Intravitreal steroids compared to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for diabetic macular edema: a meta-analysis

Role of inflammation in diabetic macular edema and neovascular age-related macular degeneration

Diabetic macular edema (DME) and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) are multifactorial disorders that affect the macula and cause significant vision loss. Although inflammation and neoangiogenesis are hallmarks of DME and nAMD, respectively, they share some biochemical mediators. While inflammation is a trigger for the processes that lead to the development of DME, in nAMD inflammation seems to be the consequence of retinal pigment epithelium and Bruch membrane alterations. These pathophysiologic differences may be the key issue that justifies the difference in treatment strategies. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors have changed the treatment of both diseases, however, many patients with DME fail to achieve the established therapeutic goals. From a clinical perspective, targeting inflammatory pathways with intravitreal corticosteroids has been proven to be effective in patients with DME. On the contrary, the clinical relevance of addressing inflammation in patients with nAMD has not been proven yet. We explore the role and implication of inflammation in the development of nAMD and DME and its therapeutical relevance.

Response of Diabetic Macular Edema to Anti-VEGF Medications Correlates with Improvement in Macular Vessel Architecture Measured with OCT Angiography

Purpose

Improvements in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield thickness (CST) have been well documented after intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF medications in diabetic macular edema (DME); however, their effect on the vasculature of the macula in diabetic retinopathy (DR) remains poorly understood. Our aim was to explore the effect of intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF on parameters of retinal vascular microstructure in DR with OCT angiography (OCTA).

Design

Retrospective study of adult patients with DME that were treated with anti-VEGF intravitreal injections at the University of Illinois at Chicago between 2017 and 2022.

Participants

Forty-one eyes from 30 patients with nonproliferative or proliferative DR with a mean age of 58.83 ± 11.71 years, mean number of intravitreal injections of 2.8 ± 1.4, and mean follow-up of 6.5 ± 1.7 months.

Methods

ImageJ was employed to measure parameters of retinal vascular microstructure in OCTA images, which included perfusion density, vessel-length density (VLD), vessel diameter, and foveal avascular zone (FAZ) characteristics (area, perimeter, and circularity). Student t tests and analysis of variance were used to determine statistical significance.

Main Outcome Measures

A primary analysis was performed comparing the mean of each parameter of all patients as a single group at the beginning and end of the study period. A subgroup analysis was then performed after stratifying patients based on visual improvement, change in CST, prior injection history, and number of injections.

Results

Eyes demonstrated statistical improvement in BCVA logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution score and CST after anti-VEGF treatment. Primary analysis showed a reduction in the vessel diameter of the superficial and deep retinal vasculature, as well as an increase in the circularity of the FAZ within the superficial retinal vasculature after anti-VEGF treatment. Subgroup analysis revealed that eyes with improvement in BCVA exhibited reduced vessel diameter in the superficial retinal vasculature and that eyes with the largest decrease in CST displayed increased perfusion density and VLD in the deep retinal vasculature.

Conclusions

Intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents to treat DME improved parameters of retinal vascular microstructure on OCTA over a period of 3 to 9 months, and this effect was most pronounced in eyes that experienced improvement in BCVA and CST.

Financial Disclosures

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

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor therapy reduces the administration frequency of steroid injection in patients with diabetic macular edema: A cohort study using the Japanese health insurance claims database

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Severe diabetic macular edema (DME) is often resistant to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Steroids are particularly effective at reducing edema by suppressing inflammation; they are also used as an alternative to expensive anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in some patients. Therefore, the use of steroids in DME reflects an unmet need for anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Notably, triamcinolone acetonide (TA) injections are widely used in Japan. Here, we evaluated the frequency of TA as an indicator of the efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) in DME treatment using a health insurance claims database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cohort study, we retrospectively analyzed the health insurance claims data of 11 million Japanese individuals from 2005 to 2019. The frequency and duration of TA injection after the initiation of SGLT2is or other antidiabetic drugs were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 2,412 matched patients with DME, the incidence rate of TA injection was 63.8 times per 1,000 person-years in SGLT2i users and 94.9 times per 1,000 person-years in non-users. SGLT2is reduced the risk for the first (P = 0.0024, hazard ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.87), second (P = 0.0019, hazard ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.80) and third TA (P = 0.0053, hazard ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.25-0.80) injections. A subanalysis of each baseline characteristic of the patients showed that SGLT2is were effective regardless of the background factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of SGLT2is reduced the frequency of TA injection in patients with DME. Therefore, SGLT2i therapy might be a novel, noninvasive and low-cost adjunctive therapy for DME.

The Anatomic and Functional Outcomes of Ozurdex-Aided Vitrectomy in Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy

Purpose

To investigate the 3-months outcomes of patients who underwent intraoperative intravitreal injection of Ozurdex for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).

Methods

This is a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial (ChiCTR2100043399). Seventy-one patients with PDR who had indications for surgery without intravitreal injection history within 3 months preoperatively were enrolled. Patients were randomly divided into three groups based on the medicine injected intraoperatively: Ozurdex, Conbercept, and Control group. The primary outcome is the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) within 3 months postoperatively. The secondary outcomes include the intraocular pressure (IOP), mean sensitivity, central retinal thickness and vessels perfusion.

Results

The BCVA and the mean sensitivity improved in the three groups (F = 130.8, P < 0.0001; F = 34.18, P < 0.0001), but there was no statistical difference among the three groups (F = 0.858, P = 0.552; F = 0.964, P = 0.452). The IOP was no significant differences among the three groups within 3 months postoperatively (F = 0.881, P = 0.533). Compared with the other two groups, central retinal thickness (CRT) and outer retinal layer (ORL) thickness decreased significantly in patients of the Ozurdex group (F = 3.037, P = 0.008; F = 2.626, P = 0.018), especially in the diabetic macular edema (DME) patients (F = 2.761, P = 0.0164; F = 2.572, P = 0.0240). In macular region, superficial vascular plexus (SVP), intermediate capillary plexus (ICP) and deep capillary plexus (DCP) perfusion were not shown statistical difference at 3 months postoperatively in the all three groups compared with 1 day postoperatively (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with the other two groups, anatomical outcomes was improved significantly in Ozurdex group for DR patients. Ozurdex may help to improve the visual acuity and visual sensitivity, and there is no significant difference in the change of IOP and microvascular improvement.

Clinical Trial Registration

This trial is registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn, registration number ChiCTR2100043399).

The Treatment of Diabetic Retinal Edema with Intravitreal Steroids: How and When

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a common complication of diabetes mellitus and a leading cause of visual impairment worldwide. It is defined as the diabetes-related accumulation of fluid, proteins, and lipids, with retinal thickening, within the macular area. DME affects a significant proportion of individuals with diabetes, with the prevalence increasing with disease duration and severity. It is estimated that approximately 25-30% of diabetic patients will develop DME during their lifetime. Poor glycemic control, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes duration, and genetic predisposition are recognized as risk factors for the development and progression of DME. Although the exact pathophysiology is still not completely understood, it has been demonstrated that chronic hyperglycemia triggers a cascade of biochemical processes, including increased oxidative stress, inflammation, activation of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), cellular dysfunction, and apoptosis, with breakdown of the blood-retinal barriers and fluid accumulation within the macular area. Early diagnosis and appropriate management of DME are crucial for improving visual outcomes. Although the control of systemic risk factors still remains the most important strategy in DME treatment, intravitreal pharmacotherapy with anti-VEGF molecules or steroids is currently considered the first-line approach in DME patients, whereas macular laser photocoagulation and pars plana vitrectomy may be useful in selected cases. Available intravitreal steroids, including triamcinolone acetonide injections and dexamethasone and fluocinolone acetonide implants, exert their therapeutic effect by reducing inflammation, inhibiting VEGF expression, stabilizing the blood-retinal barrier and thus reducing vascular permeability. They have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing macular edema and improving visual outcomes in DME patients but are associated with a high risk of intraocular pressure elevation and cataract development, so their use requires an accurate patient selection. This manuscript aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the pathology, epidemiology, risk factors, physiopathology, clinical features, treatment mechanisms of actions, treatment options, prognosis, and ongoing clinical studies related to the treatment of DME, with particular consideration of intravitreal steroids therapy.

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

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

Oxidative Stress and Its Regulation in Diabetic Retinopathy

Diabetic retinopathy is the retinal disease associated with hyperglycemia in patients who suffer from type 1 or type 2 diabetes. It includes maculopathy, involving the central retina and characterized by ischemia and/or edema, and peripheral retinopathy that progresses to a proliferative stage with neovascularization. Approximately 10% of the global population is estimated to suffer from diabetes, and around one in 5 of these individuals have diabetic retinopathy. One of the major effects of hyperglycemia is oxidative stress, the pathological state in which elevated production of reactive oxygen species damages tissues, cells, and macromolecules. The retina is relatively prone to oxidative stress due to its high metabolic activity. This review provides a summary of the role of oxidative stress in diabetic retinopathy, including a description of the retinal cell players and the molecular mechanisms. It discusses pathological processes, including the formation and effects of advanced glycation end-products, the impact of metabolic memory, and involvements of non-coding RNA. The opportunities for the therapeutic blockade of oxidative stress in diabetic retinopathy are also considered.

Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide for Diabetic Macular Edema and Macular Edema Secondary to Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The comparative safety and efficacy of different doses of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVTA) for diabetic macular edema (DME) and macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of different doses of IVTA in this setting.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted on Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, and EMBASE from January 2005 to May 2022. Studies that reported on patients with DME or ME secondary to RVO that received treatment with different doses of IVTA were included. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Cochrane's Risk of Bias Tool 2 was used to assess the risk of bias, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were used to assess certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Five RCTs reporting on 1,041 eyes at baseline were included in this meta-analysis. In eyes with ME secondary to RVO, high-dose (4 mg) IVTA achieved a significantly better change in best-corrected visual acuity (WMD = -4.75 ETDRS letters, 95% CI = [-7.73, -1.78], p = 0.002) and reduction in retinal thickness (WMD = -93.02 μm, 95% CI = [-153.23, -32.82], p = 0.002) at months 4-6 compared to low-dose (1-2 mg) IVTA. However, high-dose IVTA had a higher risk of intraocular pressure-related adverse events (RR = 2.99, 95% CI = [1.05, 8.50], p = 0.04) and cataract surgery (RR = 5.67, 95% CI = [3.09, 10.41], p < 0.00001) than low-dose IVTA in eyes with ME secondary to RVO. These efficacy and safety differences in high-dose and low-dose IVTA were not observed in DME eyes.

CONCLUSIONS

The RCT evidence in this setting is limited. High-dose IVTA achieved greater improvements in visual acuity and reductions in retinal thickness than low-dose IVTA at months 4-6. However, high-dose IVTA had a less favorable safety profile than low-dose IVTA. The significance of these outcomes was based on patients with ME secondary to RVO, but not DME.

Suppressing Inflammation for the Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy and Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Dazdotuftide as a Potential New Multitarget Therapeutic Candidate

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) are major causes of blindness globally. The primary treatment option for DME and neovascular AMD (nAMD) is anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) compounds, but this treatment modality often yields insufficient results, and monthly injections can place a burden on the health system and patients. Although various inflammatory pathways and mediators have been recognized as key players in the development of DR and AMD, there are limited treatment options targeting these pathways. Molecular pathways that are interlinked, or triggers of multiple inflammatory pathways, could be promising targets for drug development. This review focuses on the role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of DME and AMD and presents current anti-inflammatory compounds, as well as a potential multitarget anti-inflammatory compound (dazdotuftide) that could be a candidate treatment option for the management of DME and AMD.

Efficacy and safety profile of intravitreal dexamethasone implant versus antivascular endothelial growth factor treatment in diabetic macular edema: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To better understand the efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex) versus antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). A systematic review and meta-analysis. The study included randomized control trials (RCTs) and non-randomized control trials (Non-RCTs) before December 2021 that compare the efficacy of Ozurdex-related therapyand anti-VEGF therapy. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. The quality of the included studies was assessed carefully. 30 studies were included. Regarding BCVA change, the overall result revealed no significant differences between Ozurdex and anti-VEGF therapies in patients with nonresistant DME, but Ozurdex group had significantly more VA improvement than anti-VEGF therapies in patients with resistant DME (MD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02-0.21). In terms of central retinal thickness (CRT) decrease, there was a significant difference between Ozurdex therapy and anti-VEGF therapy in patients with nonresistant DME (MD 48.10, 95% CI 19.06-77.13) and resistant DME (MD 65.37, 95% CI 3.62-127.13). Overall, Ozurdex therapy resulted in significantly greater VA improvement and CRT decrease than anti-VEGF therapy in resistant DME patients. Ozurdex therapy was not inferior to anti-VEGF therapy in patients with nonresistant DME.