Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant for Chronic Diabetic Macular Edema Previously Treated in Real-Life Practice: The REALFAc Study

What have we learned from a decade treating patients with diabetic macular oedema with 0.19 mg fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant?

Diabetic macular oedema [DMO] is a prevalent and sight-threatening condition among diabetic patients, which can cause irreversible blindness. Since angiogenesis and inflammation are two key elements in the etiopathogenesis of DMO, intravitreal injections of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors [anti-VEGF] and sustained released intravitreal corticosteroid implants are currently considered as treatments of choice. The introduction, 10 years ago, of the 0.19 mg fluocinolone acetonide [FAc] implant for treating eyes with vision impairment associated with recurrent and persistent DMO represented an important advance. Since then, two randomized-control trials and many real-world studies have shown its good efficacy/safety profile and the replicability of its treatment regimen. The FAc implant is, in general terms well tolerated, although it is associated with intraocular pressure-[IOP] and cataract-related adverse events [AEs]. Most IOP-related AEs are effectively controlled with ocular-hypotensive therapies. The objective of this paper is to review the role of FAc implant in the treatment of DMO over the 10 years since its launch, as well as its impact on clinical practice outcomes.

Fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci) one month after dexamethasone implant (DEXi) for chronic diabetic macular edema: 1-year results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of FACi injected 1month after the last DEXi injection in pseudophakic patients without ocular hypertension who required frequent DEXi injections (<6months).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective study including pseudophakic patients with chronic diabetic macular edema (DME) previously treated with DEXi without secondary ocular hypertension. All patients received DEXi followed by FAci one month later. Visits were scheduled at baseline, M1, then every 3months up to 12months.

RESULTS

Fourteen eyes of 11 patients were included and were followed until the 12-month time point. Visual gain was significant at M6 (+5.6 letters) and at M9 (+7.1 letters). A reduction in central macular thickness was obtained at 1 month (-86μm), remaining stable over subsequent visits. The rate of ocular hypertension requiring pressure lowering treatment was 14%. Three eyes needed additional treatment (21%); one eye was treated with aflibercept, and 2 eyes with DEXi at M5 and M11. No patient underwant additional FAc implantation during the 11 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Injection of FAci one month after DEXi in pseudophakic patients with chronic DME who responded previously to DEXi results in anatomical improvement and deferred visual gain. This prospective study demonstrates the efficacy and safety of both implants in DME patients who have been previously treated with other therapies.

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant in Diabetic Macular Edema: Practical Guidelines from Reference Center

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Treatment with intravitreal injections is effective in most cases but is associated with a high therapeutic burden for patients. This implies the need for long-term treatments, such as the fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant. A review of basic science, pharmacology, and clinical data was conducted to provide a state-of-the-art view of the FAc implant in 2024. Although generally well tolerated, the FAc implant has been associated with ocular hypertension and cataract, and caution should be advised to the patients in this regard. By synthesizing information across these domains, a comprehensive evaluation can be attained, facilitating informed decision-making regarding the use of the FAc implant in the management of DME. The main objective of this review is to provide clinicians with guidelines on how to introduce and use the FAc implant in a patient with DME.

Real-Life Results after the Administration of a Single 0.19 mg Fluocinolone Acetonide (ILUVIEN®) Implant in Patients with Refractory Diabetic Macular Edema

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate real-life data on the functional and anatomical outcome of intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) in patients with refractory diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

Retrospective study on 44 eyes with chronic DME that received intravitreal FAc implant and were previously treated with intravitreal dexamethasone, triamcinolone, or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor. We assessed best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central maximum thickness (CMT), and foveal thickness (FT) as measured by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Spectralis OCT; Heidelberg Engineering). Secondary outcomes were intraocular pressure (IOP), adverse events, time to additional treatments.

RESULTS

The FAc implant significantly reduced the CMT (baseline 541.23 ± 155.29 µm, p < 0.001) and FT (baseline 460.34 ± 139.28 µm, p < 0.001) for up to 36 months. Despite postoperative visual improvement over time, BCVA did not significantly shift from baseline (0.55 ± 0.38 logMAR, p = 0.568). The FAc implant effect diminished after 21.34 ± 12.74 months. IOP increased in 9% of eyes (n = 4) but was well controlled under topical (n = 1) or surgical therapy (n = 3).

CONCLUSION

Even though patients' visual recovery does not benefit significantly, the FAc implant addresses the important pillars of chronic DME therapy regarding reduced injection frequency and reduced DME.

ILUVIEN® in diabetic macular edema that persists or recurs despite treatment: Results from the Retina.pt® RIVER audit

PURPOSE

Persistent diabetic macular edema (DME) remains a problem in clinical practice, with many patients having a suboptimal response to the standard of care (SOC). Evidence supports the long-term efficacy of intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant (ILUVIEN®) in patients that have responded sub-optimally, although there is still scarce data from real-world Portuguese practices. We aimed to monitor the current SOC in selected Portuguese practices prior to FAc implantation and then assess the long-term effectiveness and safety of the FAc implant.

SETTINGS

The study included patient data from five Portuguese public hospitals.

DESIGN

This was a non-interventional, multicenter audit of data collected from Retina.pt registry from patients with persistent or recurrent DME despite treatment.

METHODS

Outcome measures included changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and intraocular pressure (IOP). Results were compared at regular times over 36 months.

RESULTS

This study included 222 eyes from 152 patients. A significant decrease in BCVA (P < 0.001) and a significant increase in CMT (P = 0.013) were observed prior to FAc. A significant increase in BCVA was registered at 6 months after FAc implant administration (P < 0.001), which was maintained during follow-up. No relevant changes in IOP were observed. Treatment burden was reduced as a result of treatment with FAc (P < 0.001 for anti-VEGF, corticosteroids, or both treatments) in the full population.

CONCLUSIONS

In Portuguese practice, data showed that pre-FAc implantation, some patients did not respond to SOC treatment and/or they were undertreated. Following FAc implant administration, there were rapid, sustained, long-term visual and anatomical improvements, and a marked reduction in treatment burden.

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.

Suboptimal outcomes and treatment burden of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for diabetic macular oedema in phakic patients

OBJECTIVES

In England and Wales, treatment options were limited for patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO) with phakic eyes that failed anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment pre-2022. This study aimed to quantify the response to, and treatment burden of, anti-VEGF treatment in phakic eyes.

METHODS

Retrospective, cohort study using electronic patient record data from two UK centres between 2015 and 2020. Primary objective was proportion of phakic eyes with a suboptimal response after initial 6 months of anti-VEGF treatment. Data were available for 500 eyes from 399 patients.

RESULTS

At 6 months significantly more eyes had a suboptimal response to anti-VEGF treatment: 65.8% (95% CI 61.5-70.0%) vs 34.2% (95% CI 30.0-38.5%), p < 0.0001. Baseline visual acuity (VA) predicted VA outcome, however, despite greater gains in eyes with poorer VA, such eyes did not achieve the same VA levels as those who started treatment with better VA. Only 53.6% of eyes had more than three injections in the first 6 months indicating difficulties in delivering high volume/high frequency treatment. Treatment and review burden were similar over the following years regardless of response to anti-VEGF treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Data confirm previous real world evidence around response to anti-VEGF treatment, importance of baseline VA and frequency of injections in predicting outcomes in a UK setting. Continuing treatment beyond 6 months in suboptimal responders imposes unnecessary treatment burden without significant change in VA. In suboptimal responders, consideration of early switch to longer acting steroid treatments may help to reduce treatment burden, whilst maintaining or improving vision.

Safety and Efficacy of Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant Given Either First-Line or Second-Line in Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a common sight-threatening complication of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and the leading cause of severe visual impairment among the working-age population. Several therapeutic options are available for the management of DME, including intravitreal corticosteroids. They have been traditionally used as second-line treatment, due to the risk of intraocular pressure increase and cataract-related adverse events. However, attention has recently been focused on the primary or early use of intravitreal corticosteroids, due to growing evidence of the crucial role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of DME. Furthermore, intravitreal steroid implants offer the additional advantage of a longer duration of action compared to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents (anti-VEGF). This review aims to summarize the available evidence on the efficacy and safety profile of dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant, with a specific focus on clinical scenarios in which it might be considered or even preferred as first-line treatment option by adequate selection of patients, considering both advantages and possible adverse events. Patients with contraindications to anti-VEGF, DME with high inflammatory OCT biomarkers, pseudophakic patients and phakic patients' candidates to cataract surgery as well as vitrectomized eyes may all benefit from first-line DEX implant. Additionally, DME not responders to anti-VEGF should be considered for a switch to DEX implant and a combination therapy of DEX implant and anti-VEGF could be a valid option in severe and persistent DME.

Effectiveness and safety of fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant in diabetic macular edema patients considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies (REACT): a prospective, non-randomized, and multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of the intravitreal fluocinolone-acetonide implant (FAc-i) in patients with chronic diabetic macular edema who did not sufficiently respond to other available therapies.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective, non-randomized, and phase-IV observational study conducted on patients with recurrent-DME who were insufficient responders to currently available therapies (REACT-Study). The primary end-point was the mean change in best-corrected-visual-acuity from baseline to month-24 values.

RESULTS

Thirty-one eyes from 31 patients were included in the study. Mean age was 68.0 ± 7.7 years, and 10 (32.3%) were women. Study patients had received 5.3 ± 7.3 previous DME treatments before starting the study. In the overall study sample, BCVA improved from 56.1 ± 12.3 letters at baseline to 62.4 ± 17.0 letters at month-24 (p = 0.0510). The eyes with a baseline BCVA < 70 ETDRS letters had a significant improvement in BCVA from 53.2 ± 10.2 letters at baseline to 61.5 ± 17.9 letters at month-24 (p = 0.0165). In the overall study population, central-subfoveal-thickness (CST) was significantly reduced from 474.0 ± 135.1 µm at baseline to 333.4 ± 135.6 at month-24 (p < 0.0001). Similarly, macular-volume (MV) was significantly reduced from 10.7 ± 2.7 mm3 at baseline to 9.6 ± 2.9 mm3 (p = 0.0027) at month-24. Among the 31 study eyes, 19 (61.3%) required an additional treatment for DME. Throughout the study, 9 (29.0%) eyes required ocular hypotensive medication for controlling their intraocular-pressure and 5 (16.1%) eyes underwent cataract surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In DME eyes who did not sufficiently respond to previous therapies, the FAc-i was associated with an improvement in visual and anatomic outcomes. There were no unexpected adverse-events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT identifier: 2016-001680-37.

[Late steroid-induced ocular hypertension after intravitreal dexamethasone implants: A series of 20 cases]

INTRODUCTION

Steroid-induced ocular hypertension (OHT) occurs in approximately one third of cases after dexamethasone implant (DEXi) injection. Among these, more than one fifth occur after the third DEXi intravitreal injection (IVI). Our goal was to analyze the clinical profiles of these late responders.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A real-life, retrospective, observational study was conducted to assess demographic characteristics and intraocular pressure (IOP) responses in late responders (IOP ≥ 21mmHg, n DEXi ≥ 4). The following parameters were analyzed: IOP 2 months after IVI and number of glaucoma medications needed. The IOP response compared to baseline was defined as low (< +6mmHg), moderate (≤ +15mmHg) or high (> 15mmHg).

RESULTS

Late steroid-induced OHT occurred in 20.8% of cases. Twenty eyes (18 patients) were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 3.8±1.9 years. They received a mean number of 9.5±4.2 IVI. The first OHT peak, measured at 25.3±3.2mmHg (21-31), occurred after 6.8±2.3 IVI. Approximately 65% of OHT spikes occurred between the fourth and sixth IVI; 35% occurred later. At maximum, 1.7±1.0 glaucoma medications and 0.75±0.79 SLT procedures were required to control the OHT, with no filtering surgery required. The ratio of "low," "moderate," and "high" responders was 5%, 85% and 10% respectively.

CONCLUSION

Late steroid-induced OHT occurs after at least 3 DEXi in one fifth of multi-injected patients, requiring long-term IOP monitoring. This case series identifies mostly moderate responder profiles, whose IOP rise often remains well-controlled with medical management or laser treatment (SLT).

Ocular hypertension and intravitreal steroids injections, update in 2023. French guidelines of the French glaucoma society and the French ophthalmology society

These guidelines are a consensus of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in a third of the cases after corticosteroid implant intravitreal injections. They update the first guidelines published in 2017. Two implants are marketed in France: the dexamethasone implant (DEXi) and the fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci). It is essential to assess the pressure status before injecting a patient with a corticosteroid implant. A molecule-specific monitoring of the intraocular pressure is needed throughout the follow-up and at the time of reinjections. Real-life studies have allowed optimizing the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of these implants. Corticosteroid testing with DEXi should be performed before switching to FAci to optimize pressure tolerance of FAci. Beyond topical hypotensive treatments, selective laser trabeculoplasty may be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and subsequent injections.

[Intraocular pressure elevation and intravitreal steroid implant injection: State of the art in 2023. Recommendations of the French Glaucoma Society and French Ophthalmology Society [French version]]

These are the recommendations of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in 1/3 of cases after intravitreal steroid implant injections. They are an update to the recommendations first published in 2017. There are two implants on the French market: the dexamethasone (DEXi) and fluocinolone acetonide (FAci) implants. It is important to know the pressure status before injecting a patient with a steroid implant. Monitoring of the IOP adapted to the specific drug is necessary throughout follow-up and reinjections. Real-life studies have made it possible to optimize the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of use of these implants. A corticosteroid test with DEXi is necessary before switching to FAci to optimize the pressure tolerance of the latter. In addition to topical glaucoma medications, SLT laser can be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and future injections.

Current Treatments and Innovations in Diabetic Retinopathy and Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the leading causes of blindness worldwide. Multiple treatment options have been used over time to attempt to modify the natural progression of the disease in both proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and diabetic macular edema (DME). These two retinal complications are the result of microvascular occlusions and vascular hyperpermeability and are considered one of the leading causes of irreversible blindness in patients of working age. It is now well demonstrated that PDR and DME are associated with increased levels of inflammatory and pro-angiogenic factors in the ocular compartment. To date, laser photocoagulation, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, and corticosteroids have demonstrated efficacy in their treatment in large randomized controlled trials and in real-life observational studies. This manuscript aims to provide a comprehensive review of current treatments, including the main drugs used in diabetic pathologic manifestations, as well as new therapeutic alternatives, such as extended-release intraocular devices.

Preserflo Microshunt Surgery for Ocular Hypertension following Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant Removal: A Case Report

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is now a well-known condition for which a number of treatments have been shown to be effective. Intraocular corticosteroids are part of this therapeutic arsenal but are sometimes responsible for ocular hypertension. We describe here the case of a 60-year-old man with a history of bilateral DME who received an intravitreal injection of 190 µg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) (ILUVIEN^®, Alimera Sciences, Alpharetta, GA, USA) who presented a persistent ocular hypertension in one eye despite FAc removal by pars plana vitrectomy and was successfully managed by Preserflo^® microshunt surgery.

Do new drugs for diabetic macular edema offer a safer option?

INTRODUCTION

The last decade has witnessed important advances in retinal drug discovery, administered intravitreally, allowing high intraocular concentration and low systemic passage. However, local and systemic adverse events have been described and should be discussed before proposing treatment. In diabetes mellitus specifically, the choice of molecule and treatment regimen should limit the therapeutic burden, avoiding the need for frequent ophthalmological appointments, in patients receiving multi-disciplinary care.

AREAS COVERED

We aim to review and discuss the risk/benefit ratio of the main intravitreal therapies currently proposed for diabetic macular edema (DME), and how these treatments could be tailored to each individual patient.

EXPERT OPINION

Anti-VEGF injections and steroid implants are currently the two therapeutic options proposed in cases of DME. New molecules in these two classes have recently been approved and are currently being studied under phase IV observations to establish their efficacy and tolerance. The preferred therapeutic option is determined based on the ocular condition and the patient profile. As new treatments are developed, new adverse events will also enter into consideration, and retinal physicians must therefore be able to call on a range of therapeutic options and question the risk/benefit ratio of each of them before proposing a treatment.