Antivascular endothelial growth factors in the treatment of macular oedema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: a meta-analysis

The Change of Aqueous Humor Cytokine Levels after Anti-VEGF in Diabetic Macular Edema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a vision-threatening complication that severely impairs vision, and VEGF has a certain improvement effect on it as a growth factor.

Objective

To assess the alterations of different aqueous humor cytokine concentrations after intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME).

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception up to May 2022 for studies evaluating the alterations of different aqueous humor cytokine concentrations after intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment for diabetic macular edema. The estimates from eligible studies were meta-analyzed by the Hartung-Knapp/Sidik-Jonkman random-effects method. Egger's regression test was used to determine the publications' bias. A 95% confidence interval was calculated across studies. The analysis was performed using STATA™ Version 15 software.

Results

Nine eligible studies involving a total of 209 eyes for our systematic review were identified through our search strategy. The mean differences in 1-month and 2-month changes of VEGF were 110.681 pg/ml (P < 0.001) and 283.474 pg/ml (P=0.003), respectively. The mean difference in 2-month changes of interleukin 6 (IL-6) was -24.784 pg/ml (P=0.037). The mean difference in 3-month changes of central macular thickness was 130.372 μm (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF exerts a protective effect on macular edema secondary to diabetic retinopathy by affecting various cytokine concentrations, especially reducing aqueous VEGF concentrations and interleukin 6 in patients with DME.

A Global Assessment of Eye Health and Quality of Life: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

Question

What is the association between vision impairment, eye diseases, or ophthalmic interventions and quality of life?

Findings

In this cross-sectional study, vision impairment and eye diseases were associated with lower quality of life. More than half of the ophthalmic interventions included had a positive association with quality of life.

Meaning

The associations of quality of life with vision impairment and the improvements in quality of life with ophthalmic interventions support efforts to improve access to ophthalmic treatments globally to reach the millions of people affected by eye disease each year.

Importance

More than 1 billion people worldwide have vision impairment or blindness from potentially preventable or correctable causes. Quality of life, an important measure of physical, emotional, and social well-being, appears to be negatively associated with vision impairment, and increasingly, ophthalmic interventions are being assessed for their association with quality of life.

Objective

To examine the association between vision impairment or eye disease and quality of life, and the outcome of ophthalmic interventions on quality of life globally and across the life span, through an umbrella review or systematic review of systematic reviews.

Evidence Review

The electronic databases MEDLINE, Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Proquest Dissertations, and Theses Global were searched from inception through June 29, 2020, using a comprehensive search strategy. Systematic reviews addressing vision impairment, eye disease, or ophthalmic interventions and quantitatively or qualitatively assessing health-related, vision-related, or disease-specific quality of life were included. Article screening, quality appraisal, and data extraction were performed by 4 reviewers working independently and in duplicate. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal and data extraction forms for umbrella reviews were used.

Findings

Nine systematic reviews evaluated the association between quality of life and vision impairment, age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, or mendelian eye conditions (including retinitis pigmentosa). Of these, 5 were reviews of quantitative observational studies, 3 were reviews of qualitative studies, and 1 was a review of qualitative and quantitative studies. All found an association between vision impairment and lower quality of life. Sixty systematic reviews addressed at least 1 ophthalmic intervention in association with quality of life. Overall, 33 unique interventions were investigated, of which 25 were found to improve quality of life compared with baseline measurements or a group receiving no intervention. These interventions included timely cataract surgery, anti–vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for age-related macular degeneration, and macular edema.

Conclusions and Relevance

There is a consistent association between vision impairment, eye diseases, and reduced quality of life. These findings support pursuing ophthalmic interventions, such as timely cataract surgery and anti–vascular endothelial growth factor therapy, for common retinal diseases, where indicated, to improve quality of life for millions of people globally each year.

Effect of funding source on reporting bias in studies of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for retinal vein occlusion

PURPOSE

To examine the relationship between industry funding and outcome reporting bias in high-quality studies investigating the use of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents for patients with macular oedema secondary to branch or central retinal vein occlusion (RVO).

METHODS

This systematic review in PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE examined all randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses published in journals with impact factor of ≥2 that investigated effectiveness of intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy in patients with RVO. The main outcome measure was correspondence between statistical outcome and abstract conclusion wording.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies met inclusion criteria; 38 (84%) showed correspondence between outcome and abstract conclusion without difference between industry-funded and nonindustry-funded publications (p = 0.39) or between publications in journals with impact factor ≥3 versus <3 (p = 0.96).

CONCLUSION

In high-quality studies of intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy for RVO, neither industry funding nor journal impact factor affected the rate of outcome reporting bias.

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.

Comparison between ranibizumab and aflibercept for macular edema associated with central retinal vein occlusion

PURPOSE

We compared the efficacy of bimonthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (IVR) with that of bimonthly intravitreal injections of aflibercept (IVA) in two prospective, consecutive groups of patients with macular edema (ME) secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eyes with ME after CRVO received either bimonthly IVR (ranibizumab group; n = 13) or IVA (aflibercept group; n = 13) injections and were followed monthly for 6 months. Three patients in the ranibizumab group and two in the aflibercept group were lost to follow-up and excluded from the study. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness (CFT) on optical coherence tomography, and aqueous vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) concentrations were evaluated before and after treatment.

RESULTS

From baseline to month 6, significant improvements occurred in mean logMAR BCVA (ranibizumab group: 0.78-0.47; p < 0.05; aflibercept group: 0.74-0.54; p < 0.05) and mean CFT (ranibizumab group: 685-311 µm; p < 0.05; aflibercept group: 695-230 µm; p < 0.05). Fluctuations in CFT were seen at months 2, 4, and 6 in the ranibizumab group. Mean aqueous VEGF concentration decreased from baseline to month 2 in the ranibizumab group (509.9-348.2 pg/ml) and aflibercept group (412.1 pg/ml to undetectable limits in eight of 11 eyes and to 13.6, 15.6, and 24.1 pg/ml in the other three eyes, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant improvement of visual acuity in one group compared with another; VEGF may not be completely neutralized by bimonthly injections of ranibizumab.