Effect of Adding Dexamethasone to Continued Ranibizumab Treatment in Patients With Persistent Diabetic Macular Edema: A DRCR Network Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Treatment of chronic diabetic macular oedema with intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide implant; real-life analysis of outcomes during overall treatment period

PURPOSE

To assess the clinical efficacy of the fluocinolone acetonide (FA) intravitreal implant (Iluvien, Alimera Sciences) over a 12-month period in a population resistant to treatment with first-line anti-VEGF agents.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective cohort study assessing functional and anatomical outcomes in 13 eyes of 12 patients treated for diabetic macular oedema (DMO) with a single fluocinolone implant (FA) (Iluvien) under real-world conditions. The follow-up period includes the time of first intravitreal treatment (incl anti-VEGF or short-lasting steroids) given until 12 months post FA implant insertion. Primary outcomes were best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), measured using the modified Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) grading scale, and central foveal thickness (CFT), measured using Topcon 3DOCT-2000 (Topcon Inc) SD-OCT imaging. Mean BCVA and CFT were measured before anti-VEGF treatment, after anti-VEGF treatment, at the time of Iluvien implant insertion, and 6 and 12 months after Iluvien implant insertion. The t-paired sample test was used to ascertain statistical significance of changes in comparison of two samples while the ANOVA analysis was used in comparison of three or more samples.

RESULTS

The baseline BCVA (SD) of the cohort prior to initiation of anti-VEGF treatment was 47.45 (12.27) ETDRS letters whilst the mean CFT (SD) was 579 (203) microns. Following completion of anti-VEGF therapy, the mean improvement in vision was 8.9 ETDRS letters (p = 0.1) whilst the mean reduction in CFT was 197 microns (p = 0.028). Mean BCVA (SD) at the time of insertion of the FA implant was 55.15 (11.16) ETDRS letters and mean (SD) CFT at time of insertion of the FA was 454.62 μm (109.51). Following the 12-month treatment period with the FA implant, BCVA (SD) was 62.15 (10.25) ETDRS letters (p = 0.0331) and the mean (SD) CFT was 404.36 μm (142.92), a change of -50.26 μm from baseline (p = 0.0369).

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that statistically significant improvements in BCVA and CFT can be achieved over a 12-month period with the Iluvien implant. The implant has been shown to be a safe option in the treatment of DMO and may have a role to play in achieving good functional and anatomical outcomes in DMO while also reducing the frequency of follow-up appointments required to maintain stable vision in the working-age population.

Factors predicting the treatment frequency of ranibizumab injections during the second year in diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE

To investigate the predictors of annual treatment frequency in the second year of pro re nata (PRN) intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) injections for diabetic macular edema (DME).

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

METHODS

We reviewed 65 eyes of 60 patients with center-involved DME who received PRN IVR injections after 3 monthly loading doses. The central subfield thickness (CST) and qualitative findings were assessed on the spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) images. We then investigated whether the parameters at the baseline or at the 12-month visit were associated with treatment frequency in the second year.

RESULTS

The number of ranibizumab injections decreased from 6 (4-8) during the first year to 2 (0-3) during the second year (P < .001). The injection numbers during the first year (ρ = 0.259, P = .037) but not during the second year (ρ = 0.152, P = .226) were modestly related to the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) improvement at 24 months. Multivariate analyses revealed that the CST (β = 0.336, P = .005) and hyperreflective walls in the foveal cystoid spaces (β = 0.273, P = .020) at baseline were associated with the number of IVR injections during the second year. The treatment frequency during the second year was also related to the CST (β = 0.266, P = .012), hyperreflective walls (β = 0.394, P = .002), and cumulative doses of ranibizumab injections (β = 0.294, P = .006) at the 12-month visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The cumulative doses of ranibizumab injections, CST, and hyperreflective walls in the foveal cystoid spaces at the 12-month visit are designated predictors of the treatment frequency of ranibizumab injections during the second year in DME.

Clinical Relevance of Body Fluid Volume Status in Diabetic Patients With Macular Edema

OBJECTIVE

To investigate body fluid status in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients and the extent to which it is affected by renal function.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-two eyes from 132 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) were prospectively collected in this cross-sectional, observational study. Thirty-five were DM patients without diabetic retinopathy (DR), 31 were DR patients without DME, and 66 were DME patients. The fluid status of each participant was quantified with extracellular water-to-total body water ratio (ECW/TBW) using a body composition monitor. Central subfield thickness (CST) and macular volume (MV) were obtained using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and albumin was obtained using serum and urine laboratory data.

RESULTS

ECW/TBW was significantly increased in DME patients (39.2 ± 0.9, %) compared to DM (38.1 ± 0.7, %, P = 0.003) and DR patients without DME (38.7 ± 0.9, %, P < 0.001). In multilinear regression, fluid overload was positively related to DME and UACR (DME vs. DM: β = 2.418, P < 0.001; DME vs. DR: β = 1.641, P = 0.001; UACR, per 10², β = 1.017, P = 0.01). In the binary logistic regression for DME risk, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) increased significantly by adding ECW/TBW along with UACR and age (AUC: 0.826 vs. 0.768).

CONCLUSION

DME patients had elevated body fluid volume independent of kidney functions. The assessment of extracellular fluid status may help in the management of DME.

CLINICAL FEATURES OF INTRAVITREAL DEXAMETHASONE IMPLANTATION IN VITRECTOMIZED EYES OF PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA

PURPOSE

To identify the clinical outcomes of intravitreal dexamethasone implantation (IVD) in previously vitrectomized eyes of patients with diabetic macular edema.

METHOD

We performed a retrospective observational study. We recorded central subfield thickness, best-corrected visual acuity, and intraocular pressure up to 12 months after IVD implant placement. We compared the duration of IVD action, intraocular pressure trends, and the prevalence of ocular hypertension after the first IVD treatment of nonvitrectomized and vitrectomized eyes. We also compared the central subfield thickness, best-corrected visual acuity, number of IVD treatments, and prevalence of ocular hypertension between the 2 groups after 12 months.

RESULTS

We found no significant between-group differences in the central subfield thickness, best-corrected visual acuity, or the prevalence of ocular hypertension during treatment. However, the duration of action of the first IVD treatment was significantly shorter in vitrectomized eyes, and these eyes required more IVD treatments during the 12-month follow-up period. The maximal average intraocular pressure was observed at 2 months after the first IVD treatment in the nonvitrectomized group, but 1 month after the first IVD treatment in the vitrectomized group.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that the IVD pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics differ between vitrectomized and nonvitrectomized eyes. Nevertheless, given the relatively long-lasting effectiveness of the treatment and the good clinical results, consecutive IVD treatments may be beneficial for patients with diabetic macular edema with previously vitrectomized eyes.

Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant for the Treatment of Macular Edema and Uveitis: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

Purpose

The purpose of this review article is to provide a comprehensive review of the current applications of intravitreal DEX implant (Ozurdex^®, Allergan Inc, Irvine, CA) for a variety of ophthalmic conditions – ranging from FDA approved indications to off-label uses. We have attempted to provide relevant evidence from the literature to help a reader develop an understanding of the biological and pharmacokinetic properties of DEX implant, its uses, and potential side effects.

Methods

PubMed searches were performed using the terms “Ozurdex”, or “intravitreal DEX implant”, AND “retinal vein occlusion”, or “diabetic macular edema”, or “uveitis”. The search was performed in July of 2021, with an additional search in October 2021. All original English language articles were considered for this review.

Results

DEX implant has evidence of efficacy in a variety of clinical situations including macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion, diabetes, uveitis, and others. Safety concerns include cataract formation and progression, intraocular pressure elevation, complications related to intravitreal injection, and opportunistic infections secondary to steroid-induced immune suppression.

Conclusion

DEX implant is a useful tool in the management of several retinal disorders. Further studies are needed for head-to-head comparison with other treatment modalities and to determine its precise place in clinical practice.

Therapeutic effect of simultaneous intravitreal dexamethasone and aflibercept on diabetic macular edema

AIMS

To report the effect of simultaneous intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) and aflibercept for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

This retrospective analysis of an open-label, multicenter, consecutive case series included 102 eyes of 81 patients with DME. Patients were selected into two groups. The control group consisted of 50 eyes treated with aflibercept alone, and the combination group consisted of 52 eyes treated with simultaneous DEX implant and aflibercept injection. The primary endpoints were changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) from baseline to month 6. The secondary endpoint was the interval of retreatment.

RESULTS

Baseline BCVA increased and CRT decreased at 6 months in both groups. Pseudophakic eyes in the combination group exhibited significantly greater BCVA improvement compared with phakic eyes (p = 0.031). Fewer intravitreal treatments were required for eyes treated with combination therapy than for those treated with aflibercept alone (1.56 ± 0.54 vs. 4.04 ± 1.26, p < .0001), with a mean retreatment interval of 3.66 ± 0.69 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous intravitreal DEX and aflibercept achieved non-inferior improvement of visual and anatomic outcomes compared with aflibercept alone for DME, but exhibited a significantly longer treatment interval and superior visual outcome in pseudophakic eyes. This therapeutic approach is considered a valid strategy for treating DME in the era of COVID-19.

Changes in aqueous and vitreous inflammatory cytokine levels in diabetic macular oedema: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Diabetic macular oedema (DME) is considered a chronic inflammatory disease associated with aberrations in many intraocular cytokines. Studies assessing the role of these cytokines as biomarkers in the diagnosis and management of DME have demonstrated inconsistent findings. We quantitatively summarized data related to 116 candidate aqueous and vitreous inflammatory cytokines as biomarkers in DME. A systematic search without year limitation was performed up to 19 October 2020. Studies were included if they provided data on aqueous or vitreous cytokine concentrations in patients with DME. Effect sizes were generated as standardized mean differences (SMDs) of cytokine concentrations between patients with DME and controls. Data were extracted from 128 studies that included 4163 study eyes with DME and 1281 control eyes. Concentrations (standard mean difference, 95% confidence interval and p-value) of aqueous IL-6 (1.28, 0.57-2.00, p = 0.004), IL-8 (1.06, 0.74-1.39, p < 0.00001), MCP-1 (1.36, 0.57-2.16, p = 0.0008) and VEGF (1.31, 1.01-1.62, p < 0.00001) and vitreous VEGF (2.27, 1.55-2.99, p < 0.00001) were significantly higher in patients with DME (n = 4163) compared to healthy controls (n = 1281). No differences, failed sensitivity analyses or insufficient data were found between patients with DME and healthy controls for the concentrations of the remaining cytokines. This analysis implicates multiple cytokine biomarker candidates other than VEGF in DME and clarifies previously reported inconsistent associations. As the therapeutic options for DME expand to include multiple agents with multiple targets, it will be critical to manage the treatment burden with tailored therapy that optimizes outcomes and minimizes treatment burden. Intraocular cytokines have the promise of providing a robust individualized assessment of disease status and response to therapy. We have identified key candidate cytokines that may serve as biomarkers in individualized treatment algorithms.

Monoclonal antibodies in diabetic retinopathy

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic retinopathy (DR), as one of the main complications of diabetes, is among the leading causes of blindness and visual impairment worldwide.

AREAS COVERED

Current clinical therapies include photocoagulation, vitrectomy, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies. Bevacizumab and ranibizumab are two monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) inhibiting angiogenesis. Intravitreal ranibizumab and bevacizumab can decrease the rate of blindness and retinal thickness, and improve visual acuity whether as monotherapy or combined with other treatments. They can increase the efficacy of other treatments and decrease their adverse events. Although administered intravitreally, they also might enter the circulation and cause systemic effects. This study is aimed to review our current knowledge about mAbs, bevacizumab and ranibizumab, in DR including superiorities, challenges, and limitations. Meanwhile, we tried to shed light on new ideas to overcome these limitations. Our latest search was done in April 2021 mainly through PubMed and Google Scholar. Relevant clinical studies were imported.

EXPERT OPINION

Future direction includes detection of more therapeutic targets considering other components of DR pathophysiology and shared pathogenesis of DR and neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease, the treat-and-extend regimen, and new ways of drug delivery and other routes of ocular drug administration.

Fluctuations in Central Subfield Thickness Associated With Worse Visual Outcomes in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema in Clinical Trial Setting

PURPOSE

This study examines the relationship between fluctuations in central subfield thickness (CST) and visual acuity (VA) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) using data from 2 large clinical trials.

DESIGN

Clinical cohort study using post hoc analysis of clinical trial databases.

METHODS

Standard deviation (SD) of all recorded CSTs for each patient during the study period were used to quantify the fluctuations in CST. Patients from each protocol were grouped into quartiles based on the CST SD. Eyes with at least 3 CSTs and VA at 1 year were included. The main outcome measures were VA at 1 and 2 years for each protocol, stratified by SD quartile.

RESULTS

A total of 1197 eyes were included in the analysis. There were significant VA differences based on CST SD quartile for both protocols while adjusting for mean baseline VA, baseline CST, lens status, hemoglobin A1c, and treatment arm. At week 52 in protocol T, the difference between the first and fourth quartiles was -1.61 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters (95% confidence interval [CI] -3.52 to 0.30, P = .0986). At week 104, this difference was -3.59 letters (95% CI -6.17 to -1.00, P = .0066). In protocol V, at week 52, the difference between the first and fourth quartiles was -3.04 letters (95% CI -4.18 to -1.91, P < .0001). At week 104, this difference was -2.35 letters (95% CI -3.58 to -1.13, P = .0005).

CONCLUSION

Large fluctuations in CST may portend worse VA outcomes at the 2-year end point in patients with DME.

Recombinant thrombomodulin domain 1 rescues pathological angiogenesis by inhibition of HIF-1α-VEGF pathway

Pathological angiogenesis (PA) contributes to various ocular diseases, including age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and retinopathy of prematurity, which are major causes of blindness over the world. Current treatments focus on anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy, but persistent avascular retina, recurrent intravitreal neovascularization, and general adverse effects are reported. We have previously found that recombinant thrombomodulin domain 1 (rTMD1) can suppress vascular inflammation. However, the function of rTMD1 in VEGF-induced PA remains unknown. In this study, we found that rTMD1 inhibited VEGF-induced angiogenesis in vitro. In an oxygen induced retinopathy (OIR) animal model, rTMD1 treatment significantly decreased retinal neovascularization but spared normal physiological vessel growth. Furthermore, loss of TMD1 significantly promoted PA in OIR. Meanwhile, hypoxia-inducible factor-1α, the transcription factor that upregulates VEGF, was suppressed after rTMD1 treatment. The levels of interleukin-6, and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 were also significantly suppressed. In conclusion, our results indicate that rTMD1 not only has dual effects to suppress PA and inflammation in OIR, but also can be a potential HIF-1α inhibitor for clinical use. These data bring forth the possibility of rTMD1 as a novel therapeutic agent for PA.

Conversion of Central Subfield Thickness Measurements of Diabetic Macular Edema Across Cirrus and Spectralis Optical Coherence Tomography Instruments

Purpose

Develop equations to convert Cirrus central subfield thickness (CST) to Spectralis CST equivalents and vice versa in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME).

Methods

The DRCR Retina Network Protocol O data were split randomly to train (70% sample) and validate (30% sample) conversion equations. Data from an independent study (CADME) also validated the equations. Bland–Altman 95% limits of agreement between predicted and observed values evaluated the equations.

Results

Protocol O included 374 CST scan pairs from 187 eyes (107 participants). The CADME study included 150 scan pairs of 37 eyes (37 participants). Proposed conversion equations are Spectralis = 40.78 + 0.95 × Cirrus and Cirrus = 1.82 + 0.94 × Spectralis regardless of age, sex, or CST. Predicted values were within 10% of observed values in 101 (90%) of Spectralis and 99 (88%) of Cirrus scans in the validation data; and in 136 (91%) of the Spectralis and 148 (99%) of the Cirrus scans in the CADME data. Adjusting for within-eye correlations, 95% of conversions are estimated to be within 17% (95% confidence interval, 14%–21%) of CST on Spectralis and within 22% (95% confidence interval, 18%–28%) of CST on Cirrus.

Conclusions

Conversion equations developed in this study allow the harmonization of CST measurements for eyes with DME using a mix of current Cirrus and Spectralis device images.

Translational Relevance

The CSTs measured on Cirrus and Spectralis devices are not directly comparable owing to outer boundary segmentation differences. Converting CST values across spectral domain optical coherence tomography instruments should benefit both clinical research and standard care efforts.

Cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone and triamcinolone for the treatment of diabetic macular oedema in Finland: A Markov-model

PURPOSE

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO), a complication of diabetes, causes vision loss and blindness. Corticosteroids are usually used as a second-line treatment. The aim of this study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone implants compared to cheaper and more frequently applied triamcinolone injections.

METHODS

Markov-modelling, which incorporated both eyes, was used for economic evaluation. The model consisted of five health states based on visual acuity, illustrating the progression of DMO. A cycle length of five months was chosen for dexamethasone and four months for triamcinolone. Time horizons of two and five years were applied. Transition probabilities and health state utilities were sourced from previous studies. The perspective used in this analysis was the hospital perspective. The health care costs were acquired from Kuopio University Hospital in Finland.

RESULTS

In this cost-effectiveness analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ICER with 3% discount rate was €56 591/QALY for a two-year follow-up and -€1 110 942/QALY for a five-year follow-up. In order to consider dexamethasone as cost-effective over a 2-year time horizon, the WTP needs to be around €55 000/QALY. Over the five-year follow-up, triamcinolone is clearly a dominant treatment. Sensitivity analyses support the cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone over a 2-year time horizon.

CONCLUSIONS

Since the sensitivity analyses support the results, dexamethasone would be a cost-effective treatment during the first two years with WTP threshold around €55 000/QALY, and triamcinolone would be a convenient treatment after that. This recommendation is in line with the guidelines of EURETINA.

Diabetic macular edema treatment guidelines in India: All India Ophthalmological Society Diabetic Retinopathy Task Force and Vitreoretinal Society of India consensus statement

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a common cause of moderate visual impairment among people with diabetes. Due to the rising number of people with diabetes in India, the absolute numbers of people with DME are significant. There are several treatment options for DME, and the choice of treatment is based on the availability of retinal specialists and infrastructure for the delivery of treatment. A major challenge is the out-of-pocket expenditure incurred by patients as most treatment options are costly. Treatment also varies based on the associated ocular and systemic conditions. The All India Ophthalmology Society (AIOS) and the Vitreo-Retinal Society of India (VRSI) have developed this consensus statement of the AIOS DR task force and VRSI on practice points of DME management in India. The objective is to describe the preferred practice patterns for the management of DME considering the different presentations of DME in different clinical scenarios.

Combined intravitreal ranibizumab and posterior subtenon triamcinolone acetonide injections for patients with diabetic macular edema refractory to intravitreal ranibizumab monotherapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) alone and concurrent IVR with posterior subtenon triamcinolone acetonide (PSTA) injection for patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) refractory to IVR monotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 43 eyes of 43 patients with DME who received at least three times of IVR, which resulted in poor anatomical responses, with central foveal thickness (CFT) reduction <10% and postinjection CFT >300 μm. All the eyes received initial 3 monthly then pro re nata (PRN) IVR 0.5-mg injections. Twenty eyes continued PRN injections and 23 eyes received combined IVR 0.5 mg and PSTA 40 mg with at least 1-year follow-up. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and CFT were recorded from 1-month to 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Following switch to combined therapy, the mean BCVA significantly improved from 0.61 ± 0.32 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) to 0.45±0.39 logMAR at 6 month (P = 0.003), 0.43±0.35 logMAR at 9 months (P < 0.001), and 0.48±0.45 logMAR at 1 year (P = 0.03). In eyes with IVR alone, no significant VA improvement was noted throughout the year. Significantly better BCVA was noted in the combined group at 6-month, 9-month, and 1-year follow-up compared to IVR-alone group. The timing of combined therapy showed a significant association with 1-year BCVA (t = 3.25, P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Concurrent IVR and PSTA resulted in significantly better visual outcomes in 1-year follow-up for those refractory to preceding ranibizumab monotherapy for DME. Early addition of PSTA predicted a better visual outcome.

Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Study of Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant in Patients with Center-Involved Diabetic Macular Edema in the Asia-Pacific Region

Purpose

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX) compared with laser photocoagulation in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).

Patients and Methods

This Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, efficacy evaluator–masked, parallel-group, 12-month clinical study enrolled adults in China and the Philippines with reduced visual acuity secondary to fovea-involved DME in the study eye. Participants were randomized 1:1 to study eye treatment with laser photocoagulation every 3 months as needed (n = 139) or DEX every 5 months (n = 145). The main efficacy measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), and leakage area. The primary endpoint was the average change in BCVA from baseline over 12 months (area-under-the-curve method). Preplanned subgroup analyses evaluated outcomes in Chinese patients.

Results

Mean average change in BCVA from baseline during the study (letters) was 4.3 with DEX (n = 145) versus 1.4 with laser (n = 127) overall (P = 0.001) and 4.6 with DEX (n = 129) versus 0.6 with laser (n = 113) in Chinese patients (P < 0.001). At Month 12, mean change in CRT from baseline was −209.5 μm with DEX versus −120.3 μm with laser (P < 0.001) and mean change in total leakage area from baseline was −8.367 mm² with DEX versus −0.637 mm² with laser (P < 0.001). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in the DEX group were increased intraocular pressure and cataract.

Conclusion

DEX administered every 5 months provided significantly greater improvement in BCVA, CRT, and total leakage area compared with laser treatment. DEX demonstrated an acceptable safety profile, consistent with an intraocular corticosteroid, and similar to that reported in completed global registration studies.

Updates on the Current Treatments for Diabetic Retinopathy and Possibility of Future Oral Therapy

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a complication of diabetes and one of the leading causes of vision loss worldwide. Despite extensive efforts to reduce visual impairment, the prevalence of DR is still increasing. The initial pathophysiology of DR includes damage to vascular endothelial cells and loss of pericytes. Ensuing hypoxic responses trigger the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and other pro-angiogenic factors. At present, the most effective treatment for DR and diabetic macular edema (DME) is the control of blood glucose levels. More advanced cases require laser, anti-VEGF therapy, steroid, and vitrectomy. Pan-retinal photocoagulation for non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) is well established and has demonstrated promising outcomes for preventing the progressive stage of DR. Furthermore, the efficacy of laser therapies such as grid and subthreshold diode laser micropulse photocoagulation (SDM) for DME has been reported. Vitrectomy has been performed for vitreous hemorrhage and tractional retinal detachment for patients with PDR. In addition, anti-VEGF treatment has been widely used for DME, and recently its potential to prevent the progression of PDR has been remarked. Even with these treatments, many patients with DR lose their vision and suffer from potential side effects. Thus, we need alternative treatments to address these limitations. In recent years, the relationship between DR, lipid metabolism, and inflammation has been featured. Research in diabetic animal models points to peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα) activation in cellular metabolism and inflammation by oral fenofibrate and/or pemafibrate as a promising target for DR. In this paper, we review the status of existing therapies, summarize PPARα activation therapies for DR, and discuss their potentials as promising DR treatments.

Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant in Patients Who Did Not Complete Anti-VEGF Loading Dose During the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Retrospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

To compare the functional and anatomic outcomes between eyes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) who underwent a complete anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) loading dose with aflibercept and those who were switched to dexamethasone intravitreal (DEX) implant after an incomplete anti-VEGF treatment regimen during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

This was a retrospective and comparative study conducted on patients with DME. Main outcome measures were mean change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) from baseline to month 4.

RESULTS

Forty-three eyes (23 eyes in the anti-VEGF group and 20 eyes in the DEX group) were included. Mean BCVA significantly improved from 37.7 ± 25.3 and 35.7 ± 22.0 letters at baseline to 45.4 (23.9) (mean adjusted BCVA improvement 7.6 ± 20.8 letters, p = 0.033) and 46.1 ± 26.0 (mean adjusted BCVA improvement 10.6 ± 15.9 letters, p = 0.049) at month 4 in the anti-VEGF and DEX groups, respectively, with no significant differences between study groups (mean adjusted BCVA difference 2.8 letters, 95% CI - 9.4 to 14.9 letters, p = 0.648). There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of eyes that achieved a BCVA improvement of ≥ 5, ≥ 10, and ≥ 15 letters between groups. CRT was significantly reduced from baseline to month 4 in both DEX (mean adjusted CRT reduction 167.3 ± 148.2 µm, p = 0.012) and anti-VEGF groups (mean adjusted CRT reduction 109.9 ± 181.9 µm, p < 0.001), with no differences between them (mean adjusted CRT difference 56.1 µm, 95% CI - 46.0 to 158.2 µm, p = 0.273). Of 20 eyes in the DEX group, 16 (80.0%) and 9 (45.0%) eyes achieved a CRT reduction of ≥ 20% from baseline at 2 months and at 4 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results seem to suggest that DEX implant can significantly improve both functional and anatomic clinical outcomes in patients who were unable to complete anti-VEGF loading dose during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Intravitreal Pharmacotherapies for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

PURPOSE

To review the evidence on the safety and efficacy of current anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and intravitreal corticosteroid pharmacotherapies for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

Literature searches were last conducted on May 13, 2020, in the PubMed database with no date restrictions and limited to articles published in English. The combined searches yielded 230 citations, of which 108 were reviewed in full text. Of these, 31 were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist.

RESULTS

Only the 21 articles with level I evidence were included in this assessment. Seventeen articles provided level I evidence for 1 or more anti-VEGF pharmacotherapies, including ranibizumab (14), aflibercept (5), and bevacizumab (2) alone or in combination with other treatments for DME. Level I evidence was identified in 7 articles on intravitreal corticosteroid therapy for treatment of DME: triamcinolone (1), dexamethasone (4), and fluocinolone acetonide (2).

CONCLUSIONS

Review of the available literature indicates that intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents and corticosteroids are efficacious treatments for DME. Elevated intraocular pressure and cataract progression are important potential complications of corticosteroid therapy. Further evidence is required to assess the comparative efficacy of these therapies. Given the limited high-quality comparative efficacy data, choice of therapy must be individualized for each patient and broad therapeutic access for patients is critical to maximize outcomes.

Place of intravitreal dexamethasone implant in the treatment armamentarium of diabetic macular edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a very important and well-known cause of visual loss in diabetics. Blood–retina barrier disruption and consequent intraretinal fluid accumulation may lead to retinal thickening at the posterior pole namely DME. Even though it is not clearly understood, current evidence suggests that chronic low-grade inflammation characterized with various cytokines has a major role in the occurrence of DME. Clinical trials are continuously shaping our treatment approaches for the eyes with DME. Today, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor and steroid administrations are the main alternatives in DME treatment. Dexamethasone (DEX) implant (Ozurdex^®; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, United States) was approved by the United States Food & Drug Administration in 2014 for DME treatment. The implant is made up of a biodegradable solid copolymer that is broken down by releasing its active ingredient into the vitreous cavity over time. Biphasic release feature of this sustained-release drug delivery system ensures its efficacy for up to 6 mo with an acceptable and manageable safety profile. DEX implant provides a favorable anatomical and functional outcome in DME as shown in several randomized-controlled studies but has a relatively higher ocular side-effect profile such as increased risk of cataract formation and raised intraocular pressure when compared to the gold standard anti-VEGF agents. Thus, DEX implant becomes the second-line treatment option demonstrating inadequate clinical response to anti-VEGF therapy. However, it can be preferred as the first-line treatment in vitrectomized and pseudophakic eyes. Even in some selected conditions DEX implant is favored over anti-VEGF agents where the use of VEGF-inhibitors is either inappropriate or contraindicated such as the patients with a recent history of a major cardiovascular or cerebrovascular event, pregnancy and noncompliant to frequent visits. This mini-review briefly overviews the efficacy, safety profile and complications of DEX implant and summarizes the outcome of DEX implant administration in major clinical studies on DME treatment.

Challenges in Diabetic Macular Edema Management: An Expert Consensus Report

Purpose

This paper aimed to present daily-practice recommendations for the management of diabetic macular edema (DME) patients based on available scientific evidence and the clinical experience of the consensus panel.

Methods

A group of Spanish retina experts agreed to discuss different aspects related with the clinical management of DME patients.

Results

Panel was mainly focused on therapeutic objectives in DME management; definition terms; and role of biomarkers as prognostic and predictive factors to intravitreal treatment response. The panel recommends to start DME treatment as soon as possible in those eyes with a visual acuity less than 20/25 (always according to the retina unit capacity). Naïve patient was defined, in a strict manner, as a patient who, up to that moment, had never received any treatment. A refractory DME patient may be defined as the one who did not achieve a complete resolution of the disease, regardless of the treatment administered. Different optical coherence tomography biomarkers, such as disorganization of the retinal inner layers, hyperreflective dots, and cysts, have been identified as prognostic factors.

Conclusion

This document has sought to lay down a set of recommendations and to identify key issues that may be useful for the daily management of DME patients.

Clinical efficacy of intravitreal corticoid as an adjunctive therapy to anti-VEGF treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a Meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal corticoid as an adjunctive therapy to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD).

METHODS

Four databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the clinicaltrials.gov were comprehensively searched for studies comparing intravitreal corticoid plus anti-VEGF (IVC/IVA) vs anti-VEGF monotherapy (IVA) in patients with nvAMD. GRADE profiler was used to assess the quality of outcomes. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) and adverse events including the occurrence of severe elevation of intraocular pressure (IOP) and the progress of cataract were extracted from the eligible studies. Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

There was no statistic difference of mean change in BCVA at 6 and 12mo between IVC/IVA and IVA group [95% confidence interval (CI): -2.28 to 4.24, P=0.55; 95%CI: -3.01 to 8.70, P=0.34]. No statistic difference was found in the change of CMT between two groups at 6mo time point (95%CI: -17.98 to 16.42, P=0.93) while the CMT reduction in IVC/IVA group was significantly more obvious than IVA group at 12mo time point [mean difference (MD)=-44.08, 95%CI: -80.52 to -7.63, P=0.02]. The risk of occurrence of severe elevation of IOP in the IVC/IVA group was higher than that in the IVA group (95%CI: 1.92 to 9.48; P=0.0004). Cataract progression risk was calculated no statistic difference between two groups (95%CI: 0.74 to 4.66; P=0.18).

CONCLUSION

No visual or anatomical benefits are observed in IVC/IVA group at 6mo. At 12mo, the CMT of the IVC/IVA group is significantly lower than that of the IVA group. Risk of severe elevation of IOP is significantly higher when treated by IVC/IVA.

Rho-Kinase Inhibitors for the Treatment of Refractory Diabetic Macular Oedema

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is one of the leading causes of vision loss associated with diabetic retinopathy (DR). New insights in managing this condition have changed the paradigm in its treatment, with intravitreal injections of antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) having become the standard therapy for DMO worldwide. However, there is no single standard therapy for all patients DMO refractory to anti-VEGF treatment; thus, further investigation is still needed. The key obstacles in developing suitable therapeutics for refractory DMO lie in its complex pathophysiology; therefore, there is an opportunity for further improvements in the progress and applications of new drugs. Previous studies have indicated that Rho-associated kinase (Rho-kinase/ROCK) is an essential molecule in the pathogenesis of DMO. This is why the Rho/ROCK signalling pathway has been proposed as a possible target for new treatments. The present review focuses on the recent progress on the possible role of ROCK and its therapeutic potential in DMO. A systematic literature search was performed, covering the years 1991 to 2021, using the following keywords: "rho-Associated Kinas-es", "Diabetic Retinopathy", "Macular Edema", "Ripasudil", "Fasudil" and "Netarsudil". Better insight into the pathological role of Rho-kinase/ROCK may lead to the development of new strategies for refractory DMO treatment and prevention.

Diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular oedema pathways and management: UK Consensus Working Group

The management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) has evolved considerably over the past decade, with the availability of new technologies (diagnostic and therapeutic). As such, the existing Royal College of Ophthalmologists DR Guidelines (2013) are outdated, and to the best of our knowledge are not under revision at present. Furthermore, there are no other UK guidelines covering all available treatments, and there seems to be significant variation around the UK in the management of diabetic macular oedema (DMO). This manuscript provides a summary of reviews the pathogenesis of DR and DMO, including role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and non-VEGF cytokines, clinical grading/classification of DMO vis a vis current terminology (of centre-involving [CI-DMO], or non-centre involving [nCI-DMO], systemic risks and their management). The excellent UK DR Screening (DRS) service has continued to evolve and remains world-leading. However, challenges remain, as there are significant variations in equipment used, and reproducible standards of DMO screening nationally. The interphase between DRS and the hospital eye service can only be strengthened with further improvements. The role of modern technology including optical coherence tomography (OCT) and wide-field imaging, and working practices including virtual clinics and their potential in increasing clinic capacity and improving patient experiences and outcomes are discussed. Similarly, potential roles of home monitoring in diabetic eyes in the future are explored. The role of pharmacological (intravitreal injections [IVT] of anti-VEGFs and steroids) and laser therapies are summarised. Generally, IVT anti-VEGF are offered as first line pharmacologic therapy. As requirements of diabetic patients in particular patient groups may vary, including pregnant women, children, and persons with learning difficulties, it is important that DR management is personalised in such particular patient groups. First choice therapy needs to be individualised in these cases and may be intravitreal steroids rather than the standard choice of anti-VEGF agents. Some of these, but not all, are discussed in this document.

Vitreoretinal Society of India practice pattern survey 2020: Medical retina

Purpose:

The aim of this study was to present the outcomes of the Vitreo-retinal Society of India (VRSI) Practice Pattern Survey 2020 in medical retina.

Methods:

An online survey of members of VRSI was conducted in April 2020 regarding their practice-patterns on varied medical and surgical retina topics concerning imaging and management approach. The results were evaluated by two independent experts in this field and compared with the evidence and other practice patterns in the world.

Results:

A total of 107 VRSI members participated in the online survey. Responses were obtained on management of wide-ranging chorioretinal disorders such as Central Serous Chorioretinopathy (CSCR), Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy (PCV), Neovascular age related macular degeneration (n-AMD), Retinal Vein Occlusions (RVO), and Diabetic Retinopathy (DR). Participants were also surveyed regarding their attitudes and perceptions about anti-VEGF practice patterns and role of imaging in their current practice. Each of the survey question responses were then compared to contemporary literature, including evidence-based guidelines, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), real-world evidence and analogous international surveys. Comprehensive analysis related to this has been put forward in the article.

Conclusion:

This survey represents the contemporary practice patterns amongst vitreoretinal specialists in India. The survey results are vital for fellow practitioners to understand the 'standard of care’ practice in medical retina. This will guide them to devise the best possible individualized treatment strategy for most favorable clinical outcomes.

Anti-VEGF-Resistant Retinal Diseases: A Review of the Latest Treatment Options

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy currently plays a central role in the treatment of numerous retinal diseases, most notably exudative age-related macular degeneration (eAMD), diabetic retinopathy and retinal vein occlusions. While offering significant functional and anatomic benefits in most patients, there exists a subset of 15–40% of eyes that fail to respond or only partially respond. For these cases, various treatment options have been explored with a range of outcomes. These options include steroid injections, laser treatment (both thermal therapy for retinal vascular diseases and photodynamic therapy for eAMD), abbreviated anti-VEGF treatment intervals, switching anti-VEGF agents and topical medications. In this article, we review the effectiveness of these treatment options along with a discussion of the current research into future directions for anti-VEGF-resistant eyes.

Treatment choices for diabetic macular oedema: a guideline for when to consider an intravitreal corticosteroid, including adaptations for the COVID-19 era

First-line treatment of centrally involved diabetic macular oedema (CI-DMO) is often with an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agent. Although this can provide efficacy in the majority of eyes, a sizeable proportion do not respond sufficiently and many continue to receive anti-VEGF therapy after it may be optimal. This imposes a treatment burden on both patients and clinicians and, most importantly of all, can be sight threatening. Changing treatment to an intravitreal corticosteroid implant at the appropriate time may help optimise patient outcomes and reduce injection frequency, thereby reducing treatment burden. Eight retina specialists convened to discuss how to ensure eyes with CI-DMO receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy are evaluated for a potential change to intravitreal corticosteroid therapy at the most effective time in their treatment journey. They concluded that clear criteria on when to consider changing treatment would be helpful and so developed a consensus guideline covering key decision points such as when and how to assess response to anti-VEGF therapy, when to consider a change to corticosteroid therapy and when and how to assess the response to corticosteroid therapy. The guideline was developed before the COVID-19 pandemic but, with the additional challenges arising from this including even greater pressure on clinic capacity, it is more important than ever to reconsider current working practices and adopt changes to improve patient care while also easing pressure on clinic capacity, reducing hospital visits and maintaining patient safety. This publication therefore also includes suggestions for adapting the guidelines in the COVID-19 era.

Early effect of simultaneous intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab combination treatment in patients with persistent diabetic macular edema

PURPOSE

To report the early effect of simultaneous intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab combination treatment in patients with persistent diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

In this single-center prospective non-randomized study, 65 eyes of 59 patients with persistent DME were included. In the combined group (Group 1), we treated 35 eyes of 29 persistent DME patients with a simultaneous combination of intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab, and in the control group (Group 2), we treated 30 eyes of 30 patients with intravitreal bevacizumab. Changes in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Central Macular Thickness (CMT) and Intraocular Pressure (IOP) from the initial visit to each subsequent follow-up visit (1st, 2nd and 3rd months) were recorded.

RESULTS

In Group 1, the mean baseline Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy (ETDRS) BCVA letter score was 44.1±19.3 (range 20-51), improving significantly to 58.8±18.2 (range 42-73) in the first month (P<0.05), 57±19.2 (range 40-72) in the second month (P<0.05) and 55.4±18.4 (range 34-71) in the third month (P<0.05). In Group 2, the mean pre-injection BCVA ETDRS letter score was 43.3±18.8 (range 20-56) and did not improve significantly; the letter score was 44.3±18.1 (range 20-49) in the third month. In Group 1, the mean BCVA change from baseline to the 3rd month was 11.3 ETDRS letters. In Group 2, the mean BCVA change from baseline to the 3rd month was 1 ETDRS letter. In Group 1, the mean reduction in CMT from baseline was -142.25μm. In Group 2, the mean reduction in CMT from baseline was -17.30μm. In Group 1 at the third month, 12 (34.2%) eyes with a CMT>300μm needed an additional injection. No serious ocular or systemic side effects occurred in any patient.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous intravitreal dexamethasone and bevacizumab combination treatment is effective and can be used safely in persistent DME.

Involvement of Cytokines in the Pathogenesis of Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a critical complication of diabetic retinopathy, a condition that arises from the breakdown of the blood–retinal barrier and the consequent increase in vascular permeability. Over the years, attempts have been made to treat DME by various approaches, including laser photocoagulation, steroid triamcinolone acetonide, and vitrectomy. However, treatment was unsatisfactory until research identified vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as a factor in the pathogenesis of DME. Intraocular anti-VEGF agents show good efficacy in DME. Nevertheless, in some patients the condition recurs or becomes resistant to treatment, suggesting that other factors may be involved. Because inflammation and retinal hypoxia are seen in DME, research has examined the potential role of cytokines and other inflammatory mediators. In this review, we provide an overview of this research and describe feedback mechanisms that may represent a target for novel treatments.

Intravitreal dexamethasone insert in diabetic macular edema super-refractory to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy

BACKGROUND

Some patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) fail to completely respond to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy. These patients have a high treatment burden in the absence of significant improvement. We investigate the role of intravitreal dexamethasone insert (IDI) in eyes with super-refractory DME.

METHODS

A non-randomized interventional study was performed among eyes with super-refractory DME refractory to anti-VEGF therapy. Eyes were treated with IDI after failing clinical response to anti-VEGF, with a minimum of 15 prior. Failure to respond was defined as failure of vision to improve at least one line on Snellen Acuity chart, central subfield thickness (CST) greater than 320 μm, or failure of CST to improve by 10% or more. Eyes with glaucoma or prior uncontrolled steroid-responsive ocular hypertension were excluded. Patient outcomes were analyzed at weeks 6, 12, 24, and year 1.

RESULTS

Six eyes of four patients were identified. All patients had failed aflibercept. The mean number of prior anti-VEGF injections was 34.5. Eyes received an average of 2.92 dexamethasone injections per person-year (PY) and required breakthrough anti-VEGF injection at 1.95/PY. Mean pre-treatment visual acuity was 0.475 LogMAR, improving to 0.342 at week 6, and 0.375 at 1 year. Mean CST pre-injection was 386.5 mm, improving to 315 mm at 1 year. No glaucoma developed.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal dexamethasone insert appears effective in eyes with super-refractory DME. IDI resulted in excellent anatomic improvement on SD-OCT as well as modest visual improvement. Injection burden was reduced in those who may otherwise receive years of monthly treatments.

Diabetic retinopathy screening guidelines in India: All India Ophthalmological Society diabetic retinopathy task force and Vitreoretinal Society of India Consensus Statement

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is an emerging preventable cause of blindness in India. All India Ophthalmology Society (AIOS) and Vitreo-Retinal Society of India (VRSI) have initiated several measures to improve of DR screening in India. This article is a consensus statement of the AIOS DR task force and VRSI on practical guidelines of DR screening in India. Although there are regional variations in the prevalence of diabetes in India at present, all the States in India should screen their population for diabetes and its complications. The purpose of DR screening is to identify people with sight-threatening DR (STDR) so that they are treated promptly to prevent blindness. This statement provides strategies for the identification of people with diabetes for DR screening, recommends screening intervals in people with diabetes with and without DR, and describes screening models that are feasible in India. The logistics of DR screening emphasizes the need for dynamic referral pathways with feedback mechanisms. It provides the clinical standards required for DR screening and treatment of STDR and addresses the governance and quality assurance (QA) standards for DR screening in Indian settings. Other aspects incorporate education and training, recommendations on Information technology (IT) infrastructure, potential use of artificial intelligence for grading, data capture, and requirements for maintenance of a DR registry. Finally, the recommendations include public awareness and the need to work with diabetologists to control the risk factors so as to have a long-term impact on prevention of diabetes blindness in India.

Intravitreal ranibizumab and dexamethasone implant injections as primary treatment of diabetic macular edema: simultaneously double protocol

PURPOSE

To assess the 12-month efficacy and safety of simultaneously administered intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX implant) and ranibizumab (simultaneous double protocol) injections in comparison with ranibizumab monotherapy as the first-line treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO).

METHODS

Prospective, consecutive, clinical interventional study. Patients were randomized into two groups: 24 naive DMO patients (34 eyes) who received simultaneous double-protocol therapy and 22 DMO patients (34 eyes) who received ranibizumab monotherapy were included. Monthly ranibizumab (0.5 mg) was administered for the first 6 months and later on, an as-needed treatment basis. DEX implant injection was performed at any time during the loading dose of the three consecutive monthly injections of ranibizumab, and with as-needed reinjections of ranibizumab from 6th month onwards. Change in visual acuity was the primary efficacy endpoint. Secondary efficacy endpoints were a gain of ≥15 letters and a change in the central foveal thickness.

RESULTS

Mean BCVA increased from baseline to month 12 in the simultaneously double-protocol therapy group compared with the ranibizumab monotherapy group (21.6 versus 9.6 letters [P < 0.001]). The corresponding proportions of eyes gaining ≥15 letters were 60% versus 29.4% (P < 0.0001). Moreover, the mean reductions in the central foveal thickness were 413 versus 282 µm (P = 0.001). At 12 month, the simultaneous double-protocol therapy decreased a significant number of foveal cysts and subfoveal neuroretinal detachment compared with those by ranibizumab monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The simultaneous addition of DEX implant at any time during the three monthly loading doses of ranibizumab in patients with DMO significantly improved the visual outcomes and revealed superior anatomic outcomes than those with the ranibizumab monotherapy.

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.

ASSOCIATION OF SERUM VASOGENIC AND PROINFLAMMATORY FACTORS WITH CLINICAL RESPONSE TO ANTI-VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA

PURPOSE

To study the role of serum biomarkers as prognostic factors for qualitative and quantitative response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections for diabetic macular edema (DME).

METHODS

Sixty-seven eyes with DME were treated with intravitreal bevacizumab during a 12-month follow-up period. All cases underwent a baseline workup consisting of 12 inflammatory, metabolic and prothrombotic factors. The following outcomes were evaluated at 3-month intervals until 1 year of follow-up: visual acuity, central subfield thickness (CST), macular volume (MV), % of change from baseline in CST, occurrence of a CST change < 10%, a CST change >20%, and a CST <330 µm, achieving an improvement ≥2 lines of visual acuity, achieving visual acuity ≥20/40.

RESULTS

A significant improvement in CST and visual acuity was seen from third month onwards. Twenty-eight (48.1%) cases were classified as "early responders," 24 (35.8%) as "late responders", and 15 (22.4%) as "poor responders." Serum vascular endothelial growth factor-A levels were significantly lower in "poor responders" (P = 0.006). C-reactive protein (hsCRP) was associated with a limited anatomic response (<10% CST change) (P = 0.002, OR = 1.845, cutoff value of hsCRP = 1.84 mg/L). hsCRP was also negatively associated with obtaining a final CST <330 µm (P = 0.04, r2 = 0.112, OR = 0.643). Baseline visual acuity was significantly associated with 12th month visual acuity (P < 0.001, r2 = 0.602) and also with an improvement ≥2 visual acuity lines (P = 0.009, OR = 20.54).

CONCLUSION

Increased high-sensitivity C-reactive protein was associated with limited anatomic response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment and persistent DME. Poor responders had significantly lower values of serum vascular endothelial growth factor-A, suggesting an alternative pathogenic pathway for persisting DME.

Identifying Diabetic Macular Edema and Other Retinal Diseases by Optical Coherence Tomography Image and Multiscale Deep Learning

PURPOSE

Diabetic Macular Edema has been one of the research hotspots all over the world. But as the global population continues to grow, the number of OCT images requiring manual analysis is becoming increasingly unaffordable. Medical images are often fuzzy due to the inherent physical processes of acquiring them. It is difficult for traditional algorithms to use low-quality data. And traditional algorithms usually only provide diagnostic results, which makes the reliability and interpretability of the model face challenges. To solve problem above, we proposed a more intuitive and robust diagnosis model with self-enhancement ability and clinical triage patients' ability.

METHODS

We used 38,057 OCT images (Drusen, DME, CNV and Normal) to establish and evaluate the model. All data are OCT images of fundus retina. There were 37,457 samples in the training dataset and 600 samples in the validation dataset. In order to diagnose these images accurately, we propose a multiscale transfer learning algorithm. Firstly, the sample is sent to the automatic self-enhancement module for edge detection and enhancement. Then, the processed data are sent to the image diagnosis module to determine the disease type. This process makes more data more effective and can be accurately classified. Finally, we calculated the accuracy, precision, sensitivity and specificity of the model, and verified the performance of the model from the perspective of clinical application.

RESULTS

The model proposed in this paper can provide the diagnosis results and display the detection targets more intuitively. The model reached 94.5% accuracy, 97.2% precision, 97.7% sensitivity and 97% specificity in the independent testing dataset.

CONCLUSION

Comparing the performance of relevant work and ablation test, our model achieved relatively good performance. It is proved that the model proposed in this paper has a stronger ability to recognize diseases even in the face of low-quality images. Experiment results also demonstrate its clinical referral capability. It can reduce the workload of medical staff and save the precious time of patients.

Treatment of Eyes With Diabetic Macular Edema That Had a Suboptimal Response to Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy: 2-mg Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide vs 0.7-mg Dexamethasone Implant

Purpose:

This article compares 2-mg intravitreal triamcinolone (IVT) and 0.7-mg dexamethasone (DEX) implant for the treatment of diabetic macular edema in eyes that had a suboptimal response to antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

Methods:

A single-center, retrospective review was conducted of patients receiving either IVT between January 1, 2013, and January 1, 2018, or patients receiving DEX between October 1, 2015, and January 1, 2018. Visual acuity and central macular thickness (CMT) were recorded at visit of first injection and all subsequent visits.

Results:

Twenty-five eyes were included in the DEX group and 32 eyes were included in the IVT group. Change in vision from baseline was similar between DEX and IVT at 6-month follow-up (1.1 lines vs 2.3 lines, respectively; P = .24). Mean decrease in CMT from baseline was not different at 6-month follow-up (DEX: 120 µm vs IVT: 185 µm; P = .17).

Conclusions:

DEX and 2-mg IVT both achieved improvement in vision and CMT with no significant differences between treatment groups at 6-month follow-up.

Review of clinical studies and recommendation for a therapeutic flow chart for diabetic macular edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME), characterized by exudative fluid accumulation in the macula, is the most common form of sight-threatening retinopathy in patients with diabetes. The management of DME has changed considerably in recent years, especially following the development of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy which has emerged as a first-line therapy for center-involved DME. Laser treatment, intravitreal steroid therapy, and vitrectomy are also important treatment options for DME. We believe that it is important to choose the most appropriate treatment option for DME based on the clinical evidences, in addition to the careful consideration of individual patients' general or ocular condition, DME characteristics, patients' motivation, and compliance to the treatment in real-world clinical practice. In this review, we have summarized important clinical evidences for the main treatments for DME, presented an expert review for these evidences, and proposed a recommended therapeutic flow chart for DME. We hope that our review of the clinical evidences and the recommended therapeutic flow chart for DME will contribute to better treatment outcome for DME.

Biologic Therapy and Treatment Options in Diabetic Retinopathy with Diabetic Macular Edema

Proliferative diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema can be a potentially sightthreatening disease if not treated correctly. It is directly correlated to the duration of diabetes and how well managed the patients' diabetes is. In the last 15 years, the treatment of diabetic eye disease has taken a quantum leap in methodology due to the group of biological agents named antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF). The introduction of the first biological agent has revolutionized the treatment, not only in diabetic eye disease but also across most inflammatory eye diseases, causing leakage of fluid from the blood vessels i.e., in age-related macular degeneration. The availability of these biological agents, despite their considerable costs, have significantly improved the outcomes measured in visual acuity compared to more traditional treatments of diabetic retinopathy in the form of sole laser treatment and glycemic control. The agents demonstrate a favorable safety profile, but if the rarest and most severe side effects occur, there is a potential total loss of vision. This review aims to make an overview of the current pharmaceutical therapeutic options in the treatment of diabetic macular edema. This includes laser therapy, intravitreal steroids, and a primary focus on intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factors.

Correlation of Response between Both Eyes to First- and Second-Line Anti-VEGF Therapy in Diabetic Macular Edema

PURPOSE

To evaluate the anatomical correlation between fellow eyes for bilateral second-line anti-VEGF treatment in eyes with bilateral diabetic macular edema (DME) with incomplete response to first-line bevacizumab therapy.

METHODS

Seventy-four eyes (n = 37 patients) with bilateral-DME having incomplete response to first-line bevacizumab therapy that were switched for bilateral treatment with ranibizumab were retrospectively evaluated. Data collected included demographics, visual acuity and macular thickness. We evaluate the correlation for the response of both eyes in terms of macular thickness and visual acuity.

RESULTS

The mean±SD age was 76 ± 8 years. The mean±SD number of bevacizumab injections prior the switch was 11.03 ± 5.1 in the first eye (FE) and 10.9 ± 5.2 in the second eye (SE). The central subfield thickness (CST) reduced from 472 ± 171 microns at baseline to 418 ± 161 after the last bevacizumab injection and 365 ± 74 after 3 ranibizumab injections in the FE (p = .016, p = .004, respectively), and from 463 ± 145 microns to 446 ± 123, and 421 ± 103 in the SE (p = .112, p = .001, respectively). There was strong positive correlation between the eyes for the CST reduction under bevacizumab and ranibizumab treatments in each visit. BCVA± SD at baseline was 0.41 ± 0.30 LogMAR in the FE, and 0.42 ± 0.29 in the SE (p = .44). After 3 injections of bevacizumab, the BCVA was 0.37 ± 0.26 and 0.42 ± 0.23 in FE and SE respectively (p = .013, p = .132, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a strong anatomical correlation responses between the eyes in patients with bilateral DME for both first-line bevacizumab therapy and second-line ranibizumab therapy. Response to second-line therapy was favorable and correlated among eyes regardless they were from the same or different individuals.

Suprachoroidal CLS-TA plus Intravitreal Aflibercept for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Randomized, Double-Masked, Parallel-Design, Controlled Study

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the potential safety, efficacy, and durability advantages of investigational triamcinolone acetonide suspension (CLS-TA; Clearside Biomedical, Alpharetta, GA) administered suprachoroidally in conjunction with intravitreal aflibercept compared with aflibercept monotherapy for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

DESIGN

TYBEE was a prospective, controlled, double-masked study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to CLS-TA and aflibercept (active) or aflibercept monotherapy (control), and assessed over 24 weeks.

PARTICIPANTS

Treatment-naive DME patients with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 20 to 70 letters and central subfield retinal thickness (CST) of more than 300 μm.

METHODS

Patients in the active group (n = 36) received CLS-TA and aflibercept at baseline and week 12. Patients in the control group (n = 35) received aflibercept at baseline, week 4, week 8, and week 12. To mask both groups, sham suprachoroidal and intravitreal injections were utilized. All patients were eligible to receive aflibercept as needed at weeks 4, 8, 16, and 20 per prespecified criteria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Mean change in BCVA from baseline. Treatment differences were assessed with a 2-sided significance level of 0.10.

RESULTS

Mean BCVA changes from baseline to week 24 were not statistically different in the active and control groups (intention-to-treat [ITT] population: +11.4 letters and +13.8 letters [P = 0.288]; per protocol [PP] population: +12.3 letters and +13.5 letters [P = 0.664]; respectively). Greater improvement in CST was seen in the active versus control group (ITT population: -212.1 μm and -178.6 μm [P = 0.089]; PP population: -226.5 μm and -176.1 μm [P = 0.035]; respectively). Compared with the control group, eyes in the active group received fewer treatments (scheduled plus as-needed treatments averaging 4.6 versus 2.6, respectively). No treatment-related serious adverse events were observed. Ocular adverse events were low for both arms. Cataract events, all assessed as unrelated to treatment, and events of elevated intraocular pressure trended higher in the active group.

CONCLUSIONS

CLS-TA administered suprachoroidally in conjunction with intravitreal aflibercept for treatment of DME provides simliar visual benefit at 24 weeks' follow-up compared with aflibercept monotherapy, is well tolerated and shows modest anatomic benefit with potential to reduce treatment burden.

Profile of non-responder and late responder patients treated for diabetic macular edema: systemic and ocular factors

Diabetic macular edema (DME) treatment represents a challenge for the ophthalmologists, and several aspects of real treatment expectancy are still being discussed and not yet fully elucidated. A univocal definition of responsiveness to treatment has not been reached. How the clinicians can evaluate the therapeutic success? The evaluation of systemic and ocular factors should help in this complex management. The age influences the long-term outcomes, and the role of glycemic control is confounded by contrasting correlations between hemoglobin glycated A1c and DME. Long-term treatment success is influenced by baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) and early BCVA response. Also baseline diabetic retinopathy severity scale score is useful to evaluate the chances of improvement before and during treatments. The time-switching was influenced by early BCVA response, however considering a delayed response in a percentage of patients. Several structural optical coherence tomography (OCT) findings could predict long-term success, as the presence of serous retinal detachment, hyperreflective retinal spots, the disruption of external limiting membrane and ellipsoid zone, the disorganization of inner retinal layers and continued increase in CMT were considered predictors of poor response to treatment. Foveal avascular zone enlargement, high number of microaneurysms (Mas), lower vessel density (VD) in deep capillary plexus and lower parafoveal VD in superficial capillary plexus were considered as OCT angiography biomarkers of poor responsiveness. The aim of this review is to report the factors that could influence the response to treatment of DME patients.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the main pathological features of the diabetes mellitus spectrum. It is estimated that in 2020 about 4 million people worldwide suffered from blindness or visual impairment caused by DR. Many patients cannot access treatment, mostly because of high costs, while others discontinue it prematurely due to the high number of intravitreal administrations required, or the occurrence of ocular complications, or discomfort in quality of life.

AREAS COVERED

The aims of this paper are to summarize the current understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment of diabetic retinopathy, focus on the most promising new approaches to treatment that are being evaluated in clinical trials, and outline the potential financial impact of new drugs in future markets.

EXPERT OPINION

Slow-release systems with steroids, anti-VEGF or sunitinib are promising. Oral imatinib would avoid the ocular complications of intravitreal drugs. Brolucizumab and abicipar pegol may be superior to aflibercept and ranibizumab with the advantage of less frequent administrations. Faricimab, active on Tie-2 receptors, is being evaluated in two phase 3 clinical trials. Further knowledge of the efficacy and safety of these drugs is necessary before their final approval for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy.

Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant as a Sustained Release Drug Delivery Device for the Treatment of Ocular Diseases: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

Drug delivery into the vitreous chamber remains a great challenge in the pharmaceutical industry due to the complex anatomy and physiology of the eye. Intravitreal injection is the mainstream route of drug administration to the posterior segment of the eye. The purpose of this review is to assess the current literature about the widening use of the intravitreal 0.7 mg dexamethasone (Dex) implant, and to provide a comprehensive collection of all the ocular disorders that benefit from Dex administration. Although anti-vascular endothelial growth-factors (VEGFs) have been largely indicated as a first-choice level, the Dex implant represents an important treatment option, especially in selected cases, such as vitrectomized eyes or patients in whom anti-VEGF failed or are contraindicated. In this article, the safety profile as well as the list of the possible complications related to intravitreal Dex injection are also discussed.

[Treatment switch in diabetic macular edema: Literature review and management algorithm]

Initial management of diabetic macular edema (DME) is well-defined, but there is a lack of national or international consensus for patients who do not respond or respond only partially to these treatments. Several studies, mostly retrospective, have assessed medication switches, but currently, the literature contains no randomized studies. The goal of this article is to present an algorithm for switching medications, which can be proposed to DME patients treated with anti-VEGF agents, as defined by a group of French retina experts, supported by the existing literature on the subject. After initiation of an anti-VEGF treatment for DME, the response is usually assessed after 5 monthly injections. A partial anatomical response (reduction of central retinal thickness between 10 and 20%), seen in 30 to 40% of patients, is associated with a favorable visual prognosis according to randomized studies. Continuation of the anti-VEGF injections after the induction phase is thus possible. If the response remains incomplete after 3 additional anti-VEGF injections, a complete ophthalmologic examination should be performed, and a switch to another therapeutic class (corticosteroids) may be proposed in the absence of contraindications. If a complete non-response is seen initially (reduction of central retinal thickness<10%), the switch is proposed immediately after the induction phase.