Real-world treatment intensities and pathways of macular edema following retinal vein occlusion in Korea from Common Data Model in ophthalmology

Utility of Treatment Pattern Analysis Using a Common Data Model: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to derive observational research evidence on treatment patterns through a scoping review of common data model (CDM)-based publications.

METHODS

We searched the medical literature databases PubMed and EMBASE, as well as the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) website, for papers published between January 1, 2010 and August 21, 2023 to identify research papers relevant to our topic.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles satisfied the inclusion criteria for this scoping review. We summarized study characteristics such as phenotypes, patient numbers, data periods, countries, Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) CDM databases, and definitions of index date and target cohort. Type 2 diabetes mellitus emerged as the most frequently studied disease, covered in five articles, followed by hypertension and depression, each addressed in four articles. Biguanides, with metformin as the primary drug, were the most commonly prescribed first-line treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Most studies utilized sunburst plots to visualize treatment patterns, whereas two studies used Sankey plots. Various software tools were employed for treatment pattern analysis, including JavaScript, the open-source ATLAS by OHDSI, R code, and the R package "TreatmentPatterns."

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a comprehensive overview of research on treatment patterns using the CDM, highlighting the growing importance of OMOP CDM in enabling multinational observational network studies and advancing collaborative research in this field.

Treatment discontinuation patterns of anti-VEGF in retinal vein occlusion

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this research is to report on real-world anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment patterns in retinal vein occlusions (RVO).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Treatment-naive RVO patients initiating anti-VEGF injections between 2015 and 2021.

METHODS

Medical records available until June 2022 were reviewed. Demographics, diagnosis, number of injections, treatment length, reason for discontinuation, and baseline and final data (e.g., date, age, best-corrected visual acuity [BCVA], and central subfield thickness) were recorded. Statistical analyses performed with STATA 17.0 assessed differences between baseline and final values, branch (BRVO) and central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO), and treatment-discontinuation subgroups.

RESULTS

A total of 219 treatment-naive eyes were included (70.3 ± 13.2 years of age, 52.5% female), with 99 BRVOs and 120 CRVOs (2482 injections). The discontinuation rate was 76.7% (168 of 219), with 72.7% of patients (77 of 99) with BRVOs and 75.8% of patients (91 of 120) with CRVOs discontinuing injections. Reasons for discontinuation included stable off active therapy (98 eyes), severe comorbidity or death (17 eyes), switched to intraocular steroid (implant or injection) (12 eyes), lack of visual benefit (10 eyes), ocular comorbidity (5 eyes), patient decision (5 eyes), and patient transfer (5 eyes). Among the remaining 67 eyes, 16 (24%) were lost to follow-up. Reasons for discontinuation differed between BRVO and CRVO patients (p = 0.002). Eyes with CRVO presented with worse BCVA (p < 0.0001) and achieved worse final BCVA (p < 0.0001), but both groups experienced improvements (p < 0.0001). Younger age, better baseline BCVA, and a diagnosis of BRVO were independent predictors of better final visual acuity.

CONCLUSION

Over 7.5 years, treatment was discontinued for three-quarters of RVOs. Stable disease was the most common reason for discontinuation, with nearly half (45%) of all RVOs in the cohort stable off active therapy. Better visual outcomes were achieved in BRVO than in CRVO, although both groups benefited from treatment.

Initial response and 12-month outcomes after commencing dexamethasone or vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors for retinal vein occlusion in the FRB registry

To compare baseline characteristics, initial response and 12-month efficacy and safety outcomes in eyes with branch and central retinal vein occlusion (BRVO and CRVO) treated with dexamethasone implants (DEX) or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) we performed a multi-centre, retrospective and observational study using Fight Retinal Blindness! Registry. Of 725 eligible eyes, 10% received DEX initially with very frequent adjunctive anti-VEGF (BRVO-DEX 49%, CRVO-DEX 60%). The primary outcome of mean adjusted change in VA at 12 months with DEX and anti-VEGF initiated groups were not statistically significantly different (BRVO: DEX + 6.7, anti-VEGF + 10.6 letters; CRVO: DEX + 2.8, anti-VEGF + 6.8 letters). DEX initiated eyes had fewer injections and visits than anti-VEGF initiated eyes. The BRVO-DEX eyes had greater initial mean changes in VA and central subfield thickness (CST) and achieved inactivity sooner than BRVO-anti-VEGF eyes. The mean CST after the first three months was above 350 μm in all but the BRVO-anti-VEGF group, suggesting undertreatment. In routine care DEX is uncommonly used when available as initial treatment of BRVO and CRVO requiring supplemental anti-VEGF within the first year. The 12-month outcomes were similar, but DEX initiated eyes had fewer injections and visits but more episodes of raised IOP Vs those starting anti-VEGF.

Real-World Treatment Intensity and Patterns in Patients With Myopic Choroidal Neovascularization: Common Data Model in Ophthalmology

BACKGROUND

A paucity of data addressing real-world treatment of myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV) in the era of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs led us to investigate real-world treatment intensity and treatment patterns in patients with mCNV.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, observational study using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership-Common Data Model database of treatment-naïve patients with mCNV over the 18-year study period (2003-2020). Outcomes were treatment intensity (time trends of total/average number of prescriptions, mean number of prescriptions in the first year and the second year after initiating treatment, proportion of patients with no treatment in the second year) and treatment patterns (subsequent patterns of treatment according to the initial treatment).

RESULTS

Our final cohort included 94 patients with at-least 1-year observation period. Overall, 96.8% of patients received anti-VEGF drugs as first-line treatment, with most of injections from bevacizumab. The number of anti-VEGF injections in each calendar year showed an increasing trend over time; however, there was a drop in the mean number of injections in the second year compared to the first year from 2.09 to 0.47. About 77% of patients did not receive any treatment in their second year of treatment regardless of drugs. Most of patients (86.2%) followed non-switching monotherapy only and bevacizumab was the most popular choice either in the first-line (68.1%) or in the second-line (53.8%) of treatment. Aflibercept was increasingly used as the first-line treatment for patients with mCNV.

CONCLUSION

Anti-VEGF drugs have become the treatment of choice and second-line treatment for mCNV over the past decade. Anti-VEGF drugs are effective for the treatment of mCNV as the non-switching monotherapy is the main treatment regimen in most cases and the number of treatments decreases significantly in the second year of treatment.