Real world evidence of use of anti-VEGF therapy in Denmark

Biology and therapeutic targeting of vascular endothelial growth factor A

The formation of new blood vessels, called angiogenesis, is an essential pathophysiological process in which several families of regulators have been implicated. Among these, vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA; also known as VEGF) and its two tyrosine kinase receptors, VEGFR1 and VEGFR2, represent a key signalling pathway mediating physiological angiogenesis and are also major therapeutic targets. VEGFA is a member of the gene family that includes VEGFB, VEGFC, VEGFD and placental growth factor (PLGF). Three decades after its initial isolation and cloning, VEGFA is arguably the most extensively investigated signalling system in angiogenesis. Although many mediators of angiogenesis have been identified, including members of the FGF family, angiopoietins, TGFβ and sphingosine 1-phosphate, all current FDA-approved anti-angiogenic drugs target the VEGF pathway. Anti-VEGF agents are widely used in oncology and, in combination with chemotherapy or immunotherapy, are now the standard of care in multiple malignancies. Anti-VEGF drugs have also revolutionized the treatment of neovascular eye disorders such as age-related macular degeneration and ischaemic retinal disorders. In this Review, we emphasize the molecular, structural and cellular basis of VEGFA action as well as recent findings illustrating unexpected interactions with other pathways and provocative reports on the role of VEGFA in regenerative medicine. We also discuss clinical and translational aspects of VEGFA. Given the crucial role that VEGFA plays in regulating angiogenesis in health and disease, this molecule is largely the focus of this Review.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes for Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion: An 8-Year Experience at a Tertiary Eye Center

Purpose:

This work aims to investigate real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in eyes with branch retinal vein occlusion in the antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) era.

Methods:

A retrospective, nonrandomized, comparative study was conducted on eyes diagnosed with branch retinal vein occlusion at a single tertiary center between 2009 and 2017. Medical history, treatment patterns, and visual acuity outcomes were examined. Subanalysis was performed for eyes that met the eligibility criteria for the BRAVO (Ranibizumab for the Treatment of Macular Edema Following Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion) trial.

Results:

A total of 315 eyes were included, of which 244 were treatment naive. In all eyes, the most common first treatment was the following: intravitreal bevacizumab (38.4%), aflibercept (15.1%), ranibizumab (8.1%), sectoral scatter laser (6.2%), and triamcinolone (3.1%). At 1 year, treatment-naive eyes had received an average of 2.43 anti-VEGF injections. During follow-up, treatment-naive eyes gained an average of 0.21 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study lines. Forty eyes that met BRAVO trial criteria received an average of 5.05 anti-VEGF injections in the first year and gained an average of 1.83 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study lines.

Conclusions:

This real-world cohort received fewer anti-VEGF injections at year 1 and experienced less improvement in visual acuity during the course of treatment than clinical trial participants. Trial-eligible patients received more injections and had greater visual gains than those who would not have been eligible for the trial.

RANIBIZUMAB TREATMENT IN TREATMENT-NAIVE NEOVASCULAR AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION: Results From LUMINOUS, a Global Real-World Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and treatment patterns of ranibizumab 0.5 mg in treatment-naive patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration enrolled in LUMINOUS study.

METHODS

This 5-year, prospective, multicenter, observational study recruited 30,138 adult patients (treatment-naive or previously treated with ranibizumab or other ocular treatments) who were treated according to the local ranibizumab label.

RESULTS

Six thousand two hundred and forty-one treatment-naive neovascular age-related macular degeneration patients were recruited. Baseline (BL) demographics were, mean (SD) age 75.0 (10.2) years, 54.9% females, and 66.5% Caucasian. The mean (SD) visual acuity (VA; letters) gain at 1 year was 3.1 (16.51) (n = 3,379; BLVA, 51.9 letters [Snellen: 20/92]) with a mean (SD) of 5.0 (2.7) injections and 8.8 (3.3) monitoring visits. Presented by injection frequencies <3 (n = 537), 3 to 6 (n = 1,924), and >6 (n = 918), visual acuity gains were 1.6 (14.93), 3.3 (16.57), and 3.7 (17.21) letters, respectively. Stratified by BLVA <23 (n = 382), 23 to <39 (n = 559), 39 to <60 (n = 929), 60 to <74 (n = 994), and ≥74 (n = 515), visual acuity change was 12.6 (20.63), 6.7 (17.88), 3.6 (16.41), 0.3 (13.83), and -3.0 (11.82) letters, respectively. The incidence of ocular/nonocular adverse events was 8.2%/12.8% and serious adverse events were 0.9%/7.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of ranibizumab in treatment-naive neovascular age-related macular degeneration patients.

Intravitreal ranibizumab versus aflibercept versus bevacizumab for macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion: the LEAVO non-inferiority three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

Licensed ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 ml Lucentis®; Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland) and aflibercept (2 mg/0.05 ml Eylea®; Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany) and unlicensed bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 ml Avastin®; F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG, Basel, Switzerland) are used to treat macula oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion, but their relative clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and impact on the UK NHS and Personal Social Services have never been directly compared over the typical disease treatment period.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor agents for the management of macula oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion.

DESIGN

This was a three-arm, double-masked, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

SETTING

The trial was set in 44 UK NHS ophthalmology departments, between 2014 and 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 463 patients with visual impairment due to macula oedema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion were included in the trial.

INTERVENTIONS

The participants were treated with repeated intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (n = 155), aflibercept (n = 154) or bevacizumab (n = 154).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was an increase in the best corrected visual acuity letter score from baseline to 100 weeks in the trial eye. The null hypothesis that aflibercept and bevacizumab are each inferior to ranibizumab was tested with a non-inferiority margin of -5 visual acuity letters over 100 weeks. Secondary outcomes included additional visual acuity, and imaging outcomes, Visual Function Questionnaire-25, EuroQol-5 Dimensions with and without a vision bolt-on, and drug side effects. Cost-effectiveness was estimated using treatment costs and Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index to measure quality-adjusted life-years.

RESULTS

The adjusted mean changes at 100 weeks in the best corrected visual acuity letter scores were as follows - ranibizumab, 12.5 letters (standard deviation 21.1 letters); aflibercept, 15.1 letters (standard deviation 18.7 letters); and bevacizumab, 9.8 letters (standard deviation 21.4 letters). Aflibercept was non-inferior to ranibizumab in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference 2.23 letters, 95% confidence interval -2.17 to 6.63 letters; p = 0.0006), but not superior. The study was unable to demonstrate that bevacizumab was non-inferior to ranibizumab in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference -1.73 letters, 95% confidence interval -6.12 to 2.67 letters; p = 0.071). A post hoc analysis was unable to demonstrate that bevacizumab was non-inferior to aflibercept in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference was -3.96 letters, 95% confidence interval -8.34 to 0.42 letters; p = 0.32). All per-protocol population results were the same. Fewer injections were required with aflibercept (10.0) than with ranibizumab (11.8) (difference in means -1.8, 95% confidence interval -2.9 to -0.8). A post hoc analysis showed that more bevacizumab than aflibercept injections were required (difference in means 1.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 2.7). There were no new safety concerns. The model- and trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses estimated that bevacizumab was the most cost-effective treatment at a threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

LIMITATIONS

The comparison of aflibercept and bevacizumab was a post hoc analysis.

CONCLUSION

The study showed aflibercept to be non-inferior to ranibizumab. However, the possibility that bevacizumab is worse than ranibizumab and aflibercept by 5 visual acuity letters cannot be ruled out. Bevacizumab is an economically attractive treatment alternative and would lead to substantial cost savings to the NHS and other health-care systems. However, uncertainty about its relative effectiveness should be discussed comprehensively with patients, their representatives and funders before treatment is considered.

FUTURE WORK

To obtain extensive patient feedback and discuss with all stakeholders future bevacizumab NHS use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13623634.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Heparin-binding VEGFR1 variants as long-acting VEGF inhibitors for treatment of intraocular neovascular disorders

Neovascularization is a key feature of ischemic retinal diseases and the wet form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD), all leading causes of severe vision loss. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors have transformed the treatment of these disorders. Millions of patients have been treated with these drugs worldwide. However, in real-life clinical settings, many patients do not experience the same degree of benefit observed in clinical trials, in part because they receive fewer anti-VEGF injections. Therefore, there is an urgent need to discover and identify novel long-acting VEGF inhibitors. We hypothesized that binding to heparan-sulfate proteoglycans (HSPG) in the vitreous, and possibly other ocular structures, may be a strategy to promote intraocular retention, ultimately leading to a reduced burden of intravitreal injections. We designed a series of VEGF receptor 1 variants and identified some with strong heparin-binding characteristics and ability to bind to vitreous matrix. Our data indicate that some of our variants have longer duration and greater efficacy in animal models of intraocular neovascularization than current standard of care. Our study represents a systematic attempt to exploit the functional diversity associated with heparin affinity of a VEGF receptor.

Burden of diabetic macular oedema in patients receiving antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy in South Korea: a healthcare resource use and cost analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine healthcare resource utilisation (HRU) and direct medical costs for patients with diabetic macular oedema (DME) treated with antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) in Korea by comparing with those for (1) patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) without retinopathy and (2) patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) treated with anti-VEGF.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

The Korean National Health Insurance (NHI) database from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2016.

PARTICIPANTS

We identified 1398 patients older than 30 years of age who received anti-VEGF treatment for DME in 2015 after excluding patients who had a diagnosis of nAMD in 2015 and any cancer in the preceding year.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

One-year healthcare resource use and direct medical costs of patients with DME treated with anti-VEGF.

RESULTS

In total, 1398 patients with DME receiving anti-VEGF, 12 813 patients with DM without retinopathy and 12 222 patients with nAMD receiving anti-VEGF were identified. Hospital admissions and outpatient visits were highest in patients with DME, while the number of licensed anti-VEGF injections in those with DME was about half that of those with nAMD (2.1 vs 3.9 per patient per year). Mean 1-year medical costs were also higher in patients with DME (US$6723) than in those with DM without retinopathy (US$2687) and nAMD (US$4980). In a multivariable analysis with matched cohorts, DME was associated with 66% higher medical costs for comorbid diseases (adjusted OR (aOR), 1.66; 95% CI 1.45 to 1.90) and 50% lower anti-VEGF injections (aOR, 0.50; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.54) compared with nAMD.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall HRU and economic burden for DME treated with anti-VEGF were higher than for DM without retinopathy or for nAMD treated with anti-VEGF. Meanwhile, the lower number of licensed anti-VEGF injections compared with nAMD may reflect a potential lack of ophthalmological treatment for DME supported by the NHI in Korea.

Real-World Outcomes in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema Treated Long Term with Ranibizumab (VISION Study)

Aim

Evaluate long-term real-world treatment patterns and associated effectiveness and safety outcomes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) treated ≥36 months with 0.5mg ranibizumab.

Methods

Open-label observational effectiveness study in 9 Belgian clinics. Included were primary treated eyes of 55 DME patients between August 2014 and March 2015 and followed for 3.5±1.8 years. Eyes were 21.8% treatment (TX)-naïve, 9.1% non-naïve with exclusive prior anti-VEGF treatment (PRIOR-anti-VEGF), and 63.6% non-naïve with other prior treatments (PRIOR-other). Intravitreal injections with ranibizumab were administered per ophthalmologists’ best clinical judgment. Trend testing of changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) over time occurred using mixed regression analysis.

Results

The mean±SD number of treatments in the first year was 5.1±3.0 (TX-naïve), 4.5±2.7 (PRIOR-anti-VEGF) and 5.6±3.1 (PRIOR-other). At 12 months, BCVA increased by 8.9±16.4 letters from 59.7±9.3 at baseline in TX-naïve (p<0.0001), by 11.8±9.9 from 61.6±8.5 in PRIOR-anti-VEGF (p=0.03), and by 4.2±10.6 from 58.2±14.6 in PRIOR-other groups (p=0.0002). BCVA remained stable for the remainder of follow-up in all groups. CRT decreased over the first 2 months by monthly rates of −43.8µm in TX-naïve (p=0.04), −75.7µm in PRIOR-anti-VEGF (p=0.02), and −65.8µm in PRIOR-other eyes (p=0.0003), showing stability afterwards. No unknown adverse events were recorded; a painful eye following injection was registered with a possible relationship to the treatment.

Conclusion

This real-world study confirms the effectiveness of ranibizumab in preventing a decline in BCVA and demonstrated initial improvement and subsequent retention of BCVA in DME patients ≥36 months. Ranibizumab initially reduced and then maintained CRT. However, these data reveal that treatment intensity and BCVA and CRT outcomes are lower than those found in early efficacy trials. Under-treatment likely accounts for this efficacy-effectiveness gap. Yet, intravitreal ranibizumab is an effective and safe long-term treatment for DME under conditions of significant heterogeneity in patients and treatment patterns.

Use of Anti-VEGF Drugs in Retinal Vein Occlusions

Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is one of the most prevalent causes of visual loss in the Western World. Its pathogenesis is still not completely known. Chronic macular edema and ischemia compromise the functional and anatomical status of the retina. Antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections have demonstrated better results than other previous options, including observation or laser therapy. This narrative review aims to analyze the current aspects related to these drugs.

Cost-Minimization Analysis of Ranibizumab Versus Aflibercept for Treating Saudi Patients With Visual Impairment Owing to Age-Related Macular Degeneration or Diabetic Macular Edema

OBJECTIVE

The standard-of-care treatment for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME) includes inhibiting blood vessel proliferation and reducing macular edema or swelling using anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapies, such as ranibizumab and aflibercept. To conduct a cost-minimization analysis of ranibizumab and aflibercept for treating Saudi patients with visual impairment owing to AMD or DME.

METHODS

Cost minimization was analyzed assuming that ranibizumab and aflibercept have equivalent clinical effectiveness. The third-party payer's perspective was used in several clinical scenarios. The base-case scenario was DME cases followed monthly using a protocol-specific follow-up. In scenario 1, AMD cases followed a treat-and-extend protocol over 2 years. In scenario 2, AMD cases followed the PRN (pro re nata) regimen over 2 years. In scenario 3, DME cases followed the PRN regimen for 1 year only.

RESULTS

Aflibercept yielded cost savings of 25.75%, 31.54%, 51.30%, and 9.28% compared with ranibizumab for the base case, scenario 1, scenario 2, and scenario 3, respectively, which supports the premise that aflibercept is more cost saving than ranibizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

From the third-party payer perspective, aflibercept is a cost-containment option that provides substantial savings over ranibizumab for treating Saudi patients with AMD or DME.

Two Year Visual Acuity and Structural Outcomes in Patients with Diabetic Macular Oedema Treated with Intravitreal Aflibercept - A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

To assess visual and anatomical outcomes of intravitreal aflibercept for clinically significant diabetic macular oedema (DME).

Methods

For this retrospective single-center cohort study at a tertiary referral center, we performed a data warehouse query to identify 117 treatment-naive patients (139 eyes) undergoing intravitreal treatment with aflibercept for DME between January 2014 and May 2018. Changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) values (as measured with ETDRS letters), central retinal thickness (CRT) and total macular volume (TVOL) are reported over a two-year period at various time-points.

Results

The total number of injections per study eye was 5.5 ± 1.4 after one and 8.7 ± 2.2 injections after two years. Baseline visual acuity (VA) was 60.1 ± 14.5 letters. A gain of 4.8 and 9.2 letters from baseline was observed after one and two years, respectively (both p ≤ 0.01). In comparison to the mean CRT at baseline (419 ± 174 µm), a CRT decrease was observed after one and two years of treatment (298 ± 115 µm and 319 ± 119 µm, respectively; both p ≤ 0.01). Similarly, TVOL decreased from 10.12 ± 2.05 mm³ to 8.96 ± 0.96 mm³ and 9.01 ± 1.29 mm³ (both p ≤ 0.01).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that treating DME with intravitreal aflibercept yields positive functional and structural outcomes over a two-year period. However, we observed fewer injection numbers, along with inferior VA and structural outcomes than has been reported in randomized clinical trials. Our results show similar results as in patients treated with ranibizumab due to DME in real-life settings.

Comparison of two different treatment regimens' efficacy in neovascular age-related macular degeneration in Turkish population-based on real life data-Bosphorus RWE Study Group

AIM

To compare two different anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment regimens'-a priori pro re nata (PRN) and PRN regimen following the loading phase-anatomical and functional results in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) patients.

METHODS

Totally 544 nAMD patients followed and treated with aflibercept (n=135) and ranibizumab (n=409) at 9 different centers between 2013 and 2015 were enrolled into this retrospective multicenter study. Patients with initial best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) interval of 1.3-0.3 (logMAR) and a minimum follow-up of 12mo were included. Patients under two different regimens-a priori pro re nata (1+PRN) or 3 consecutive intravitreal injections followed by a PRN regimen (3+PRN)-were compared in BCVA at 3th, 6th and 12th months, and in central macular thickness (CMT) at 6th and 12th months. The total study group, intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) and intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) groups were evaluated separately.

RESULTS

The mean CMT decreased in the 1+PRN (n=101) regimen from 407 to 358 and 340 µm and in the 3+PRN (n=443) group from 398 to 318 and finally to 310 µm at months 6 and 12, respectively. Anatomically, the CMT reduction at 6th month (48.5 vs 76.4; P<0.05) was statistically significant in favor of 3+PRN group. BCVA changed in 1+PRN group from 0.77 to 0.78, 0.75 and 0.75; in 3+PRN group from 0.81 to 0.69, 0.72, and 0.76 at months 3, 6, and 12, respectively. Visual gain was statistically better in 3+PRN group at 3th month (-0.01 vs 0.12; P<0.001). In IVR group, CMT reduction was in greater in 3+PRN at 6th (44 vs 72) and 12th month (61 vs 84), but statistically insignificant. The 3+PRN group revealed statistically better visual results at 3th month (-0.02 vs 0.11, P<0.05). In IVA group, although statistically insignificant, CMT reduction (61 vs 89, 6th month; 85 vs 97, 12th month) and visual gain (0.02 vs 0.16; 0.02 vs 0.14; 0.05 vs 0.11) was found in favor of 3+PRN group at all visits.

CONCLUSION

The loading dose of anti-VEGF treatments in nAMD leads to significantly better anatomical and functional results, regardless of the agent, specially in early follow-up interval.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes for Central Retinal Vein Occlusion in the Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor Era

Purpose:

This article describes treatment patterns and visual outcomes for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) era.

Methods:

A retrospective cohort study of eyes diagnosed with CRVO between 2009 and 2016 was conducted. Treatment history and visual acuity (VA) measurements were abstracted from medical records and analyzed.

Results:

A total of 476 eyes of 476 patients (median age 67 years, median follow-up 25.4 months) were included. Optical coherence tomography was obtained in 93.9% and fluorescein angiography in 80% of cases on presentation. Mean VA at presentation and final visit was 20/60 and 20/94, respectively, for eyes with nonischemic CRVO, whereas that of ischemic cases remained worse than 20/800 at final follow-up. Intravitreal bevacizumab was the most common first treatment (42.2%). Intravitreal steroid was the first treatment in 3.6% and ultimately administered in 11.3% of eyes. In the first year, an average of 5.2 ± 3.6 and 2.2 ± 3.4 anti-VEGF injections were given in treatment-naive and nontreatment-naive eyes, respectively.

Conclusions:

In our real-world cohort, anti-VEGF injection burden and frequency are lower than in published clinical trials. Visual outcomes in both ischemic and nonischemic eyes with CRVO are poorer than expected and worse than those recorded in controlled trial settings.

Using Post-market Utilisation Analysis to Support Medicines Pricing Policy: An Australian Case Study of Aflibercept and Ranibizumab Use

OBJECTIVES

To describe how post-market utilisation analysis in Australia informs cost-effectiveness assessment and pricing decisions, using aflibercept and ranibizumab as case studies.

METHODS

Pharmaceutical claims were used to identify initiators of aflibercept and ranibizumab in the year after aflibercept-listing (December 2012), and ranibizumab initiators in the year before aflibercept listing. The dispensing rates for each cohort were calculated, and their demographic and clinical characteristics compared using Kruskal-Wallis tests.

RESULTS

Aflibercept and ranibizumab each accounted for half the age-related macular degeneration market following aflibercept listing. Aflibercept initiators had similar dispensing rates to ranibizumab initiators in the pre- and post-aflibercept era (~ three scripts during the first 90 days, and eight to nine scripts during the following 12 months). All cohorts were similar in terms of their age, sex, residential aged-care status and geographic remoteness, and no differences were observed in their overall co-morbidity scores and history of thromboembolic events.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to clinical trial protocols, post-market utilisation research for ranibizumab and aflibercept demonstrates equivalent use in practice in terms of dose frequency, and the demographic and clinical characteristics of initiators. This supports Australia's decision to pay the same price for each rather than giving a premium to aflibercept. Many other countries are likely overpaying for aflibercept if their utilization patterns are similar to Australia's, and could benefit from incorporating routine utilisation assessment.

Clinical preferences and trends of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatments for diabetic macular edema in Japan

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

To determine the current clinical preferences of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment protocols for diabetic macular edema (DME) in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a descriptive cross-sectional study. Answers to a questionnaire consisting of 16 questions were obtained from 176 of 278 (63.3%) surveyed ophthalmologists.

RESULTS

The results showed that 81.2% preferred intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF antibodies as the first-line therapy. The most important indicators for beginning anti-VEGF therapy were: the best-corrected visual acuity in 44.3% and the retinal thickness in 30.7%. In the loading phase, 53.4% preferred a single injection, and in the maintenance phase, 75.0% preferred the pro re nata regimen. Financial limitation (85.8%) was reported as the most important difficulty in the treatment. For combination therapy with anti-VEGF treatment, panretinal photocoagulation, focal photocoagulations and a sub-Tenon steroid injection were preferred. The contraindications for anti-VEGF therapy were: prior cerebral infarction (72.7%). Regarding the use of both approved anti-VEGF agents in Japan, ranibizumab and aflibercept, 39.8% doctors used them appropriately.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results present the current clinical preferences of anti-VEGF treatment for DME in Japan. The best-corrected visual acuity and the retinal thickness are important indicators to institute this therapy. The majority of the ophthalmologists use anti-VEGF treatment as first-line therapy and prefer the 1 + pro re nata regimen.

Efficacy and safety of ranibizumab monotherapy versus ranibizumab in combination with verteporfin photodynamic therapy in patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy: 12-month outcomes in the Japanese cohort of EVEREST II study

Purpose

To compare the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab 0.5 mg with or without verteporfin photodynamic therapy in Japanese patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy over 12 months.

Study design

EVEREST II was a 24-month, Phase IV, multicenter, randomized, double-masked study in Asian patients with symptomatic macular polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy.

Methods

Of the 322 enrolled patients, 84 patients, including 46 patients who received ranibizumab + verteporfin photodynamic therapy (combination therapy arm) and 38 patients who received ranibizumab/sham PDT (monotherapy arm), were Japanese who were evaluated in this subanalysis. Mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and complete polyp regression at Month 12, ranibizumab treatment exposure, and safety over 12 months were assessed.

Results

Baseline demographics were well balanced between the arms. At Month 12, mean change in BCVA letter score was +8.5 with combination therapy versus +6.4 with monotherapy. Complete polyp regression was higher with combination therapy than with monotherapy at Month 12 (70.5% vs 27.3%). Over 12 months, patients in the combination arm received a median of 4.0 ranibizumab injections vs 7.0 in the monotherapy arm. Serious adverse events were generally low in both arms, and retinal hemorrhage, an adverse event, was reported in one patient (2.2%).

Conclusion

The results from the Japanese cohort were in agreement with the EVEREST II study. Combination therapy was effective in improving BCVA and achieving a higher rate of complete polyp regression with a lower number of ranibizumab injections than monotherapy. No new safety signals were reported, and safety events were comparable between both arms over 12 months.

TREATMENT PATTERNS AND 2-YEAR VISION OUTCOMES WITH BEVACIZUMAB IN DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA: An Analysis From a Large U.S. Integrated Health Care System

PURPOSE

To assess health care utilization and vision outcomes over 2 years in patients receiving bevacizumab treatment in clinical practice for diabetic macular edema.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed diabetic macular edema who received an intravitreal bevacizumab injection within 12 months of initial diagnosis were identified from Kaiser Permanente's 350,000 patients with diabetes mellitus treated between 2008 and 2013. Snellen best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), number of intravitreal injections, and patient characteristics were abstracted from the electronic record. The main outcome measure was change in BCVA.

RESULTS

Three hundred and nine patients met the inclusion criteria and had 2 years of follow-up after their first bevacizumab injection. These patients had a mean of 3.1 injections (range, 1-17) during the 2-year follow-up. Mean BCVA improvement was 5.4 letters at 12 months and 5.3 letters at 24 months. Only 29.8% of patients demonstrated ≥3 lines of vision improvement from baseline, whereas 12.3% had ≥3 lines of vision loss from baseline at 24 months.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest U.S. clinical practice-based study of bevacizumab use in diabetic macular edema. Consistent with national studies, the frequency of injection was low. Average BCVA improvement was lower than in anti-vascular endothelial growth factor trials. Significant BCVA improvement was achieved in approximately 30% of patients with newly diagnosed diabetic macular edema.

The real life data of ranibizumab use among the diabetic macular edema patients in Turkey: Documenting the improvement with clinical optimization during three consecutive years

Purpose

To report the 12 month real life outcomes of ranibizumab treated diabetic macular edema (DME) patients.

Methods

Treatment naïve DME patients treated with ranibizumab were included. Patients were divided into three groups according to their hospital admittance years (2013, 2014, and 2015) and were compared in regards to the treatment outcomes.

Results

The mean visual acuity change from baseline to month 12 was not statistically significant in 2013 at month 12. The mean BCVA change from baseline to month 12 was statistically better at month 12 in 2014 and 2015. There was a statistically significant difference among the three groups in regards to both mean visit and injection numbers. The mean visit number in 2013 and 2014 were both lower than 2015. The mean injection number in 2013 was lower than both 2014 and 2015.

Conclusions

It is effortful to obey the strict follow-up criteria of prospective studies in DME patients on a PRN regimen. However, optimizing the clinical processes of patient management may lead to improved clinical outcomes in real life.

Injections frequency and health care costs in patients treated with aflibercept compared to ranibizumab: new real-life evidence from Switzerland

Background

Previous analyses of real-life data indicated that injection frequency and health care costs did not differ for anti-VEGF treatment with aflibercept and ranibizumab. The objective of this study was to investigate whether this finding persisted when analysing a longer time period after licensing.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of health insurance claims data of two large Swiss basic health insurance plans including 28% of the Swiss population. Patients qualified for inclusion if aflibercept or ranibizumab treatment had been initiated between June 1, 2013 and November 1, 2014. Within this set, patients with at least 12 months of continuous insurance enrolment in the previous year, 12-month follow-up, and without change of anti-VEGF drug were considered. We examined the distribution of demographic data and patient characteristics between those receiving ranibizumab and those receiving aflibercept. Numbers of injections and associated health care expenditures observed during the 12-month follow-up period after incident treatment were the two outcomes considered. In multivariate regression analyses, controlling for possible confounding factors, we compared differences in these two outcomes between patients treated with aflibercept as compared to ranibizumab.

Results

A total of 3′058 patients were analysed, 790 (26%) receiving aflibercept and 2`268 receiving ranibizumab (74%). The use of aflibercept (average number of injections 6.2) as compared to ranibizumab (average number of injections 5.7) in the follow-up period of 1 to 12 months, was associated with a 12% increase in the injection frequency (95% confidence interval (CI) 6–17%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Real-life data contradicts the assumption that aflibercept is used less frequently as compared to ranibizumab. This results in similar total health care expenditures for both anti-VEGF agents.