The 0.19-mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: An Expert Consensus

Diabetic macular edema (DME): dissecting pathogenesis, prognostication, diagnostic modalities along with current and futuristic therapeutic insights

One of the most common health concerns disturbing people within working years globally is diabetes mellitus (DM). One well-known consequence of DM is vascular damage, which can manifest as macro- and microangiopathy affecting the ocular retina. Therefore, Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a major sight-threatening complication of diabetic retinopathy (DR) worldwide. It is the most prevalent cause of significant vision impairment in diabetic patients. Long-term vision loss can be avoided by following early DME treatment guidelines in everyday life. Hence, there are various therapeutic approaches for DME management. Currently, the first-line treatment for DME is anti-VEGF family drugs, such as ranibizumab, brolucizumab, bevacizumab, and aflibercept. Nevertheless, relapses of the disease, inadequate response, and resistance during anti-VEGF therapy are still seen because of the intricate pathophysiological foundation of the disease. Consequently, there is an excellent requirement for therapeutic approaches to advance and become better at controlling diseases more satisfactorily and require fewer treatments overall. We conducted a thorough literature search in the current review to present a comprehensive overview of the primary data about the current DME therapeutic agents. We also covered the novel advances in DME management and probable future treatments being investigated and developed. This review recommended that Large clinical trials should afford sufficient evidence to support these innovative treatment modalities.

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.

Intraretinal Hyper-Reflective Foci Are Almost Universally Present and Co-Localize With Intraretinal Fluid in Diabetic Macular Edema

Purpose

In diabetic macular edema (DME), hyper-reflective foci (HRF) has been linked to disease severity and progression. Using an automated approach, we aimed to investigate the baseline distribution of HRF in DME and their co-localization with cystoid intraretinal fluid (IRF).

Methods

Baseline spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) volume scans (N = 1527) from phase III clinical trials YOSEMITE (NCT03622580) and RHINE (NCT03622593) were segmented using a deep-learning-based algorithm (developed using B-scans from BOULEVARD NCT02699450) to detect HRF. The HRF count and volume were assessed. HRF distributions were analyzed in relation to best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and IRF volume in quartiles, and Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scores (DRSS) in groups. Co-localization of HRF with IRF was calculated in the central 3-mm diameter using the en face projection.

Results

HRF were present in most patients (up to 99.7%). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) HRF volume within the 3-mm diameter Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study ring was 1964.3 (3325.2) pL, and median count was 64.0 (IQR = 96.0). Median HRF volumes were greater with decreasing BCVA (nominal P = 0.0109), and increasing CST (nominal P < 0.0001), IRF (nominal P < 0.0001), and DRSS up to very severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (nominal P < 0.0001). HRF co-localized with IRF in the en face projection.

Conclusions

Using automated HRF segmentation of full SD-OCT volumes, we observed that HRF are a ubiquitous feature in DME and exhibit relationships with BCVA, CST, IRF, and DRSS, supporting a potential link to disease severity. The spatial distribution of HRF closely followed that of IRF.

Ocular, Visual, and Anatomical Outcomes in Eyes Requiring Incisional Intraocular Pressure-Lowering Surgery Following the 0.19-mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To assess ocular, visual, and anatomical outcomes following the 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant (ILUVIEN®) and incisional intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering surgery in diabetic macular edema.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From a 36-month, phase 4, open-label, observational study (N = 202 eyes, 159 patients), 8 eyes (7 patients) required IOP-lowering surgery post-FAc; eyes were segregated by FAc-induced (n = 5, 2.47%) versus neovascular glaucoma (NVG)-related (n = 3, 1.49%) IOP elevations and assessed for IOP, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and cup-to-disc ratio (c/d).

RESULTS

Changes at 36 months were +5.4 letters BCVA (P > 0.05) and +0.09 c/d (P = 0.0217); IOP and CST were unchanged. FAc-induced-group eyes required fewer IOP-lowering medications than NVG-group eyes (2.0 versus 4.0; P < 0.01) but for longer duration (15.2 versus 2.6 months; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-FAc IOP-lowering surgery, regardless of cause, largely did not affect the outcomes measured; these procedures, then, may not meaningfully threaten positive outcomes. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2024;55:22-29.].