Outcome of Treatment of Uveitic Macular Edema: The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment Trial 2-Year Results

Treatment of Noninfectious Uveitic Macular Edema with Periocular and Intraocular Corticosteroid Therapies: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

PURPOSE

To review the evidence on the effectiveness and complications of periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies for noninfectious uveitic macular edema.

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed database was conducted last in December 2021 and a post-assessment search was conducted in March 2023. The searches were limited to articles published in English and no date restrictions were imposed. The combined searches yielded 739 citations; 53 articles were selected for inclusion because the studies (1) evaluated periocular corticosteroid injection, intraocular corticosteroid injection or implant, suprachoroidal corticosteroid injection, or a combination thereof for uveitic macular edema; (2) had outcomes that included visual acuity (VA) or macular edema assessed clinically or imaged by OCT or fluorescein angiography; and (3) included more than 20 patients.

RESULTS

This assessment reviewed 23 articles that provided level I or level II evidence from 18 studies on the use of periocular, suprachoroidal, and intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injections and intravitreal dexamethasone and fluocinolone acetonide implants or inserts in noninfectious uveitic macular edema. These reports consistently demonstrated that all investigated periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies improved VA, macular structure, or both. One comparative study showed that intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection and the dexamethasone intravitreal implant had effectiveness superior to that of periocular triamcinolone acetonide injection for these outcomes. As a group, the studies highlighted the potential for these therapies to elevate intraocular pressure and to accelerate cataract formation.

CONCLUSIONS

The published literature provides high-quality evidence that periocular and intraocular corticosteroid therapies are effective and safe for the treatment of noninfectious uveitic macular edema. However, information on the relative effectiveness and complication rates across the different therapies is limited.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Steroidal nanoformulations for the treatment of uveitis: potential, promises and future perspectives

BACKGROUND

Intraocular inflammation, commonly referred to as uveitis, is a prevalent ocular disease. The categorization of uveitis may be based on the prevailing anatomical site, which includes anterior, intermediate, and posterior uveitis. There exists a significant body of evidence indicating that T cells play a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of autoimmune uveitis. In addition to the presence of T cells, an elevation in levels of inflammatory cytokines and a reduction in regulatory cytokines were also noted. The primary pharmacological interventions for uveitis comprise of corticosteroids, methotrexate, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents, anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) antibodies, and sirolimus. These medications offer prompt alleviation for inflammation. Nevertheless, prolonged administration of corticosteroids invariably leads to unfavorable adverse reactions. The traditional topical corticosteroids exhibit certain limitations, including inadequate transcorneal permeation and low corneal retention, leading to reduced ocular bioavailability. Consequently, there is a growing inclination towards the creation of innovative steroid drug delivery systems with the aim of reducing the potential for adverse effects, while simultaneously enhancing the drug's corneal permeation and retention.

CONCLUSION

This review is an attempt to compile all the research work done so far in this field and provides a brief overview of the global efforts to develop innovative nanocarrier-based systems for corticosteroids.

Risk factors for failing sub-Tenon's triamcinolone acetonide for uveitic macular edema

BACKGROUND

Sub-Tenon's triamcinolone acetonide (STA) is less effective than intravitreal corticosteroids in the treatment of uveitic macular edema (ME), but does have some relative advantages, including substantially lower cost and decreased risk of post-injection ocular hypertension. It would be useful for clinicians to know which eyes may respond well to STA and not necessarily require intravitreal therapy. The objective of this study is to identify risk factors for failing STA for the treatment of uveitic ME.

MAIN BODY

A retrospective cohort study was performed. Medical records were reviewed of patients who underwent STA for the treatment of uveitic ME between January 1, 2013, and July 31, 2022, at the University of Colorado Hospital. Uveitic ME was defined by a central subfield thickness (CST) greater than 320 μm or the presence of intra-retinal cystoid spaces on optical coherence tomography (OCT), or by the presence of petaloid macular leakage on fluorescein angiography (FA). Data collected included age, race/ethnicity, sex, history of diabetes mellitus, anatomic classification of uveitis, use of corticosteroids, use of immunomodulatory therapy, presence of intra-retinal fluid on OCT, CST on OCT, and presence of petaloid macular leakage on FA. STA failure was defined as the need for additional therapy within 12 weeks of STA due to persistent or worsening uveitic ME. One hundred eighty eyes from 131 patients were included. Forty-two eyes (23.3%) were considered treatment failures. In univariate and multivariable analysis, higher baseline CST was associated with a higher likelihood of failing STA (OR 1.17 for each 30 μm increase in CST, P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

STA, while not as potent as intravitreal corticosteroids for the treatment of uveitic ME, was still an effective therapy, particularly for patients with lower baseline CST. Given its lower side effect profile and cost compared to intravitreal treatments, clinicians could consider STA as an initial treatment for mild uveitic ME.

SER recommendations for the treatment of uveitis

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence-based expert-consensus recommendations for the management of non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-demyelinating disease associated uveitis.

METHODS

Clinical research questions relevant to the objective of the document were identified, and reformulated into PICO format (patient, intervention, comparison, outcome) by a panel of experts selected based on their experience in the field. A systematic review of the available evidence was conducted, and evidence was graded according to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria. Subsequently, recommendations were developed.

RESULTS

Three PICO questions were constructed referring to uveitis anterior, non-anterior and complicated with macular edema. A total of 19 recommendations were formulated, based on the evidence found and/or expert consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

Here we present the first official recommendations of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology for the treatment of non-infectious and non-demyelinating disease associated uveitis. They can be directly applied to the Spanish healthcare system as a tool for assistance and therapeutic homogenisation.

Intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide 0.19 mg (ILUVIEN®) in patients with non-infectious uveitis: real-world effectiveness and safety outcomes at 12 months

PURPOSE

This study assessed the effectiveness of the 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant by multimodal measurements in patients with non-infectious uveitis (NIU) in a real-world setting in Spain.

METHODS

A prospective study of patients who had NIU including uveitic macular oedema (UME) with ≥ 12 months follow-up was done. Exclusion criteria include infectious uveitis and uncontrolled glaucoma or ocular hypertension requiring more than 2 medications. Effectiveness was assessed using a multicomponent outcome measure that included nine outcomes. Effectiveness was defined as all components being met at every timepoint. Secondary outcome measures were onset or progression of glaucoma and investigator-reported adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-six eyes from 22 patients were included, with 96.2% having an indication including UME. During the 12-month study, the FAc implant was effective in 15 (57.7%) eyes, reaching effectiveness as soon as 2 weeks post-implantation. Mean best-corrected visual acuity and mean central macular thickness (CMT) were significantly improved vs. baseline at all timepoints (all comparisons p < 0.01). During the 12-month study, inflammation markers (anterior chamber cells and vitreous haze) had also significantly declined. Factors predicting effectiveness at month 12 were systemic corticosteroid dose pre-FAc, higher immunomodulatory therapy (IMT) load at baseline and thicker retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) at baseline (all p < 0.05). Factors predicting failure were male gender, thinner RNFL at baseline and treatment ineffectiveness at 1 month (all p < 0.05). In parallel, corticosteroid and IMT use also declined significantly. No significant increase in IOP was detected.

CONCLUSION

The FAc implant is safe and effective at treating NIU over 12 months in a real-world setting in Spain.

Intravitreal Therapy for Uveitic Macular Edema-Ranibizumab versus Methotrexate versus the Dexamethasone Implant: The MERIT Trial Results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of 3 different intravitreal treatments for persistent or recurrent uveitic macular edema (ME): dexamethasone implant, methotrexate, and ranibizumab.

DESIGN

Single-masked, randomized controlled clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with minimally active or inactive uveitis and persistent or recurrent uveitic ME in one or both eyes.

METHODS

Patients at 33 centers were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 1 of the 3 therapies. Patients with bilateral ME received the same treatment in both eyes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome, measured at 12 weeks, was reduction in central subfield thickness (CST) expressed as a proportion of baseline (CST per CST at baseline) assessed with spectral-domain OCT by readers masked to treatment assignment. Secondary outcomes included improvement and resolution of ME, change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and elevations in intraocular pressure (IOP).

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-four participants (225 eligible eyes) were randomized to dexamethasone (n = 65 participants and 77 eyes), methotrexate (n = 65 participants and 79 eyes), or ranibizumab (n = 64 participants and 69 eyes). All received at least 1 injection of the assigned treatment. At the 12-week primary outcome point, each group showed significant reductions in CST relative to baseline: 35%, 11%, and 22% for dexamethasone, methotrexate, and ranibizumab, respectively. Reduction of ME was significantly greater in the dexamethasone group than for either methotrexate (P < 0.01) or ranibizumab (P = 0.018). Only the dexamethasone group showed a statistically significant improvement in BCVA during follow-up (4.86 letters; P < 0.001). Elevations of IOP by 10 mmHg, to 24 mmHg or more, or both were more common in the dexamethasone group; IOP spikes to 30 mmHg or more were uncommon overall and were not significantly different among groups. Reductions in BCVA of 15 letters or more were more common in the methotrexate group and typically were attributable to persistent ME.

CONCLUSIONS

At 12 weeks, in eyes with minimally active or inactive uveitis, dexamethasone was significantly better at treating persistent or recurrent ME than methotrexate or ranibizumab. Risk of IOP elevation was greater with dexamethasone, but elevations to levels of 30 mmHg or more were infrequent.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Corticosteroid implants for chronic non-infectious uveitis

BACKGROUND

Uveitis is a term used to describe a group of intraocular inflammatory diseases. Uveitis is the fifth most common cause of vision loss in high-income countries, with the highest incidence of disease in the working-age population. Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment for all subtypes of non-infectious uveitis. They can be administered orally, topically with drops, by periocular (around the eye) or intravitreal (inside the eye) injection, or by surgical implantation.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of steroid implants in people with chronic non-infectious posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, and panuveitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, PubMed, LILACS, and three trials registries to November 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing either fluocinolone acetonide (FA) or dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implants with standard-of-care therapy or sham procedures, with at least six months of follow-up after treatment. We included studies that enrolled participants of all ages, who had chronic non-infectious posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, or panuveitis with vision that was better than hand-motion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We applied standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included data from four trials (683 participants, 907 eyes) that compared corticosteroid implants with either sham or standard-of-care therapy. Study characteristics and risk of bias Of the two trials that compared corticosteroid implants with sham procedure, one examined a 0.18 mg FA implant, and the other, a 0.7 mg DEX implant. The other two trials compared a 0.59 mg FA implant with standard-of-care therapy, which included systemic corticosteroids and immunosuppressive medications, if needed. Considering improvement in visual acuity, we assessed the four trials to be at either low risk, or with some concerns of risk of bias across all domains. Findings Using sham procedure as control, combined results at the six-month primary time point suggested that corticosteroid implants may decrease the risk of uveitis recurrence by 60% (relative risk [RR] 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 0.54; 2 trials, 282 participants; low-certainty evidence); and lead to a greater improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA; mean difference [MD] 0.15 logMAR, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.24; 1 trial, 153 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence based on a single-study report (146 participants) suggested that steroid implants may have no effects on visual functioning quality of life, measured on the National Eye Institute 25-Item Visual Function Questionnaire (MD 2.85, 95%CI -3.64 to 9.34; 1 trial, 146 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Using standard-of care therapy as control, combined estimates at the 24-month primary time point suggested that corticosteroid implants were likely to decrease the risk of recurrence of uveitis by 54% (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 2 trials, 619 eyes). Combined estimates at 24 months also suggested that steroid implants may have little to no effects on improving BCVA (MD 0.05 logMAR, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.12; 2 trials, 619 eyes; low-certainty evidence). Evidence based on a single-study report (232 participants) suggested that steroid implants may have minimal clinical effects on visual functioning (MD 4.64, 95% CI 0.13 to 9.15; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); physical functioning (SF-36 physical subscale MD 2.95, 95% CI 0.55 to 5.35; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or mental health (SF-36 mental subscale MD 3.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.78; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); but not on EuroQoL (MD 6.17, 95% CI 1.87 to 10.47; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or EuroQoL-5D scale (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.08; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse effects Compared with sham procedures, corticosteroid implants may slightly increase the risk of cataract formation (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.17 to 6.18; 1 trial, 90 eyes; low-certainty evidence), but not the risk of cataract progression (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 6.12; 1 trial, 117 eyes; low-certainty evidence); or the need for surgery (RR 2.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 10.81; 1 trial, 180 eyes; low-certainty evidence), during up to 12 months of follow-up. These implants may increase the risk of elevated intraocular pressure ([IOP] RR 2.81, 95% CI 1.42 to 5.56; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and the need for IOP-lowering eyedrops (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.25; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); but not the need for IOP-lowering surgery (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.13 to 4.17; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence comparing the 0.59 mg FA implant with standard-of-care suggested that the implant may increase the risk of cataract progression (RR 2.71, 95% CI 2.06 to 3.56; 2 trials, 210 eyes; low-certainty evidence); and the need for surgery (RR 2.98, 95% CI 2.33 to 3.79; 2 trials, 371 eyes; low-certainty evidence); along with the risk of elevated IOP (RR 3.64, 95% CI 2.71 to 4.87; 2 trials, 605 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence); and the need for medical (RR 3.04, 95% CI 2.36 to 3.91; 2 trials, 544 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence); or surgical interventions (RR 5.43, 95% CI 3.12 to 9.45; 2 trials, 599 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence). In either comparison, these implants did not increase the risk for endophthalmitis, retinal tear, or retinal detachment (moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our confidence is limited that local corticosteroid implants are superior to sham therapy or standard-of-care therapy in reducing the risk of uveitis recurrence. We demonstrated different effectiveness on BCVA relative to comparators in people with non-infectious uveitis. Nevertheless, the evidence suggests that these implants may increase the risk of cataract progression and IOP elevation, which will require interventions over time. To better understand the efficacy and safety profiles of corticosteroid implants, we need future trials that examine implants of different doses, used for different durations. The trials should measure core standard outcomes that are universally defined, and measured at comparable follow-up time points.

Risk factors for the development of macular edema in children with uveitis

Aim

To determine the risk factors for macular edema (ME) in children with uveitis.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted of 150 pediatric patients (264 eyes) with uveitis attending 2 tertiary medical centers. Data were collected from the medical files on demographics, type of uveitis, etiology, clinical findings, treatment, and time to development of ME. Risk factors for the development of ME were identified.

Results

ME developed in 63 eyes (23.9%) over a mean period of 15.3 ± 2.95 months from diagnosis of uveitis, at a rate of 0.08 eyes per eye-year. On univariate analysis, risk factors for the development of ME were the non-anterior location of the inflammation (p=0.002), band keratopathy (p <0.0001), posterior synechiae (p=0.003), cataract (p=0.002), and vision impairment at presentation (p <0.0001). On multivariate analysis, non-anterior uveitis, which includes intermediate, pan, and posterior-uveitis, and vision impairment retained significance as independent risk factors of ME.

Conclusion

Within the pediatric population with uveitis, non-anterior location is associated with the highest risk of ME, followed by the presence of complications, such as band keratopathy and posterior synechiae. These findings indicate a need for close follow-up in children with uveitis for early detection of ME.

Corticosteroid implants for chronic non-infectious uveitis

BACKGROUND

Uveitis is a term used to describe a group of intraocular inflammatory diseases. Uveitis is the fifth most common cause of vision loss in high-income countries, with the highest incidence of disease in the working-age population. Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment for all subtypes of non-infectious uveitis. They can be administered orally, topically with drops, by periocular (around the eye) or intravitreal (inside the eye) injection, or by surgical implantation.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of steroid implants in people with chronic non-infectious posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, and panuveitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, PubMed, LILACS, and three trials registries to November 2021.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials comparing either fluocinolone acetonide (FA) or dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implants with standard-of-care therapy or sham procedures, with at least six months of follow-up after treatment. We included studies that enrolled participants of all ages, who had chronic non-infectious posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, or panuveitis with vision that was better than hand-motion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We applied standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included data from four trials (683 participants, 907 eyes) that compared corticosteroid implants with either sham or standard-of-care therapy. Study characteristics and risk of bias Of the two trials that compared corticosteroid implants with sham procedure, one examined a 0.18 mg FA implant, and the other, a 0.7 mg DEX implant. The other two trials compared a 0.59 mg FA implant with standard-of-care therapy, which included systemic corticosteroids and immunosuppressive medications, if needed. We assessed the four trials to be at either low risk, or with some concerns of risk of bias across all domains. Findings Using sham procedure as control, combined results at the six-month primary time point suggested that corticosteroid implants may decrease the risk of uveitis recurrence by 60% (relative risk [RR] 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 0.54; 2 trials, 282 participants; low-certainty evidence); and lead to a greater improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA; mean difference [MD] 0.22 logMAR, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.31; 1 trial, 153 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence based on a single-study report (146 participants) suggested that steroid implants may have no effects on visual functioning quality of life, measured on the National Eye Institute 25-Item Visual Function Questionnaire (MD 2.85, 95%CI -3.64 to 9.34; 1 trial, 146 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Using standard-of care therapy as control, combined estimates at the 24-month primary time point suggested that corticosteroid implants were likely to decrease the risk of recurrence of uveitis by 54% (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 2 trials, 619 eyes). Combined estimates at 24 months also suggested that steroid implants may have little to no effects on BCVA (MD 0.05 logMAR, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.12; 2 trials, 619 eyes; low-certainty evidence). Evidence based on a single-study report (232 participants) suggested that steroid implants may have minimal clinical effects on visual functioning (MD 4.64, 95% CI 0.13 to 9.15; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); physical functioning (SF-36 physical subscale MD 2.95, 95% CI 0.55 to 5.35; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or mental health (SF-36 mental subscale MD 3.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.78; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); but not on EuroQoL (MD 6.17, 95% CI 1.87 to 10.47; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or EuroQoL-5D scale (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.08; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse effects Compared with sham procedures, corticosteroid implants may slightly increase the risk of cataract formation (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.17 to 6.18; 1 trial, 90 eyes; low-certainty evidence), but not the risk of cataract progression (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 6.12; 1 trial, 117 eyes; low-certainty evidence); or the need for surgery (RR 2.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 10.81; 1 trial, 180 eyes; low-certainty evidence), during up to 12 months of follow-up. These implants may increase the risk of elevated intraocular pressure ([IOP] RR 2.81, 95% CI 1.42 to 5.56; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and the need for IOP-lowering eyedrops (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.25; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); but not the need for IOP-lowering surgery (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.13 to 4.17; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Evidence comparing the 0.59 mg FA implant with standard-of-care suggested that the implant may increase the risk of cataract progression (RR 2.71, 95% CI 2.06 to 3.56; 2 trials, 210 eyes; low-certainty evidence); and the need for surgery (RR 2.98, 95% CI 2.33 to 3.79; 2 trials, 371 eyes; low-certainty evidence); along with the risk of elevated IOP (RR 3.64, 95% CI 2.71 to 4.87; 2 trials, 605 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence); and the need for medical (RR 3.04, 95% CI 2.36 to 3.91; 2 trials, 544 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence); or surgical interventions (RR 5.43, 95% CI 3.12 to 9.45; 2 trials, 599 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence). In either comparison, these implants did not increase the risk for endophthalmitis, retinal tear, or retinal detachment (moderate-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our confidence is limited that local corticosteroid implants are superior to sham therapy or standard-of-care therapy in reducing the risk of uveitis recurrence. We demonstrated different effectiveness on BCVA relative to comparators in people with non-infectious uveitis. Nevertheless, the evidence suggests that these implants may increase the risk of cataract progression and IOP elevation, which will require interventions over time.  To better understand the efficacy and safety profiles of corticosteroid implants, we need future trials that examine implants of different doses, used for different durations. The trials should measure core standard outcomes that are universally defined, and measured at comparable follow-up time points.

Immunity status and expression of molecular markers (ICAM-1, CD5, CD25, CD95) on lymphocytes of patients with recurrent anterior uveitis complicated by macular edema

BACKGROUND

Treatment of macular edema in uveitis is a key goal of treatment, because this complication remains a potential therapeutic problem for specialists.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Examination was carried out in 1-2 groups - 50 persons with uncomplicated recurrent anterior uveitis (AU) in the stage of relapse or remission - and 3-4 groups - 26 persons with recurrent AU complicated by uveitic macular edema (UME) in the stage of relapse or remission of AU. Control group - 27 healthy volunteers. All patients underwent an ophthalmologic examination, using OCT (Spectralis HRA + OCT (Heidelberg Engineering)). The state of cellular and humoral immunity and the expression of activation markers on blood lymphocytes in all patients were assessed. An immunohistocytochemical analysis using monoclonal antibodies (the peroxidase-anti-peroxidase method) was employed to assess the expression of lymphocyte activation markers. The monoclonal antibody panel (MCAP) for immunophenotyping included antibodies reacting with CD5, CD54 (ICAM-1), CD25, and CD95 (FAS) antigens. Immunophenotyping was performed using immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

In the patients with AU + UME, the parameters of the T-cell link of the immune response were increased and the parameters of humoral immunity (CD19, IgA, IgG) were decreased in comparison with the uncomplicated AU patients. The absolute and relative numbers of natural killer cells in the peripheral blood were higher, and the relative numbers of phagocytic neutrophils were lower in the group of anterior uveitis with UME than in uncomplicated AU. The absolute and relative expression levels of ICAM-1 (CD54) and the absolute expression level of CD5 on peripheral blood lymphocytes were increased in relapse at patients with AU + UME compared with uncomplicated AU. The expression levels of CD25 and CD95 were not different in these groups.

CONCLUSION

Activation of cellular immunity markers ICAM-1 and CD5 seems to play a role in uveitic macular edema. The expression levels of CD25 and CD95 were not significantly different in these groups.

Intravitreal dexamethasone implant results in the treatment of non-infectious uveitis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implant in non-infectious uveitic macular edema.

METHODS

Between April 2013 and February 2017, 27 eyes of 21 patients were included in the study at Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital. The files of patients who underwent intravitreal dexamethasone implantation for non-infectious uveitic macular edema and followed up at least 6 months were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were evaluated in terms of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) before and at the 1^st, 3^rd, and 6^th months after injection and the need for re-injection.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven eyes of 21 patients were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 39.2±11.7 years. The mean monitoring time was 24.15±10.08 months. In patients who received single-dose intravitreal dexamethasone implant, the decrease in CMT measurements and improvement in BCVA measurements at 1, 3, and 6 months after injection compared to baseline was found to be statistically significant (p=0.001 for each). Recurrence was detected in 33.3% (n=9) of the cases during follow-up; in cases with recurrence, second implants were repeated after an average of 9.67±3.12 months. The third dexamethasone implantation was applied due to the second relapse of four cases from nine relapsing cases. Third implants were performed at an average of 12.50±4.79 months. During the follow-up period, the most common complications in our patients were cataract (37%) and increased intraocular pressure (40.7%).

CONCLUSION

Intravitreal dexamethasone implantation is an effective and reliable treatment option in non-infectious uveitic macular edema. There was no difference between the first dose and re-implantations in terms of efficacy and safety.

The Conundrum of Clinical Trials for the Uveitides: Appropriate Outcome Measures for One Treatment Used in Several Diseases

The uveitides consist of >30 diseases characterized by intraocular inflammation. Noninfectious intermediate, posterior, and panuveitides typically are treated with oral corticosteroids and immunosuppression, with a similar treatment approach for most diseases. Because these uveitides collectively are considered a rare disease, single-disease trials are difficult to impractical to recruit for, and most trials have included several different diseases for a given protocol treatment. However, measures of uveitis activity are disease specific, resulting in challenges for trial outcome measures. Several trials of investigational immunosuppressive drugs or biologic drugs have not demonstrated efficacy, but design problems with the outcome measures have limited the ability to interpret the results. Successful trials have included diseases for which a single uveitis activity measure suffices or a composite measure of uveitis activity is used. One potential solution to this problem is the use of a single, clinically relevant outcome, successful corticosteroid sparing, defined as inactive uveitis with a prednisone dose ≤7.5 mg/day coupled with disease-specific guidelines for determining inactive disease. The clinical relevance of this outcome is that active uveitis is associated with increased risks of visual impairment and blindness, and that prednisone doses ≤7.5 mg/day have a minimal risk of corticosteroid side effects. The consequence of this approach is that trial visits require a core set of measures for all participants and a disease-specific set of measures, both clinical and imaging, to assess uveitis activity. This approach is being used in the Adalimumab Versus Conventional Immunosuppression (ADVISE) Trial.

Outcomes of uveitic macular edema in the First-line Antimetabolites as Steroid-sparing Treatment (FAST) Uveitis Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes of uveitic macular edema at 6 months and 12 months in patients treated with methotrexate or mycophenolate mofetil.

DESIGN

Subanalysis of a block-randomized, observer-masked, multi-center clinical trial.

SUBJECTS/PARTICIPANTS

Patients were enrolled into the First-line Antimetabolites as Steroid-sparing Treatment (FAST) uveitis trial between August 2013 and August 2017.

METHODS/INTERVENTION/TESTING

Patients were randomized to oral methotrexate 25mg weekly or mycophenolate mofetil 1.5g twice daily for 12 months, along with a corticosteroid taper. In addition to standardized clinical examination, all patients underwent spectral domain optical coherence tomography imaging at each visit. At the 6-month primary endpoint, patients who achieved treatment success continued the same treatment for a subsequent 6 months and treatment failures switched to the other treatment group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pre-specified primary outcome at 6 months and 12 months outcomes of central subfield thickness and visual acuity.

RESULTS

Of 216 patients in the FAST Trial, 42 eyes of 30 patients in the methotrexate group and 55 eyes of 41 patients in the mycophenolate group had uveitic macular edema. Baseline median central subfield thickness was 359μm and 342μm in the methotrexate and mycophenolate groups, respectively. At 12 months, for those who stayed on the same treatment, macular thickness decreased from baseline by 23 μm (IQR, -39.0 to 13) and 18 μm (IQR, -68.5 to 9), in the methotrexate and mycophenolate groups, respectively, (P=0.76). In patients who switched treatment at 6 months, macular thickness decreased from baseline by 12.5 μm (IQR, -29.8 to -2.3) and 92 μm (IQR, -240 to -18) in the methotrexate and mycophenolate groups, respectively, (P=0.23). At 12 months, 7/19 (37%) eyes on methotrexate had resolution of macular edema compared to 15/25 (60%) eyes on mycophenolate (P=0.10). For those that switched treatments, 8/17 (47%) eyes on methotrexate and 6/11 (55%) eyes on mycophenolate had improvement of macular edema, (P=0.92) CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with methotrexate or mycophenolate mofetil for uveitic macular edema results in similar improvements in macular thickness at 6 and 12 months. At 12 months, approximately half of eyes in each antimetabolite group still had persistent macular edema.

Uveitis for the non-ophthalmologist

The uveitides are a heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by inflammation inside the eye. The uveitides are classified as infectious or non-infectious. The non-infectious uveitides, which are presumed to be immune mediated, can be further divided into those that are associated with a known systemic disease and those that are eye limited,-ie, not associated with a systemic disease. The ophthalmologist identifies the specific uveitic entity by medical history, clinical examination, and ocular imaging, as well as supplemental laboratory testing, if indicated. Treatment of the infectious uveitides is tailored to the particular infectious organism and may include regional and/or systemic medication. First line treatment for non-infectious uveitides is corticosteroids that can be administered topically, as regional injections or surgical implants, or systemically. Systemic immunosuppressive therapy is used in patients with severe disease who cannot tolerate corticosteroids, require chronic corticosteroids at >7.5 mg/day prednisone, or in whom the disease is known to respond better to immunosuppression. Management of many of these diseases is optimized by coordination between the ophthalmologist and rheumatologist or internist.

A Review of Local Therapy for the Management of Cystoid Macular Edema in Uveitis

ABSTRACT

Uveitic macular edema is a significant cause of visual impairment in most uveitis types. Treatment options of uveitis have advanced remarkably in recent years. Up to now, corticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment. Nonsteroidal immunomodulators, and recently the biologic agents, which can reinforce efficacy and enable discontinuation or reduction of steroids to maintenance doses, are becoming increasingly popular in the management of uveitic macular edema. Several medications can be used in intraocular delivery and more and more sustained releasing implants are being developed. This review will briefly focus on the review of local therapy for the management of cystoid macular edema in uveitis, as many of these novel approaches are currently being evaluated in clinical trials.

Evaluation of fluocinolone acetonide 0.19 mg intravitreal implant in the management of birdshot retinochoroiditis

PURPOSE

To report treatment outcomes and efficacy of the fluocinolone acetonide 0.19 mg intravitreal implant (Iluvien) in controlling retinal and choroidal inflammation in 11 patients with birdshot retinochoroiditis.

METHODS

A single-centre, retrospective, interventional case series. The primary efficacy end point was improvement in vascular leakage on fluorescein angiography (FA), effect on cystoid macular oedema (CMO) and resolution of hypofluorescent lesions on indocyanine green angiography (ICGA); secondary measures were improvements on pattern and full-field electroretinogram (PERG; ERG) parameters. Safety outcome measures were intraocular elevation and cataractogenesis.

RESULTS

Fifteen eyes received Iluvien implant with an average follow-up of 31 months (range 12-36 months). Prior to the implant, 5 (33.3%) eyes had received dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (Ozurdex). FA showed evidence of vascular leakage in all eyes at baseline. Between month 6 and 12, FA showed that 73.4% of eyes had no leakage, this increased to 84.6% by month 24. Three eyes in our study had CMO at baseline. 6 months after Iluvien implant, all eyes achieved complete CMO resolution. One year after insertion of the implant, the characteristic hypofluorescent lesions on ICGA were unchanged in all cases. There was baseline ERG evidence indicating a high incidence of peripheral cone system dysfunction and most showed PERG evidence of macular dysfunction. Retinal function improved and macular function improved or was stable in the majority following treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show the possible therapeutic effect of Iluvien in the management of Birdshot-related vascular leakage, CMO and retinal dysfunction. However, choroidal lesions seem to persist with no detectable response to treatment.

Seven-Year Outcomes of Uveitic Macular Edema: The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment Trial and Follow-up Study Results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term outcomes of uveitic macular edema (ME).

DESIGN

Longitudinal follow-up of a cohort of participants in a randomized clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 248 eyes of 177 participants with uveitic ME enrolled in the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial and Follow-up Study.

METHODS

OCT measurements, taken at baseline and annually, were graded by reading center graders masked to clinical data. Macular edema was defined as a center macular thickness (CMT) ≥240 μm on time-domain OCT or time-domain OCT equivalent. Resolution of ME was defined as normalization of macular thickness on OCT. Relapse of ME was defined as increase in macular thickness to ≥240 μm in an eye that previously had resolution. Visual acuity was measured at each visit with logarithmic visual acuity charts.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Resolution and relapse of ME. Visual acuity.

RESULTS

Among 227 eyes with ME followed ≥1 year, the cumulative percent of eyes with ME resolving at any point during 7 years was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89-97). Epiretinal membranes on OCT were associated with a lower likelihood of ME resolution (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-1.01; P = 0.05). Among 177 eyes with resolved ME, the cumulative percent with relapse within 7 years was 43% (95% CI, 32-51). Eyes in which ME resolved gained a mean of 6.24 letters (95% CI, 4.40-8.09; P < 0.001) compared with eyes that remained free from ME during the 1-year follow-up intervals, whereas eyes in which ME did not resolve experienced no gain in vision (mean change -1.30 letters; 95% CI, -2.70 to 0.09; P = 0.065), and eyes that developed ME during the year (incident or relapsed) experienced a mean loss of -8.65 letters (95% CI, -11.5 to -5.84, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Given sufficient time and treatment, nearly all uveitic ME resolves, but episodes of relapse were common. Visual acuity results were better among eyes with resolved ME, suggesting that control of inflammation and resolution of ME might be visually relevant treatment targets.

Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant (Ozurdex) in Paediatric Patients with Non-infectious Intermediate Uveitis and Related Cystoid Macular Oedema: Evaluation of Macular Morphology and Function with Six-month Follow-up; a Deeper Role of MfERG?

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of Ozurdex implant by analyzing macular morphology and function in pediatric uveitis and related cystoid macular edema (CMO).

METHODS

Main outcomes were visual acuity, mfERG and photopic ERG response, and central macular thickness. Mean values recorded at each time-point were compared to baseline and correlations between functional and anatomical parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

Resolution of intraocular inflammation and CMO was achieved in all eyes 1 month after implant without procedure or drug-related complications. Mean visual acuity and mfERG amplitude improved showing a statistically significant difference to baseline values for the first 4 months. Mean central macular thickness showed a statistically significant reduction for all follow-up time. Photopic ERG did not vary significantly. Statistically significant correlation was found between trends of visual acuity, central macular thickness, and mfERG responses.

CONCLUSION

Correlation found between macular morphology and function confirms the efficacy of Ozurdex in pediatric uveitis.

Intravitreal methotrexate and fluocinolone acetonide implantation for Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada uveitis

Purpose

To report a case of intravitreal methotrexate treatment and fluocinolone acetonide (Retisert®) implantation in a patient with Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada syndrome (VKH).

Observations

A 34-year-old male was referred for worsening vision and bilateral panuveitis consistent with VKH. He was treated with prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil, prednisolone acetate eye drops, and injections of triamcinolone and adalimumab. He failed to improve with these therapies and developed multiple adverse effects, including hepatotoxicity, severe eye pain, cataracts, and cystoid macular edema. We treated him with intravitreal methotrexate injections in both eyes, which rapidly improved his eye pain, inflammation, and vision. He subsequently underwent fluocinolone acetonide (Retisert®) implantation, cataract extraction with intraocular lens insertion, and Ahmed tube placement for long-term intraocular pressure control. His vision improved from hand motions to 20/30, intraocular pressure remained stable at 17, there was complete resolution of his panuveitis and uveitic macular edema, and his systemic medications were able to be discontinued.

Conclusions

/Importance: This case demonstrates intravitreal methotrexate may successfully treat intraocular inflammation, pain, and macular edema in VKH. Excellent long-term vision and reduction of adverse effects of systemic medications were also achieved with subsequent fluocinolone acetonide implantation. Combining these two targeted therapies may be an effective strategy in treating VKH in patients who have severe pain and cannot tolerate systemic therapy.

Drug Tissue Distribution of TUDCA From a Biodegradable Suprachoroidal Implant versus Intravitreal or Systemic Delivery in the Pig Model

Purpose

To determine local ocular tissue levels of the bile acid, tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA), in the pig model using oral, intravenous (IV), intravitreal injection (IVitI) and low- and high-dose suprachoroidal, sustained-release implants (SCI-L or SCI-H).

Methods

Forty-six pigs (92 globes) were included in the study. TUDCA was delivered orally in 5 pigs, IV in 4, IVitI in 6, SCI-L in 17, and SCI-H in 14. Testing timeframes varied from the same day (within minutes) for IV; 1 to 6 days, oral; and 1 to 4 weeks, IVitI and SCI. Enucleated globes were dissected, specimens from specific tissues were separated, and TUDCA was extracted and quantified using mass spectrometry.

Results

The highest TUDCA tissue levels occurred after IV delivery in the macula (252 ± 238 nM) and peripheral retina (196 ± 171 nM). Macular choroid and peripheral choroid levels were also high (1032 ± 1269 and 1219 ± 1486 nM, respectively). For IVitI delivery, macular levels at day 6 were low (0.5 ± 0.5 nM), whereas peripheral choroid was higher (15.3 ± 16.7 nM). Neither the SCI-L nor SCI-H implants delivered meaningful macular doses (≤1 nM); however, peripheral retina and choroid levels were significantly higher. Bile acid isoforms were found in the serum specimens.

Conclusions

The highest TUDCA tissue levels in the pig model were obtained using IV delivery. Oral delivery was associated with reasonable tissue levels. Local delivery (IVitI and SCI) was able to achieve measurable local ocular tissue levels.

Translational Relevance

Diffusional kinetics from the suprachoroidal space follow the choroidal blood flow, away from the macula and toward the periphery.

KS23, a novel peptide derived from adiponectin, inhibits retinal inflammation and downregulates the proportions of Th1 and Th17 cells during experimental autoimmune uveitis

BACKGROUND

Uveitis is a potentially sight-threatening form of ocular inflammation that affects the uvea in the wall of the eye. Currently available treatments for uveitis have exhibited profound adverse side effects. However, KS23 is a novel 23-amino-acid anti-inflammatory peptide derived from adiponectin that may have the capability to function as a safe alternative to these existing treatment options. We, therefore, evaluated the preventive effect of KS23 in experimental autoimmune uveitis (EAU).

METHODS

EAU was induced in mice via immunization with the peptide interphotoreceptor retinoid binding protein 161-180 (IRBP161-180). KS23 was then administered every 2 days via intraperitoneal injection to induce protection against EAU. Clinical and histopathological scores were employed to evaluate the disease progression. Inflammatory cytokines were also quantified using ELISA, and the expression levels of specific chemokines and chemokine receptors were assessed via qRT-PCR. In addition, the proportions of Th1 and Th17 cells were detected via flow cytometry, and the expression levels of specific proteins were quantified from the retina of mice using western blot analysis, to elucidate the specific mechanism of action employed by KS23 to suppress the inflammation associated with EAU.

RESULTS

KS23 was found to significantly improve EAU-associated histopathological scores, while decreasing the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-17A), chemokines (LARC, RANTES, MIG, IP-10), and chemokine receptors (CCR6 and CXCR3). The proportions of Th1 and Th17 cells were also suppressed following intraperitoneal injection with KS23. The anti-inflammatory mechanism employed by KS23 was determined to be associated with the activation of AMPK and subsequent inhibition of NF-κB.

CONCLUSIONS

KS23 decreased the proportions of Th1 and Th17 cells to effectively ameliorate the progression of EAU. It may, therefore, serve as a promising potential therapeutic agent for uveitis.

Perioperative Management of Uveitic Cataracts

Uveitis patients represent a unique subset of the population undergoing cataract surgery and pose several challenges that require special consideration and strategy. Maintenance of disease quiescence for at least three months prior to surgery maximizes postoperative outcomes, though these patients remain at increased risk for pseudophakic cystoid macular edema, which can be refractory to the traditional steroid treatments. In this review, we detail the pillars of preoperative optimization, intraoperative considerations, and postoperative management of uveitic cataracts, with special attention on the evidence surrounding prevention and treatment of refractory postoperative cystoid macular edema.

Long-Term Outcomes of Treatment with Biological Agents in Eyes with Refractory, Active, Noninfectious Intermediate Uveitis, Posterior Uveitis, or Panuveitis

PURPOSE

To examine a large cohort of patients treated with biologic agents for active noninfectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis (NIPPU) and to compare their efficacy and long-term effect.

DESIGN

Retrospective, longitudinal study.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighty-two patients (156 eyes) with active NIPPU after failure of treatment with corticosteroids and a second-line immunosuppression drug and treated with biologic agents who were treated at Moorfields Eye Hospital between 2001 and 2016.

METHODS

Information was gathered from the clinical notes of all patients.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time to first disease flare, rate of treatment failure, best-corrected visual acuity, and risk factors for treatment failure.

RESULTS

Patients were followed on average for 4.7±0.4 years (724 eye-years). All patients demonstrated active uveitis at baseline, and 34 patients (41.5%) demonstrated a coexisting active systemic disease. Control of ocular inflammation was achieved in 136 eyes (87.2%). The average oral prednisolone dose at baseline was 16.4±1.7 mg/day, and by 6 months reduced to 6.5±0.7 mg/day (P < 0.0001), remaining stable for up to 5 years follow-up. Best-corrected visual acuity at baseline was 0.5±0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), improved to 0.4±0.1 logMAR (P = 0.008) at 3 months, and remained stable during follow-up. After baseline, 42.3% of eyes experienced flares, and the average number of flares reduced from 1.8±0.1 flares/year to 0.6±0.1 flares/year (P < 0.0001). Median time to first flare was 5.4 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-5.4 years) with a 5-year survival rate of 58.7%. Treatment failed in 37 eyes (23.7%), with a 5-year survival rate of 68.0% and an estimated time to 75% survival of 2.9 years (95% CI, 2.1-4.4 years). The risk for treatment failure was lower when treatment used adalimumab (odds ratio, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9; P = 0.03) but was greater when systemic disease also was active at baseline (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.5-7.1; P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, eyes treated with biologic agents after failure of treatment with corticosteroids and a second-line immunosuppression drug experienced satisfactory disease control (87.2%), reduced use of systemic immunosuppression, stable visual acuity, and a 23.7% risk of disease relapse. After multivariate adjustment, older age, treatment with adalimumab (versus infliximab), and inactive concomitant systemic disease were associated with a lower risk of treatment failure.

Comprehensive Treatment of Noninfectious Uveitis Accompanied by Macular Edema with the Use of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma

Background. A common cause of visual impairment in patients with non-infectious uveitis is macular edema, developing in 38–84 % of cases. Plasma enriched with platelets is widely used in various branches of medicine, the effectiveness of its use in the treatment of non-infectious uveitis, accompanied by macular edema, has not been sufficiently investigated. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of autologous platelet-rich plasma in the complex treatment of non-infectious uveitis accompanied by macular edema.

Material and methods. The study was conducted on the basis of the academician S.N. Fyodorov Eye Microsurgery Federal State Institution in the period from 2016 to 2018, which included 123 people (176 eyes) from 18 to 50 years with non-infectious uveitis, accompanied by macular edema: 46 men, 77 women. Patients were divided into 2 groups. The main group consisted of patients receiving autologous platelet-rich plasma and anti-inflammatory treatment; the comparison group consisted of patients receiving anti-inflammatory treatment. The results of visual acuity, intraocular pressure, biomicroophthalmoscopy, optical coherence tomography of the macular zone, microperimetry, ultrasound examination on the side of the affected eye were evaluated. Statistical processing of the data was carried out in the program Statistica 10.

Results. Maintenance of autologous platelet-rich plasma contributes to a statistically significant improvement in visual acuity on the 10th day of treatment by 64.2 %, a decrease in the thickness of the retina in fovea by 36.3 % and an increase in retinal photosensitivity by 34.6 % compared to the group of patients receiving only anti-inflammatory treatment. Conclusions. The use of autologous platelet-rich plasma in the complex treatment of non-infectious uveitis allows to accelerate the natural mechanisms of tissue regeneration, contributing to the reduction of macular edema, and improve visual performance.

Intravitreal dexamethasone implants for non-infectious uveitis

IMPORTANCE

Inflammatory-mediated cystoid macular oedema (CMO) is the most common inflammatory-mediated threat to vision in non-infectious uveitis (NIU). Corticosteroid therapy is the cornerstone to the management of CMO in NIU. Sustained-release dexamethasone (DEX) implant devices provide localized therapy.

BACKGROUND

The authors present a series documenting the efficacy of DEX implants for NIU in an Australian cohort.

DESIGN

A single centre, retrospective case series patients receiving DEX implants for NIU from 2012 to 2018 in a New South Wales tertiary eye hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty eyes of 17 patients receiving DEX implants for confirmed cases of NIU of varying aetiologies.

METHODS

Cases from March 2012 and March 2018 were retrospectively selected with follow-up assessment data recorded and analysed. All patients were seen at 1, 2 and 4 weeks post implant, then monthly. Minimum duration of follow-up was 32 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was change in central retinal thickness (CRT) of >20% at two consecutive visits. Secondary outcomes included change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure and medication regimens.

RESULTS

Ninety-five percent of patients achieved significant CRT reduction at 4, 8 and 16 weeks (P < .01). Sixty-one percent demonstrated improved BCVA at week 8 (P < .05). Ninety percent of patients taking systemic corticosteroid therapy at commencement reduced their dose to below 7.5 mg/day. Adverse event frequency was low.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In keeping with larger studies, the authors suggest that DEX implants may effectively control uveitis refractory to other therapy, while improving BCVA and CRT. In addition, DEX usage has demonstrably reduced systemic steroid burden within the observed cohort.

Visual and Clinical Outcome of Macular Edema Complicating Pediatric Noninfectious Uveitis

PURPOSE

To investigate the clinical course and visual outcome of macular edema (ME) in pediatric patients with chronic noninfectious uveitis.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

The databases of the uveitis clinics of 4 tertiary medical centers in Israel and the UK were searched for all children treated for uveitic ME in the years 2005-2015. Data were collected from the medical records as follows: demographics, diagnosis, visual acuity, clinical and imaging findings, and treatment given specifically for ME. Findings at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months were evaluated.

RESULTS

The cohort included 25 children (33 eyes) of mean age 8.5 ± 3.4 years. The most common diagnosis was intermediate uveitis, in 14 children (7 idiopathic, 7 pars planitis). Uveitis was active at ME diagnosis in 28 eyes (84.8%). Median duration of follow-up was 48 months. Median time to resolution of ME was 6 months, with complete resolution in 25 eyes (75.8%) by 24 months. Baseline visual acuity was ≥20/40 in 8 eyes (24.2%), increased to 57.6% at 3 months (P < .0001), and remained stable thereafter. Treatment regimens included corticosteroids (systemically and/or locally), immunosuppression, and biologic therapies. No correlation was found between outcome and either structural characteristics of ME or specific treatment strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognosis of pediatric uveitic ME is favorable despite its chronic course. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to define differences among treatment regimens.

RESPONSE OF INFLAMMATORY CYSTOID MACULAR EDEMA TO TREATMENT USING ORAL ACETAZOLAMIDE

PURPOSE

To determine the treatment effect of oral acetazolamide on refractory inflammatory macular edema.

METHODS

A retrospective review of identified patients with uveitic or pseudophakic macular edema treated using acetazolamide between 2007 and 2014. Visual acuity and central macular subfield thickness was determined at baseline and at first follow-up. Baseline optical coherence tomography features were analyzed as predictors of acetazolamide response.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients (19 eyes) of 61 screened met all criteria. Mean age was 57.9 years (19.7-81.1). The most common diagnosis was idiopathic uveitis (n = 6, 31.6%). Mean uveitis duration was 4.4 years (0.2-27.5). Average central macular subfield thickness decreased significantly (from 471.8 ± 110.6 μm to 358.3 ± 50.4 μm) (P < 0.0001). Average visual acuity (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) improved significantly from 20/54 (0.43 ± 0.25) to 20/37 (0.27 ± 0.16) (P = 0.003). Pretreatment optical coherence tomographies demonstrated intraretinal fluid (n = 19, 100%), subretinal fluid (n = 8, 42.1%), epiretinal membrane (n = 13, 68.3%), and vitreomacular traction (n = 1, 5.2%). No optical coherence tomography characteristic was predictive of a response to therapy.

CONCLUSION

There is a significant benefit to vision and central macular subfield thickness after acetazolamide treatment in patients with inflammatory macular edema. In patients with refractory inflammatory macular edema, treatment using acetazolamide can provide anatomical and visual benefit without corticosteroid-related adverse effects.

The Effectiveness of Pharmacological Agents for the Treatment of Uveitic Macular Edema (UMO): A Systematic Review

Purpose: To conduct a systematic review of effectiveness of pharmacological therapies for treatment of Uveitic Macular Edema (UMO). Method/Design: Comparative studies of pharmacological therapies in patients with UMO were identified in Cochrane CENTRAL/MEDLINE/EMBASE/CINAHL/trials registers (February 2017). PROSPERO registration: CRD42015019170. Results: Thirty-one studies were included. Corticosteroids were the most frequently studied (n = 20). Corticosteroids (all forms) were consistently of greater/equal efficacy to active comparators; for anti-VEGF (n = 4) improvement, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were mostly less than local corticosteroid injection; for interferon (n = 1) improvement BCVA and CMT were greater than the comparator of methotrexate; for topical indomethacin (n = 1) improvement, BCVA and CMT were greater than placebo. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, and vitamin E (n = 5) were not effective for these outcomes. Conclusion: The review highlights areas where the evidence base is still lacking, and appropriately focused trials are needed to inform best treatment to tackle this sight-threatening condition.

Update in treatment of uveitic macular edema

Macular edema (ME) represents the most common cause for visual loss among uveitis patients. The management of uveitic macular edema (UME) may be challenging, due to its often recalcitrant nature. Corticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment, through their capability of effectively controlling inflammation and the associated ME. Topical steroids may be effective in milder cases of UME, particularly in edema associated with anterior uveitis. Posterior sub-Tenon and orbital floor steroids, as well as intravitreal steroids often induce rapid regression of UME, although this may be followed by recurrence of the pathology. Intra-vitreal corticosteroid implants provide sustained release of steroids facilitating regression of ME with less frequent injections. Topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may provide a safe alternative or adjuvant therapy to topical steroids in mild UME, predominantly in cases with underlying anterior uveitis. Immunomodulators including methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, azathioprine, and cyclosporine, as well as biologic agents, notably the anti-tumor necrosis factor-α monoclonal antibodies adalimumab and infliximab, may accomplish the control of inflammation and associated ME in refractory cases, or enable the tapering of steroids. Newer biotherapies have demonstrated promising outcomes and may be considered in persisting cases of UME.

Predictors for functional and anatomic outcomes in macular edema secondary to non-infectious uveitis

Aims

We aimed to investigate predictive factors for visual and anatomic outcomes in patients with macular edema secondary to non-infectious uveitis.

Material and methods

We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational, 12-month follow-up study. Participants included in the study were adults with non-infectious uveitic macular edema (UME), defined as central subfoveal thickness (CST) of >300 μm as measured by spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and fluid in the macula. Demographic, clinical and tomographic data was recorded at baseline, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Foveal-centered SD-OCT exploration was set as the gold-standard determination of UME using a standard Macular Cube 512x128 A-scan, within a 6 x 6 mm² area, and the Enhanced High Definition Single-Line Raster. To assess favorable prognosis, the main outcomes analyzed were the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the CST. Favorable prognosis was defined as sustained improvement of BCVA (2 lines of gain of the Snellen scale) and CST (decrease of 20% of the initial value or <300 μm) within a 12 month period.

Results

Fifty-six eyes were analyzed. The number of eyes with sustained improvement in the CST was 48 (86.2%), against 23 (41.1%) eyes with sustained improvement in BCVA. Favorable prognosis, as defined above, was observed in 18 (32.1%) eyes. UME prognosis was negatively correlated with baseline foveal thickening, alteration in the vitreo-macular interface and cystoid macular edema. In contrast, bilaterally, systemic disease and the presence of anterior chamber cells were predictive of favorable prognosis.

Conclusion

Available treatment modalities in UME may avoid chronic UME and improve anatomic outcome. However, the proportion of functional amelioration observed during 12 months of follow-up is lower. Thicker CST, alteration in the vitreo-macular interface and cystoid macular edema may denote less favorable prognosis. Conversely, bilaterally, systemic disease and anterior chamber cells may be associated with favorable prognosis in UME.

Spectral domain optical coherence tomography as an adjunctive tool for screening Behçet uveitis

Background

This study investigated the association of central macular thickness (CMT) and macular volume (MV) with severity of Behçet uveitis in the absence of macular edema (ME).

Methods

This retrospective, interventional study included a total 131 treatment-naïve Behçet patients with varying degree of uveitis in the absence of ME. The mean CMT and MV were obtained by spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD ODT). The patients were classified according to the anatomical classification of Behçet uveitis. The main outcome measure was comparison of mean CMT and MV with the types of Behçet uveitis.

Results

Sixty patients (45.8%) with no uveitis, 41 patients (31.3%) with anterior uveitis, 18 patients (13.7%) with posterior uveitis, and 12 patients (9.2%) with panuveitis. The mean CMT were 261.6±22.2 μm in no uveitis, 268.1±17.8 μm in anterior uveitis, 306.4±32.9 μm in posterior uveitis, and 300.4±44.0 μm in panuveitis (P < 0.001). The mean MV was 8.7±0.3 mm³ in those without uveitis, 8.8±0.3 mm³ in anterior uveitis, 9.9±1.1 mm³ in those with posterior uveitis, and 9.7±0.4 mm³ in panuveitis (P < 0.001). Types of Behçet uveitis was the only significant factor correlated with the mean CMT (B = 18.170, β = 0.408, P < 0.001) and the mean MV (B = 0.328, β = 0.652, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The mean CMT and MV were significantly thicker in the Behçet uveitis with posterior involvement. SD OCT can be used for an adjunctive tool for screening Behçet uveitis, especially for the presence of posterior involvement.

Periocular Triamcinolone vs. Intravitreal Triamcinolone vs. Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant for the Treatment of Uveitic Macular Edema: The PeriOcular vs. INTravitreal corticosteroids for uveitic macular edema (POINT) Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of 3 regional corticosteroid injections for uveitic macular edema (ME): periocular triamcinolone acetonide (PTA), intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (ITA), and the intravitreal dexamethasone implant (IDI).

DESIGN

Multicenter, randomized clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with uveitic ME.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 1 of the 3 therapies. Patients with bilateral ME were assigned the same treatment for both eyes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of baseline (PropBL) central subfield thickness (CST) at 8 weeks (CST at 8 weeks/CST at baseline) assessed with OCT by masked readers. Secondary outcomes included ≥20% improvement and resolution of ME, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and intraocular pressure (IOP) events over 24 weeks.

RESULTS

All treatment groups demonstrated improved CST during follow-up. At 8 weeks, each group had clinically meaningful reductions in CST relative to baseline (PropBL: 0.77, 0.61, and 0.54, respectively, which translates to reductions of 23%, 39%, and 46% for PTA, ITA, and IDI, respectively). Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (PropBL ITA/PropBL PTA, hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 99.87% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.96) and IDI (PropBL IDI/PropBL PTA, HR, 0.69; 99.87% CI, 0.56-0.86) had larger reductions in CST than PTA (P < 0.0001). Intravitreal dexamethasone implant was noninferior to ITA at 8 weeks (PropBL IDI/PropBL ITA, HR, 0.88; 99.87% CI, 0.71-1.08). Both ITA and IDI treatments also were superior to PTA treatment in improving and resolving uveitic ME. All treatment groups demonstrated BCVA improvement throughout follow-up. Both ITA and IDI groups had improvements in BCVA that was 5 letters greater than in the PTA group at 8 weeks (P < 0.004). The risk of having IOP ≥24 mmHg was higher in the intravitreal treatment groups compared with the periocular group (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.91-3.65 and HR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.29-4.91 for ITA and IDI, respectively); however, there was no significant difference between the 2 intravitreal treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide and the IDI were superior to PTA for treating uveitic ME with modest increases in the risk of IOP elevation. This risk did not differ significantly between intravitreal treatments.

Intravitreal therapeutic agents in noninfectious uveitic macular edema

The management of uveitis is challenging for most treating ophthalmologists. The treatment of uveitis often requires the use of high dose of systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressive agents, which are almost always associated with potential side effects. Intravitreal medications have become a popular mode of drug administration in uveitis patients as they provide high volume of drug to the target tissues, eliminating the risk of systemic toxicity. There has been tremendous development in the intravitreal therapeutics over the last few years. With the advent of sustained-release technique, increasing patient compliance, biodegradable nature of the implant, and introduction of newer agents with better safety profile, the intravitreal medications have become more popular in recent years. This review presents evidence in the scientific literature supporting the use of intravitreal medications for the management of uveitis and its complications.

TWENTY-FOUR MONTH FOLLOW-UP OF TOCILIZUMAB THERAPY FOR REFRACTORY UVEITIS-RELATED MACULAR EDEMA

BACKGROUND

To report the 24-month efficacy and safety of the interleukin-6 receptor antagonist tocilizumab (TCZ) for refractory uveitis-related macular edema (ME).

METHODS

Data were obtained by standardized chart review. Patients with quiescent uveitis seen at a single tertiary referral center, for whom ME was the principal cause of reduced visual acuity.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Central foveal thickness measured by optical coherence tomography; degree of anterior and posterior chamber; inflammation (Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature Working Group criteria); and visual acuity (Snellen and logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) were recorded in all patients during TCZ therapy at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24.

RESULTS

Sixteen eyes from 12 patients (10 women) were included. Mean age was 34.6 years. Mean duration of ME was 13.2 years. All patients achieved 24 months of follow-up and that is the census date for data collection. Before TCZ was commenced, ME was present, and all patients had been previously treated with immunosuppressive therapy and biologic agents. Uveitis diagnoses were juvenile idiopathic arthritis associated, uveitis (n = 6), birdshot chorioretinopathy (n = 2), idiopathic panuveitis (n = 2), sympathetic ophthalmia (n = 1), and ankylosing spondylitis (n = 1). Mean central foveal thickness (95%; confidence interval) was 516 ± 55 μm at baseline, improving to 274 ± 13 at Month 12 (P = 0.0004), and sustained at 274 ± 14 at Month 24 of follow-up (P = 0.00039). Mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.78 ± 0.18 (Snellen 20/120 ± 20/30) at baseline to 0.42 ± 0.17 (20/52 ± 20/30) at Month 12 (P = 0.0001) and 0.40 ± 0.17 (20/50 ± 20/30) at Month 24 of follow-up (P = 0.0002). Tocilizumab therapy was withdrawn in 5 patients with sustained remission at Month 12 but in all, ME relapsed between 1 and 3 months after TCZ discontinuation. Rechallenge of TCZ infusions led to recovery of uveitis control and ME resolution. Two adverse events were reported during two 4-month follow-ups: one Grade 1 neutropenia and one community-acquired pneumonia.

CONCLUSION

In this long-term study, TCZ was effective and had a comparable safety profile to published data for TCZ use in other indications, when used for the treatment of refractory uveitis-related ME.

Effect of Antituberculous Therapy on Uveitis Associated With Latent Tuberculosis

PURPOSE

To describe the clinical features of patients with uveitis associated with latent tuberculosis (TB) and examine the effect of anti-TB treatment (ATT) on uveitis outcome.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-nine eyes of 129 patients diagnosed with uveitis associated with latent TB were evaluated for recurrence of disease following treatment. Eighty-nine of the patients (69%) received ATT and information was gathered retrospectively regarding clinical outcome, vision, and treatment. Outcome measures included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and rate of disease recurrence.

RESULTS

This study included 89 patients (69%) who received ATT and 40 patients who did not. The uveitis was treated with local and systemic anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive therapy in all patients. The mean change in BCVA following treatment was 4.5 ± 1.4 letters over the follow-up period, with no difference between eyes of patients receiving ATT and those who did not. Sixty-eight eyes (34.9%) had a recurrence of uveitis (0.64 ± 0.08 recurrences per year), with eyes of patients receiving ATT less likely to develop a recurrence compared to those not receiving ATT (29.5% vs 48.2%, odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.77, P = .003). Eyes treated with ATT recurred at an estimated median of 120 months, compared with 51 months in eyes with no treatment (P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with ATT halved the risk of uveitis recurrence and delayed the onset of the first recurrence in eyes with uveitis associated with latent TB.

Immunosuppression for the Uveitides

The uveitides are a collection of more than 30 diseases characterized by intraocular inflammation. Many cases of juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated uveitis, many cases of intermediate uveitis, and most cases of posterior and panuveitides requiring treatment are treated with corticosteroids and immunosuppression. Disease-specific, time-updated modeling of clinical data for several uveitides suggests superior prevention of ocular complications and visual outcomes with immunosuppression. These studies also suggest that oral corticosteroids at doses low enough for safe long-term therapy (i.e., <7.5 mg/day) are ineffective, implying that immunosuppression should be part of the initial regimen. The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial and Follow-up Study was a randomized comparative effectiveness trial comparing systemic therapy with oral corticosteroids and immunosuppression with regional corticosteroid treatment. It demonstrated that, when used properly, oral corticosteroids and immunosuppression can be given safely for up to 7 years with no evident increased risk of systemic side effects compared with regional corticosteroid therapy, except for greater antibiotic use for infections. The Systemic Treatment for Eye Diseases (SITE) Cohort Study suggested long-term safety for this approach, when the immunosuppressive agents were antimetabolites or calcineurin inhibitors. Thus, oral corticosteroids and immunosuppression may be a preferred initial therapy for many noninfectious, intermediate, posterior, and panuveitides. Nonalkylating-agent immunosuppression has a low rate of sustained, drug-free remissions, <10%/year. Nonalkylating-agent immunosuppression for >3 years with control of the inflammation for >2 years is associated with a decreased risk of relapse after discontinuing immunosuppression. Alkylating agents can induce sustained drug-free remissions but likely increase the lifetime risk of cancer. Biologics, which target specific cytokines and pathways, hold promise for the future. Monoclonal antibodies directed against tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α have been studied most often, and one, adalimumab, is U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of noninfectious, intermediate, posterior, and panuveitides.

PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF A SUSTAINED-RELEASE DEXAMETHASONE INTRAVITREAL IMPLANT FOR CYSTOID MACULAR EDEMA IN QUIESCENT UVEITIS

PURPOSE

To investigate dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant; OZURDEX, Allergan, Inc) in the treatment of uveitic cystoid macular edema that had persisted in the absence of intraocular inflammation.

METHODS

In this prospective interventional case series, 10 patients with uveitic cystoid macular edema and quiescent uveitis were treated with dexamethasone intravitreal implant at baseline and evaluated monthly for one year. Patients were retreated whenever cystoid macular edema recurred. The primary outcome measure was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at day 90.

RESULTS

At day 90, mean improvement from baseline BCVA was 14.4 letters (P = 0.0003), 70% of patients had a ≥10 letter BCVA improvement, 50% of patients had a ≥15 letter BCVA improvement, and the mean decrease from baseline central subfield retinal thickness was 140 μm (P = 0.008). Improvements were maintained through day 360 with retreatment as needed. At day 360, mean improvement in BCVA was 16.5 letters (P = 0.006) and the mean decrease in central subfield retinal thickness was 158 μm (P = 0.002). One patient experienced intraocular pressure >25 mmHg (managed with topical medication). Two phakic patients (2/8; 25%) had worsening of lens opacity requiring cataract extraction.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant may be an effective treatment for patients with persistent cystoid macular edema in quiescent uveitis.

Ocular Autoimmune Systemic Inflammatory Infectious Study - Report 3: Posterior and Panuveitis

PURPOSE

To report the pattern of posterior and panuveitis at a tertiary referral center in Singapore.

METHODS

Subgroup retrospective analysis of 334 new posterior and panuveitis cases, from the Ocular Autoimmune Systemic Inflammatory Infectious Study (OASIS) database. Descriptive analysis was performed and visual outcome and complications were reported.

RESULTS

The etiology for posterior uveitis and panuveitis was infectious in 162 patients (48.5%), non-infectious in 144 patients (43.1%), and idiopathic in 28 patients (8.4%). More patients with bilateral disease had a non-infectious etiology (n = 82, 50.9%) (p = 0.012). The most common complication was epiretinal membrane (n = 20, 12.3%) for the infectious group and cystoid macular edema (n = 12, 8.3%) for the non-infectious group.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of etiologies in our cohort varies from other studies. Understanding the variations and demographic associations allows the diagnosis and management of posterior and panuveitis to be further improved.

RESOLUTION OF NONINFECTIOUS UVEITIC CYSTOID MACULAR EDEMA WITH TOPICAL DIFLUPREDNATE

PURPOSE

To evaluate the short-term safety and efficacy of topical difluprednate (0.05%) for the treatment of noninfectious uveitic cystoid macular edema.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients (35 eyes) undergoing treatment with difluprednate 4 times daily for 3 weeks for noninfectious uveitic cystoid macular edema were reviewed for visual acuity, intraocular pressure, optical coherence tomography, and fluorescein angiography results. A mixed model analysis was fit with each measure as the outcome, visit as the primary predictor, and patient and eye as random effects.

RESULTS

Mean central foveal thickness decreased by 117 μm (P < 0.001) at 30 ± 15 days, 124 μm (P < 0.001) at 60 ± 15 days, and 152 μm (P < 0.001) at 180 ± 30 days. Complete resolution of intraretinal fluid was observed in 15 of 34 (44%) eyes at 30 ± 15 days, 11 of 21 (52%) eyes at 60 ± 15 days, and 9 of 12 (75%) eyes at 180 ± 30 days. Improvement in fluorescein leakage was noted in 7 of 8 eyes (88%). Visual acuity improved by a mean of 5 letters (P = 0.001) at 30 ± 15 days, 5.5 letters (P = 0.007) at 60 ± 15 days, and 7 letters (P = 0.032) at 180 ± 30 days. Mean increase in intraocular pressure was 1.48 mmHg at 30 ± 15 days (P = 0.080), 1.92 mmHg at 60 ± 15 days (P = 0.110), and 6.18 mmHg (P = 0.001) at 180 ± 30 days.

CONCLUSION

Topical difluprednate is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for noninfectious uveitic cystoid macular edema with decreased central foveal thickness, mild improvement in visual acuity, and elevation of intraocular pressure observed in a few patients.