people with DME compared to sham or control. Effects were small, about one line of vision or less in most comparisons. More evidence is available for dexamethasone or fluocinolone implants when compared to sham, and the evidence is limited and inconsistent for the comparison of dexamethasone with antiVEGF treatment. Any benefits should be weighed against IOP elevation, the use of IOP-lowering medication and, in phakic patients, the progression of cataract. The need for glaucoma surgery is also increased, but remains rare.

One-Year Effectiveness Study of Intravitreously Administered Conbercept® Monotherapy in Diabetic Macular Degeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The evidence on efficacy of intravitreously administered Conbercept (IVC) monotherapy for diabetic macular degeneration was still limited.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in November 2019 to summarize the current evidence on visual acuity (VA) changes with IVC monotherapy in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) from Pubmed, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMbase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, Chin VIP Information (VIP), and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM). Retrospective or prospective clinical studies which used IVC injection for the treatment of DME were included. Outcomes included in the analysis were change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT). A meta-regression was conducted to assess 1-year BCVA and CMT changes against numbers of injections.

RESULTS

A total of 20 studies were included in current study. At 12-month follow-up, an overall increase of 0.67 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) BCVA score [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-1.11; P = 0.003] and 1.03 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters (95% CI 0.69-1.38; P < 0.001) was shown with IVC injection compared to baseline. Decrease in CMT was 142.79 μm (95% CI 112.71-172.87; P < 0.001) compared to baseline. The meta-regression showed a significant increase in effect size between number of injections and 12-month logMAR BCVA scale change as well as CMT.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest improved VA and CMT outcomes during 1-year follow-up in patients with DME who underwent IVC monotherapy. Increased injection frequency demonstrates a significant trend with improved outcomes at 12 months.

Response of Retinal Sensitivity to Intravitreal Anti-angiogenic Bevacizumab and Triamcinolone Acetonide for Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema over One Year

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare microperimetry changes in patients with clinically significant diabetic macular edema secondary to diabetes mellitus, following intravitreal injections of bevacizumab or triamcinolone during a follow-up of 1 year after treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

30 patients with clinically significant macular edema were randomized into two groups of 15 patients each. One group initially received three intravitreal injections of 2.5 mg bevacizumab at monthly intervals. The other received a single injection of 8 mg of triamcinolone followed by two sham interventions at monthly intervals. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) were measured. Macular function was documented by microperimetry at baseline, 3, 6, 9 months and at the last visit of each patient.

RESULTS

In the bevacizumab group, the mean differential light threshold (±standard deviation) under therapy improved significantly from 8.40 (± 3.8) dB to 12.8 (±4.3) dB at the 12-month follow-up visit (p ≤ .05), whereas in the triamcinolone group it increased from 8.0 (± 2.4) dB at baseline to 9.3 (±3.6) dB at the last visit without reaching statistical significance (p > .05). The mean differential light thresholds between the two groups were not statistically significant at baseline or the last visit (p > .05). In the bevacizumab group, the improvement (slope) in mean differential light threshold was significantly superior to the Triamcinolone group (Estimate = 0.588, p ≤ .05).

CONCLUSION

Central macular function as measured by microperimetry in patients with acute DME improved in addition to anatomical restoration after intravitreal bevacizumab and triamcinolone injection. In our clinical study, the measures of the variables in patients receiving bevacizumab were superior to those receiving triamcinolone throughout the one-year observation period.

Corticosteroids for Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a chronic condition with a multifactorial pathogenesis. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and several inflammatory mediators are upregulated in eyes with DME. VEGF inhibitors and corticosteroids have all been used successfully in the management of DME. Currently available corticosteroids include triamcinolone acetonide (TA), the dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant, and the fluocinolone acetonide (FA) intravitreal implant. The response to treatment can vary substantially with each treatment modality. Some cases of DME are VEGF driven, and in others, inflammation plays a key role. Chronicity appears to favor corticosteroid treatment. There are no clear guidelines to guide switching from an anti-VEGF to a corticosteroid. Combination therapy of an anti-VEGF drug and a corticosteroid does not appear to provide additional benefit over monotherapy with either drug. The main advantage of corticosteroids over VEGF inhibitors is their longer duration of action. Vitrectomy does not affect the pharmacokinetics of the corticosteroid implants. Common adverse events of corticosteroids include cataract formation, cataract progression, and ocular hypertension. TA may cause a sterile endophthalmitis and pseudoendophthalmitis. Migration of the intravitreal DEX and FA implants into the anterior chamber can be problematic. Because of their less favorable safety profile, corticosteroids are generally used as a second-line treatment for DME. Advantages of using an intravitreal corticosteroid implant include the reduction of treatment burden and predictable pharmacokinetics even in vitrectomized eyes. Pseudophakic eyes, previously vitrectomized eyes and eyes with long-standing DME, particularly of patients who have difficulty in maintaining a monthly appointment, may benefit from primary treatment with a corticosteroid intravitreal implant.

Correlation of Macular Thickness and Visual Acuity in DME Treated by Two Doses of Intravitreal Ziv-Aflibercept Versus Bevacizumab: Analysis of a Randomized, Three-Armed Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To report the correlation of central macular thickness (CMT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after 1-year treatment by two doses (2.5 mg or 1.25 mg) of intravitreal ziv-aflibercept (IVZ) versus bevacizumab (IVB) in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this study, the correlation of CMT and BCVA changes of the eyes enrolled in a previous clinical trial of 123 eyes were re-evaluated. The correlation of BCVA and CMT changes at each visit was evaluated in the three study arms individually. Then, the eyes in each of the arms were classified at each follow-up visit into three subgroups based on their CMT changes related to the baseline CMT: CMT decrease of 30% or more of baseline CMT, between 10% to 29% of baseline CMT, and less than 9% of baseline CMT or CMT increase.

RESULTS

BCVA and CMT changes were correlated significantly (P < .05) in all and in half of the follow-up visits, respectively, in the eyes treated by IVZ 1.25 mg and IVB (r = 0.554 and r = 0.617 at 1 year, respectively). Nevertheless, such a significant correlation was not detected in the eyes treated by IVZ 2.5 mg in any of the follow-up visits (r = 0.202 at 1 year; P = .259). In the IVZ 2.5 mg group, BCVA improvement was observed in all subgroups with each level of CMT reductions.

CONCLUSION

Ziv-aflibercept 2.5 mg might have a beneficial effect on DME beyond thickness reduction. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2019;50:684-690.].

Association of Irisin Circulating Level with Diabetic Retinopathy: A Case-Control Study

Obesity and obesity induced type 2 diabetes development and progression have been associated with sedentary lifestyle. Irisin, a newly discovered myokine, has been demonstrated at lower levels in obese and type 2 diabetes patients compared to controls. The main aim of this study is to explore association of Irisin with diabetic retinopathy (DR). A total of 233 healthy and adults participated in this study. Participants were divided into four categories: a healthy control group and an age-match subset of patients with type 2 diabetes; a positive control group of patients with type 2 diabetes not affected by DR (No DR); and patients with type 2 diabetes affected by DR (non-proliferative DR (NPDR) and proliferative DR (PDR)). Plasma samples were quantified for Irisin measurement, lipid profile and HbA1c. Comparison of the age-matched groups of healthy controls and patients with type 2 diabetes revealed lower Irisin plasma level in type 2 diabetes group. Analyses revealed negative correlations of Irisin to HbA1c and LDL levels and positive correlation to HDL level. Comparing Irisin level in No DR and DR groups revealed a higher level in No DR group and analysis per DR classification indicated higher Irisin level in NPDR group. Our results demonstrate not only correlation of plasma Irisin level with DR stages, but also significantly different Irisin level among them. This is promising in terms of researching Irisin as a potential associating marker for type 2 diabetes and DR development and progression.

Intravitreal Injection of Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Agents for Ocular Vascular Diseases: Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide the clinical recommendations for the administration of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs especially bavacizumab for ocular vascular diseases including diabetic macular edema, neovascular age-related macular degeneration, myopic choroidal neovascularization, retinal vein occlusion and central serous chorioretinopathy.

METHODS

Twenty clinical questions were developed by the guideline technical committee. Relevant websites and databases were searched to find out the pertinent clinical practice guidelines to answer the questions. The technical committee provided possible answers (scenarios) according to the available evidences for each question. All scenarios along with their levels of evidence and the supported articles were sent to the experts for external review. If the experts did not agree on any of the scenarios for one particular clinical question, the technical committee reviewed all scenarios and their pertinent evidences and made the necessary decision. After that, the experts were asked to score them again. All confirmed scenarios were gathered as the final recommendations.

RESULTS

All the experts agreed on at least one of the scenarios. The technical committee extracted the agreed scenario for each clinical question as the final recommendation. Finally, 56 recommendations were developed for the procedure of intravitreal anti-VEGF injection and their applications in the management of ocular vascular diseases.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of this guideline can standardize the management of the common ocular vascular diseases by intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents. It can lead to better policy-making and evidence-based clinical decision by ophthalmologists and optimal evidence based eye care for patients.

Analysis of retinal layer thickness in diabetic macular oedema treated with ranibizumab or triamcinolone

PURPOSE

To evaluate detailed changes in retinal layer thickness in spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) images during a 1-year follow-up of patients treated for diabetic macula oedema (DME).

METHODS

Post hoc analysis of retinal layer thickness changes applying the automated layer segmentation of SD-OCT images in eyes with DME that were randomly assigned to receive pro re nata (PRN) treatment with either 0.5 mg ranibizumab or 8 mg triamcinolone. In each patient, seven retinal layers were segmented in 49 scans covering a 20° × 20° area of the macula at baseline and after 1 year of treatment. Changes in individual layer thickness were correlated with visual acuity (VA) and compared between treatment arms.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (seven female, 60.2 ± 15.1 years) were evaluated. Thickness decrease of retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) was associated with a gain in VA over 12 months (r > 0.54; p < 0.05). Decrease in ganglion cell layer (GCL) and GCL+IPL thickness pooled for nasal Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) subfields correlated with VA as follows: ranibizumab r = 0.74 (GCL) and r = 0.63 (GCL+IPL); and triamcinolone r = 0.45 (GCL) and r = 0.46 (GCL+IPL).

CONCLUSION

In DME therapy, reduction in RNFL thickness may have a considerable impact on retinal function, unrelated to the type of pharmacological treatment. Precise morphologic quantification of neurosensory layers by SD OCT offers new insight into disease pathology and therapeutic targets.

Shifts in renin-angiotensin system components, angiogenesis, and oxidative stress-related protein expression in the lamina cribrosa region of streptozotocin-induced diabetic mice

PURPOSE

This study aimed to analyse shifts in renin-angiotensin system (RAS) components, angiogenesis, and oxidative stress-related protein expression in the lamina cribrosa (LC) region in streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetic mice.

METHODS

Six months after diabetes induction, the retinal vessels of male C57BL/6 J mice were observed by colour photography, fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA), and immunofluorescent staining following incubation with CD31. Immunofluorescence for glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), alpha-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA),and NG2 was also performed. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 1 (ACE1), angiotensin II type I receptor (AT1R), renin, hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha (HIF-1α), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2), and haeme oxygenase 1 (HO-1) expression levels were confirmed by immunohistochemical and western blotting analyses.

RESULTS

Compared with control mice, diabetic mice had significantly higher blood glucose concentrations (p < 0.001) and significantly lower body weights (p < 0.001). Colour photography and FFA did not reveal any vessel abnormalities in the diabetic mice; however, immunostaining of whole-mount retinas revealed an increased number of retinal vessels. Furthermore, histopathological staining showed significant reduction in the whole retinal thickness. GFAP expression was slightly higher, whereas fewer NG2⁺ pericytes were observed in diabetic mice than in control mice. ACE1, AT1R, renin, HIF-1α, VEGF, VEGFR2, and HO-1 expression were up-regulated in the LC of the STZ-induced diabetic mice.

CONCLUSIONS

Collectively, ACE 1, AT1R, HIF-1α, VEGF, VEGFR2, and HO-1 activation in the LC region in diabetic mice may be involved in diabetes via the RAS and induction of angiogenesis and oxidative stress.

Detailed analysis of retinal morphology in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) randomized to ranibizumab or triamcinolone treatment

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to compare the impact in diabetic macula edema (DME) of two intravitreal drugs (0.5 mg ranibizumab vs. 8 mg triamcinolone) on changes in retinal morphology in spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD OCT) images, color fundus photography (CF) and fluorescein angiography (FA) images during a 1-year follow-up.

METHODS

Post hoc analysis was conducted of morphologic characteristics in OCT, FA and CF images of eyes with a center involving DME that were included in a prospective double-masked randomized trial. Eligible patients were divided at random into two groups receiving either pro re nata treatment with 0.5 mg ranibizumab or 8 mg triamcinolone after a fixed loading dose. OCT and CF images were acquired at monthly visits and FA images every three months.

RESULTS

Twenty-five eyes of 25 patients (ranibizumab: n = 10; triamcinolone: n = 15) were included in this study. Patients treated with ranibizumab showed better visual acuity results after 12 months than patients receiving triamcinolone (p = 0.015) although edema reduction was similar (p = 0.426) in both groups. The initial effect on macular edema shedding after a single ranibizumab injection could be amplified with the following two injections of the loading dose. After a single injection of triamcinolone the beneficial initial effect on the macula edema faded within 3 months. Subretinal fluid and INL cystoid spaces diminished early in the course of treatment while fluid accumulation in the ONL seemed to be more persistent in both treatment arms. In FA, the area of leakage diminished significantly in both treatment arms. After repeated injections the morphologic OCT and FA characteristics of the treatment arms converged.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the higher dosage of triamcinolone, both therapies were safe and effective for treating diabetic macular edema. Fluid accumulation in the INL and subretinal space was more responsive to therapy than fluid accumulation in the ONL. Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT00682539.

Prognostic factors of short-term outcomes of intravitreal ranibizumab in diabetic macular edema

AIM

To evaluate the prognostic factors for short-term visual and anatomical improvement of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) for diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

Fifty-one eyes from 35 patients that received three consecutive monthly IVR for DME with moderate visual loss were retrospectively recruited; all cases had their baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between 20/400 and 20/40. BCVA and central subfield thickness (CST) at baseline and month 3 were collected. Linear mixed models were used to evaluate the prognostic factors for visual and anatomical improvement at month 3.

RESULTS

Younger age, poorer baseline BCVA and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) were correlated with better visual improvement at month 3 (P=0.002, 0.0001 and 0.007, respectively). Thicker CST and the presence of subretinal fluid at baseline were correlated with a greater reduction in CST (P<0.0001 and P=0.018, respectively). The presence of epiretinal membrane or previous posterior subtenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide (PSTA) were associated with a smaller reduction in CST (P=0.029 and 0.018, respectively), but had no significant effects in visual improvement at month 3 (P>0.05 for both).

CONCLUSION

For eyes with DME and moderate visual loss, those with younger age, poorer baseline BCVA or PDR tend to have better visual improvement after three consecutive monthly IVR. Epiretinal membrane or previous PSTA result in less resolution of CST, but do not significantly affect visual improvement.

Optical Coherence Tomography Features in Diabetic Macular Edema and the Impact on Anti-VEGF Response

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship between spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) features and functional outcomes for diabetic macular edema (DME) undergoing treatment with intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Institutional review board-approved, retrospective, consecutive case series of eyes receiving intravitreal bevacizumab (1.25 mg) for DME. SD-OCT features were evaluated and correlated with functional response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-nine eyes of 159 subjects were included in this study. Mean visual acuity improved from 20/76 to 20/58. The proportion of eyes with 20/40 or greater visual acuity increased with treatment (35% at initial visit, 51% at final visit). SD-OCT factors that were associated with functional outcomes to anti-VEGF therapy include ellipsoid zone integrity and severity of intraretinal fluid.

CONCLUSION

SD-OCT features appear to provide important markers for functional response to anti-VEGF therapy in DME. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2016;47:908-913.].

Intravitreal bevacizumab alone or combined with 1 mg triamcinolone in diabetic macular edema: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To compare the results of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection alone or in combination with intravitreal 1 mg triamcinolone acetonide (IVT) in center-involved diabetic macular edema.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial study, ninety-two eyes of 46 patients with bilateral center-involved diabetic macular edema and no previous treatment were included in the study. One eye of each patient was randomly assigned to 1.25 mg of IVB injection or combination of 1.25 IVB and 1 mg IVT. Evaluation of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), intraocular pressure (IOP) and grading of lens opacity was conducted at baseline, and weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 after treatment. Retreatment was performed at a 6-week interval whenever indicated based on CMT.

RESULTS

Between the groups, BCVA changes were not statistically different until 24-week follow-up (P > 0.05), but at 24 weeks after treatment, BCVA improvement was significantly better in IVB group (P = 0.049). Significant CMT reduction was observed in each group along the follow-up period (P = 0.001). The mean CMT reduction was more significant in combination (IVB + IVT) group at 2 weeks of follow-up (P < 0.001), but CMT changes were not significant between the groups at weeks 12th and 24th after injection. Overall, retreatment was applied for 59 eyes up to 24 weeks (33 in the IVB group, 26 in the IVB + IVT group). Among patients with 2 or more injections, number of injections was significantly lower in IVB + IVT group (P = 0.043). Three eyes within IVB + IVT group developed IOP rise beyond 21 mmHg, which were controlled with topical anti-glaucoma medications within 1 week. Changes in lens opacity were not significant between two groups.

CONCLUSION

Eyes treated with IVB plus 1 mg IVT injections had more significant reduction in CMT in early post-injection, but this effect was transient. Although after 24 weeks visual acuity improvement was better in IVB group, combination therapy may decrease the number of injections. Combining 1 mg of intravitreal triamcinolone with bevacizumab was not accompanied with significant side effects.

Intravitreal bevacizumab and dexamethasone implant for treatment of chronic diabetic macular edema

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate anatomical and functional outcomes of intraviteal bevacizumab (IVB) in patients with chronic diabetic macular edema (DME), and the effectivity and safety of dexamethasone implant in those unresponsive to regular IVB treatment.

METHODS

Thirty-five eyes of 35 patients (16 male and 19 female) with chronic DME (central foveal thickness (CFT)  > 275 μm, duration  > 6 months) received three injections of 2.5 mg IVB with six-week intervals. At 18 weeks, dexamethasone implant was applied to patients unresponsive to IVB. Main outcomes were the change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), CFT and ocular and systemic adverse effects for both drugs. The patients responsive to IVB were followed up for 36 weeks and those patients receiving dexamethasone implant were followed up for 24 weeks postoperatively.

RESULTS

At 18 weeks, the mean BCVA (0.68 ± 0.40 logMAR, p = 0.45) and CFT (453 ± 169 μm, p = 0.58) did not show any significant change compared to baseline (0.74 ± 0.42 logMAR and 521 ± 151 μm, respectively). In 20 patients (%57.1) responsive to IVB, the CFT was significantly improved from 12 to 36 weeks with the mean value of 295 ± 42 μ (p = 0.01). However, no significant difference was observed for BCVA during this period (p = 0.17). Dexamethasone was implanted in 15 eyes (42.8%) unresponsive to IVB at 18 weeks. Statistically significant improvements were observed in BCVA (at postoperative 4 and 12 weeks) and CFT (at postoperative 4, 12 and 24 weeks). In addition, both parameters significantly worsened at 24 weeks compared to 12 weeks (p < 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with chronic DME should be followed in accordance with a fixed treatment protocol combining anti-VEGF and steroid treatments.

Advances in bone marrow stem cell therapy for retinal dysfunction

The most common cause of untreatable vision loss is dysfunction of the retina. Conditions, such as age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy and glaucoma remain leading causes of untreatable blindness worldwide. Various stem cell approaches are being explored for treatment of retinal regeneration. The rationale for using bone marrow stem cells to treat retinal dysfunction is based on preclinical evidence showing that bone marrow stem cells can rescue degenerating and ischemic retina. These stem cells have primarily paracrine trophic effects although some cells can directly incorporate into damaged tissue. Since the paracrine trophic effects can have regenerative effects on multiple cells in the retina, the use of this cell therapy is not limited to a particular retinal condition. Autologous bone marrow-derived stem cells are being explored in early clinical trials as therapy for various retinal conditions. These bone marrow stem cells include mesenchymal stem cells, mononuclear cells and CD34+ cells. Autologous therapy requires no systemic immunosuppression or donor matching. Intravitreal delivery of CD34+ cells and mononuclear cells appears to be tolerated and is being explored since some of these cells can home into the damaged retina after intravitreal administration. The safety of intravitreal delivery of mesenchymal stem cells has not been well established. This review provides an update of the current evidence in support of the use of bone marrow stem cells as treatment for retinal dysfunction. The potential limitations and complications of using certain forms of bone marrow stem cells as therapy are discussed. Future directions of research include methods to optimize the therapeutic potential of these stem cells, non-cellular alternatives using extracellular vesicles, and in vivo high-resolution retinal imaging to detect cellular changes in the retina following cell therapy.

ELLIPSOID ZONE MAPPING AND OUTER RETINAL CHARACTERIZATION AFTER INTRAVITREAL OCRIPLASMIN

PURPOSE

To assess outer retinal architectural alterations after intravitreal ocriplasmin with a novel automated ellipsoid zone (EZ) mapping algorithm.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective, consecutive case series of image analysis was performed. Quantitative assessment of EZ status imaged with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography was performed before and after single intravitreal injection of 0.125 mg of ocriplasmin (Jetrea, Thrombogenics). A novel EZ mapping algorithm was used to assess the EZ retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) central area, EZ-RPE macular volume, and en face EZ integrity based on the percentage of sampling areas with 20 μm or greater EZ-RPE thickness. Longitudinal assessment of these changes with custom optical coherence tomography reading software was completed. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared with these retinal changes.

RESULTS

Nineteen eyes were included in this study. The retinal volume between EZ and RPE was significantly reduced at 1 week after ocriplasmin (P = 0.0036). Seven of 19 patients (36.8%) complained of color abnormalities or brightness reduction after injection. All of these seven patients had increased subretinal fluid after ocriplasmin and EZ attenuation. The EZ-RPE volume was reduced at 1 week (P = 0.0036), 1 month (P = 0.015) after ocriplasmin, and restored by 3 months. The area with EZ-RPE thickness below 20 μm was increased at 1 week (P = 0.046) after ocriplasmin and recovered with time.

CONCLUSION

Mapping of EZ is feasible to assess EZ-RPE volume and overall EZ integrity with en face thickness mapping. Alterations in EZ occur in a significant proportion of eyes after ocriplasmin therapy. The EZ-RPE volume and the EZ-RPE central foveal area typically recover to baseline by 3 months. This effect appears to be panretinal and associated with subjective symptoms.

Early and Long-Term Responses to Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy in Diabetic Macular Edema: Analysis of Protocol I Data

PURPOSE

To determine whether early visual acuity response to ranibizumab in diabetic macular edema is associated with long-term outcome.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of randomized controlled trial data.

METHODS

Pooled data from the ranibizumab plus prompt and deferred laser treatment arms of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network's Protocol I study were used to explore the relationship between early (week 12) and late (weeks 52-156) visual acuity response (mean change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity [CFB BCVA]; categorized improvement [<5, 5-9, or ≥10 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters] in BCVA).

RESULTS

In the analysis population (340 eyes), <5-, 5- to 9-, and ≥10-letter BCVA improvements occurred in 39.7%, 23.2%, and 37.1% of eyes, respectively, at 12 weeks, and 34.2%, 16.5%, and 49.3% of eyes at 156 weeks. Within each early BCVA response category (<5, 5-9, and ≥10 letters of improvement at 12 weeks), mean CFB BCVA at 52-156 weeks varied by <5 letters from that at 12 weeks. CFB BCVA and <5-letter improvement at 12 weeks showed significant positive and negative association, respectively, with CFB BCVA and ≥10-letter improvement at 52 and 156 weeks. Similar relationships were demonstrated in eyes with baseline BCVA <69 letters, and associations remained significant after multivariate adjustment for potential confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

Ranibizumab ± laser therapy resulted in similar rates (∼40%) of suboptimal (<5-letter) and pronounced (≥10-letter) BCVA improvement at 12 weeks. Eyes with suboptimal early BCVA response showed poorer long-term visual outcomes than eyes with pronounced early response (mean improvement 3.0 vs 13.8 letters at 156 weeks).

The Efficacy and Safety of Current Treatments in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Purpose

To compare the efficacy and safety of current treatments in diabetic macular edema (DME).

Methods

PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL were systematically reviewed for randomized controlled trials of current treatments in DME through August 2015. Data on the mean change of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were extracted, and adverse events (AEs) were collected.

Results

A total of 21 trials were included in our network meta-analysis. Intravitreal ranibizumab improved BCVA most significantly (OR: +7.01 95%CI (2.56 to 11.39)) in 6 months and intravitreal aflibercept (+8.19 (5.07 to 11.96)) in 12 months. Intravitreal triamcinolone combined with LASER decreased CMT most significantly (-111.34 (-254.61 to 37.93)) in 6 months and intravitreal aflibercept (-110.83 (-190.25 to -35.27)) in 12 months. Compared with the relatively high rate of ocular AEs in the groups with administration of steroids, systematic AEs occurred more frequently in the groups with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors involved.

Conclusions

Our analysis confirms that intravitreal aflibercept is most favorable with both BCVA improvement and CMT decrease than other current therapies in the management of DME within 12 months. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors for DME should be used with caution due to systematic AEs. Combined intravitreal triamcinolone with LASER has a stronger efficacy in decreasing CMT than the other interventions in the early stage after injection. More high-quality randomized controlled trials will be necessary.

"Off-label" use of intravitreal bevacizumab in non-ischemic macular edema secondary to retinal vein obstructions

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravitreal Bevacizumab in treatment of non-ischemic macular edema secondary to retinal vein obstruction (RVO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 2-year-retrospective study was performed on 26 patients hospitalized for non-ischemic macular edema secondary to RVO. All the patients underwent a complete ophthalmologic exam, with best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) testing, fundus photography, fluorescein angiography (FA) and macular thickness measurement by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Reevaluation was performed monthly for VA, OCT, and ophthalmoscopy and, at every 3 months, by FA. A standard protocol of 0.05 ml intravitreal Bevacizumab injection was applied. Further administrations were performed according to clinical evolution.

RESULTS

The medium follow-up period was of 9,7 months (6-20 months). There were no significant complications following the procedure. The number of intravitreal Bevacizumab injections varied from 2-5/ patient. All the patients experienced an improvement in VA and a significant regression of macular edema. The smallest number of intravitreal Bevacizumab injections and the best visual prognosis were observed in cases with branch retinal vein obstruction (BRVO) and early presentation (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

As a pathogenic therapy, intravitreal Bevacizumab is a safe, repeatable procedure and it may be considered an effective and lasting treatment for non-ischemic macular edema secondary to RVO. Intravitreal Bevacizumab should be included in the therapeutic protocol of RVO, both for early and delayed presentations. Abbreviations: RVO = retinal vein obstruction, BRVO = branch retinal vein obstruction, CRVO = central retinal branch obstruction, BCVA = best corrected visual acuity, FA = fluorescein angiography, OCT = optical coherence tomography.

Topical dexamethasone γ-cyclodextrin nanoparticle eye drops increase visual acuity and decrease macular thickness in diabetic macular oedema

PURPOSE

To compare in a randomized, controlled trial topical 1.5% dexamethasone γ-cyclodextrin nanoparticle eye drops (DexNP) with posterior subtenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide in diabetic macular oedema (DME).

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, controlled trial, 22 eyes of 22 consecutive patients with DME were randomized to (i) topical treatment with DexNP ×3/day (4 weeks), ×2/day (4 weeks) and ×1/day (4 weeks) or (ii) one posterior subtenon injection of 20 mg triamcinolone acetonide. Study visits were at baseline and 4, 8, 12 and 16 weeks.

RESULTS

The logMAR (Snellen) visual acuity (mean ± SD) improved significantly with DexNP from 0.41 ± 0.3 (Snellen 0.39) to 0.32 ± 0.25 (0.48) and 0.30 ± 0.26 (0.50) at 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. One-third of the DexNP group improved more than 0.3 logMAR units. For triamcinolone, logMAR changed significantly from 0.42 ± 0.28 (0.38) at baseline to 0.32 ± 0.29 (0.48) at 4w and 0.33 ± 0.37 (0.47) at 12w. The central macular thickness (CMT) decreased significantly with DexNP from 483 ± 141 μm to 384 ± 142 μm at 4w and 342 ± 114 μm at 8w. For triamcinolone, CMT decreased significantly at all time-points: 494 ± 94 μm, 388 ± 120, 388 ± 145, 390 ± 136 and 411 ± 104 μm at 0, 4, 8, 12 and 16 weeks, respectively. There was a modest increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) at all time-points with DexNP while no increase was seen with triamcinolone. Serum cortisol was affected by both treatments.

CONCLUSION

Topical DexNP significantly improve visual acuity and decrease macular thickness in patients with DME. The effect is similar to that from subtenon triamcinolone. A modest increase in IOP was seen with the nanoparticle eye drops, but IOP normalized after the discontinuation of treatment.

A randomized clinical trial of intravitreal bevacizumab versus intravitreal dexamethasone for diabetic macular edema: the BEVORDEX study

OBJECTIVE

To report the 12-month results of the first head-to-head comparison of a dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) versus bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) for center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME).

DESIGN

Phase 2, prospective, multicenter, randomized, single-masked clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01298076).

PARTICIPANTS

We enrolled 88 eyes of 61 patients with center-involving DME.

METHODS

Forty-two eyes were randomized to receive bevacizumab every 4 weeks and 46 eyes were randomized to receive a dexamethasone implant every 16 weeks, both pro re nata. Results were analyzed using linear regression with generalized estimation equation methods to account for between-eye correlation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of eyes that improved vision by 10 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution letters. Secondary outcomes included mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), change in central macular thickness (CMT), injection frequency, and adverse events. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire.

RESULTS

Improvement in BCVA of 10 or more letters was found in 17 of 42 eyes (40%) treated with bevacizumab compared with 19 of 46 dexamethasone implant-treated eyes (41%; P = 0.83). None of the 42 bevacizumab eyes lost 10 letters or more, whereas 5 of 46 (11%) dexamethasone implant eyes did, mostly because of cataract. Mean CMT decreased by 122 μm for bevacizumab eyes and by 187 μm for dexamethasone implant eyes (P = 0.015). Bevacizumab-treated eyes received a mean of 8.6 injections compared with 2.7 injections for dexamethasone implant eyes. Significant improvement in IVI scores occurred for both treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone implant achieved similar rates of visual acuity improvement compared with bevacizumab for DME, with superior anatomic outcomes and fewer injections. Both treatments were associated with improvement in visual quality-of-life scores. However, more dexamethasone implant-treated eyes lost vision, mainly because of cataract.