Patients' preferences in choosing therapy for retinal vein occlusions

Risk factors for repeated dexamethasone intravitreal implant therapy for macular edema due to treatment-naïve branch retinal vein occlusion

Background

This study evaluated the effects of dexamethasone intravitreal implant on treatment-naïve branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO)-induced macular edema (ME), and the risk factors for earlier repeated treatment.

Methods

Patients treated from 2013 to 2016 were enrolled. The patients’ demographics, medical history, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central retinal thickness (CRT) were recorded. Risk factors for repeated treatment were identified using a Cox proportional hazard model and logistic regression.

Results

29 patients (mean age: 58.64 ± 13.3 years) were included; 44.8% received only one injection, while 55.2% received two or more. The mean initial CRT was 457.8 ± 167.1 μm; the peak CRT and final CRT improved significantly to 248.9 ± 57.9 μm and 329.2 ± 115.1 μm, respectively. The peak BCVA improvement and final improvement were 29.5 ± 23.5 approximate ETDRS letters and 19.8 ± 24.4 letters, respectively, with 62.1% of patients improving by more than 15 letters. Older age, higher initial CRT, and diabetes were the risk factors for multiple injections.

Conclusion

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant results in significant peak CRT and BCVA improvements, while older age, higher initial CRT, and diabetes are risk factors for repeated injections. The optimal retreatment schedule for these patients should be further explored.

Phase I trial on robot assisted retinal vein cannulation with ocriplasmin infusion for central retinal vein occlusion

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted retinal vein cannulation with Ocriplasmin infusion for central retinal vein occlusion.

METHODS

Prospective phase I trial including four patients suffering from central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). Diagnosis was confirmed by preoperative fluo-angiography and followed by a standard three-port pars plana vitrectomy. Afterwards, a custom-built microneedle was inserted into a branch retinal vein with robotic assistance and infusion of Ocriplasmin started. Primary outcomes were the occurrence of intra-operative complications and success of cannulation. Secondary outcomes were change in visual acuity, central macular thickness (CMT) and venous filling times (VFT) during fluo-angiography two weeks after the intervention.

RESULTS

Cannulation with infusion of ocriplasmin was successful in all four eyes with a mean total infusion time of 355 ± 204 seconds (range 120-600 seconds). Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) remained counting fingers (CF) in case 3 and 4, increased in case 1 from CF to 0.9LogMAR and decreased in case 2 from 0.4 to 1.3 LogMAR. CMT and VFT both showed a trend towards significant decrease comparing preoperative measurements with two weeks postintervention (1061 ± 541 μm versus 477 ± 376 μm, p = 0.068) and 24 ll 4 seconds versus 15 ± 1 seconds, p = 0.068, respectively). In one eye a needle tip broke and could be removed with an endoforceps. There were no other intervention-related complications.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted retinal vein cannulation is feasible and safe. Local intravenous infusion with Ocriplasmin led to an improved retinal circulation.

Vision Preference Value Scale and Patient Preferences in Choosing Therapy for Symptomatic Vitreomacular Interface Abnormality

Importance

While symptomatic vitreomacular interface abnormalities (VIAs) are common, assessment of vision preference values and treatment preferences of these may guide treatment recommendations by physicians and influence third-party payers.

Objective

To determine preference values that individuals with VIA assign to their visual state and preferences of potential treatments.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cross-sectional one-time questionnaire study conducted between December 2015 and January 2017, 213 patients from tertiary care referral centers in Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States were studied. Patients with symptomatic VIA diagnosed within 1 year of data collection, visual acuity less than 20/20 OU, and symptoms ascribed to VIAs were included. Data were analyzed from January 2017 to November 2017.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end points were overall mean preference value that individuals with VIA assigned to their visual state and patients' preferences for potential treatments. Preference values were graded on a scale from 0 to 1, with 0 indicating death and 1 indicating perfect health with perfect vision.

Results

Of the 213 included patients, 139 (65.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 65.6 (7.7) years. Diagnoses included epiretinal membrane (n = 100 [46.9%]), macular hole (n = 99 [46.5%]), and vitreomacular traction (n = 14 [6.6%]). The mean (SD) vision preference value was 0.76 (0.15), without differences identified among the 3 VIA types. More participants were enthusiastic about vitrectomy (150 [71.1%]) compared with intravitreal injection (120 [56.9%]) (difference, 14.2%; 95% CI, 5.16-23.3; P = .002). Adjusted analyses showed enthusiasm for vitrectomy was associated with fellow eye visual acuity (odds ratio, 10.99; 95% CI, 2.01-59.97; P = .006) and better-seeing eye visual acuity (odds ratio, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.001-0.66; P = .03). Overall enthusiasm for treatment was associated with fellow eye visual acuity (odds ratio, 7.22; 95% CI, 1.29-40.40; P = .02). Overall, most participants (171 [81.0%]) were enthusiastic about surgery, injection, or both.

Conclusions and Relevance

Study participants reported similar preference values among 3 types of VIAs. The data suggest that most patients with these conditions would be enthusiastic about undergoing vitrectomy or an injection to treat it, likely because of the condition's effect on visual functioning, although there may be a slight preference for vitrectomy at this time.

Therapies for Macular Edema Associated with Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

PURPOSE

To evaluate the available evidence on the ocular safety and efficacy of current therapeutic alternatives for the management of macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

METHODS

Literature searches were last conducted on January 31, 2017, in PubMed with no date restrictions and limited to articles published in English, and in the Cochrane Database without language limitations. The searches yielded 321 citations, of which 109 were reviewed in full text and 27 were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment. The panel methodologist assigned ratings to the selected studies according to the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Level I evidence was identified in 10 articles that addressed anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pharmacotherapies for ME, including intravitreal bevacizumab (5), aflibercept (2), and ranibizumab (4). Level I evidence was identified in 6 studies that examined intravitreal corticosteroids, including triamcinolone (4) and the dexamethasone implant (2). Level I evidence also was available for the role of macular grid laser photocoagulation (7) and scatter peripheral laser surgery (1). The inclusion of level II and level III studies was limited given the preponderance of level I studies. The number of studies on combination therapy is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Current level I evidence suggests that intravitreal pharmacotherapy with anti-VEGF agents is effective and safe for ME secondary to BRVO. Prolonged delay in treatment is associated with less improvement in visual acuity (VA). Level I evidence also indicates that intravitreal corticosteroids are effective and safe for the management of ME associated with BRVO; however, corticosteroids are associated with increased potential ocular side effects (e.g., elevated intraocular pressure, cataracts). Laser photocoagulation remains a safe and effective therapy, but VA results lag behind the results for anti-VEGF therapies.

Treatment Patterns of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor and Laser Therapy Among Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema

BACKGROUND

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a form of diabetic retinopathy caused by continued leakage from retinal blood vessels. The use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections has gained in popularity in the treatment of DME due to satisfactory efficacy, while laser photocoagulation is still the first-line therapy. Examining anti-VEGF treatment patterns may improve understanding of real-world medication-taking behaviors.  

OBJECTIVES

To (a) compare demographic and clinical characteristics and treatment patterns of anti-VEGF (bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and pegaptanib) and laser therapies among DME patients and (b) determine predictors of switching and anti-VEGF therapy initiation. 

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted with Texas Medicaid medical and prescription claims (January 1, 2008-December 31, 2012) for patients who were aged 18-63 years, continuously enrolled 1 year pre- and post-index, diagnosed with DME and treated with anti-VEGF or laser therapies. Treatment patterns included treatment frequency and switching between anti-VEGF and laser therapies. Logistic regression and multinomial analysis were used to determine factors associated with switching and initiation of anti-VEGF therapy, while controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

DME patients (N = 2,201) were aged 54.7 (SD ± 7.9) years; 63.1% were female; 59.1% were Hispanic; and 10.3% were visually impaired. CCI mean score was 6.5 (SD ± 3.1), and patients were on 2.6 (SD ± 3.3) unique prescription medications. Anti-VEGF users had significantly (P  less than  0.0001) fewer prescriptions compared with laser users (1.9 [SD ± 3.1) vs. 2.8 [SD ± 3.3], respectively). Laser was the most commonly used (84.9%) therapy from 2009 to 2011; however, anti-VEGF use increased from 11.7% in 2009 to 21.8% in 2011 (P  less than  0.0001). Patients received 1.5 (SD ± 0.7) laser surgeries compared with 1.7 (SD ± 1.1) anti-VEGF injections per eye annually. Switching from laser to anti-VEGF injections was 9.7%, while switching from anti-VEGF injections to laser surgery was 42.2%. Patients who switched from anti-VEGF injections to laser surgery were more likely to be Hispanic (OR = 1.415, 95% CI = 1.037-1.930); male (OR = 1.341, 95% CI = 1.053-1.709); have fewer prescriptions (OR = 0.944, 95% CI = 0.905-0.985); and less likely to have no visual impairment (OR = 0.641, 95% CI = 0.449-0.915). Multinomial regression results showed anti-VEGF users were more likely to remain on the same therapy if they had more prescriptions (OR = 1.094, 95% CI = 1.029-1.172) or were female (OR = 1.441, 95% CI = 1.024-2.041). Anti-VEGF initiators had fewer prescriptions (OR = 0.917, 95% CI = 0.868-0.947) and initiated in 2011 vs. 2009 (OR = 2.363, 95% CI = 1.777-3.141).   

CONCLUSIONS

Although anti-VEGF use is increasing, laser use is still more prevalent. Over 40% of patients who initiated on anti-VEGF injections switched to laser surgery. Additional research should be conducted to determine factors associated with this high rate of switching.

Therapies for macular edema associated with central retinal vein occlusion: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

PURPOSE

To review the available evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of therapies for the treatment of macular edema (ME) associated with central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO).

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed database was last conducted in March 2014 with no date restrictions but limited to articles published in English. A literature search of the Cochrane Library was also conducted in March 2014 with no date restrictions and without a language limitation. The combined searches yielded 108 citations, of which 20 were deemed clinically relevant for the Ophthalmic Technology Assessment Committee Retina/Vitreous panel to review in full text. Three additional studies were also identified for panel review. The level of evidence of these selected studies was reviewed by the panel methodologist.

RESULTS

There were 7 citations representing 4 clinical trials that provided level I evidence supporting the use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pharmacotherapies for ME associated with CRVO, including intravitreal ranibizumab (2), aflibercept (3), and bevacizumab (2). There were 3 citations representing 2 studies with level I evidence for intravitreal corticosteroid injection with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (2 citations) or triamcinolone (1 citation), although cataract and glaucoma were observed in these studies. Level I evidence is available on the limited benefit of macular grid-pattern laser photocoagulation (1 citation). Eight other citations reviewed were rated as level II, and 4 citations were rated as level III. Long-term efficacy results (≥2 years of follow-up) are limited to intravitreal ranibizumab at this time, and few studies have evaluated combination therapy with anti-VEGF and corticosteroid versus monotherapy of either class of drug.

CONCLUSIONS

Level I evidence indicates that intravitreal anti-VEGF pharmacotherapy is safe and effective over 2 years for ME associated with CRVO and that delay in treatment is associated with worse visual outcomes. In addition, level I evidence demonstrates short-term efficacy of intravitreal corticosteroid but also an association with a higher frequency of adverse events.

Intravitreal bevacizumab alone or combined with macular laser photocoagulation for recurrent or persistent macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Background. To evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) injection with or without macular laser photocoagulation (MLP) for recurrent or persistent macular edema (ME) secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). Methods. Thirty-four eyes underwent IVB injection for ME secondary to BRVO as a primary treatment. Twenty of the 34 eyes experienced recurrent or persistent ME after the first IVB. Nine of the 20 eyes (Group 1) were retreated with IVB combined with MLP. The remaining 11 eyes (Group 2) were retreated with IVB alone. Results. In Group 1, the postoperative best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved compared with the preoperative value at all follow-up visits, although no statistically significant improvement was observed at 6 months. In contrast, BCVA significantly improved from 0.53 to 0.40 at 6 months (P < 0.05) in Group 2. Conclusion. Combined therapy tended to have a smaller effect on visual acuity compared with IVB monotherapy.

Comparison of injection of intravitreal drugs with standard care in macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion

Purpose

To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolon with or without rescue laser therapy (intravitreal triamcinolone injection [IVTA] group), bevacizumab with or without rescue laser treatment (intravitreal bevacizumab injection [IVB] group), or a combination of both with or without rescue laser therapy (IVTA + IVB group), with standard care for patients with macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

Methods

We reviewed the medical records of 151 patients treated with intravitreal injection with or without rescue laser for treatment of macular edema caused by BRVO, and who were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. During the observation period, rescue grid laser or repeated intravitreal injection with initial drug was performed if recurrence of macular edema was confirmed. Visual acuity, change in visual acuity, and intraocular pressure were compared in each phase.

Results

Totals of 16%, 5.6%, and 0% of participants in the three groups showed significant visual loss of more than three lines of the Snellen chart at last follow-up. The IVTA group was the least effective treatment modality, with statistical significance. The development rates of elevated intraocular pressure were similar among the groups.

Conclusions

Although IVTA yielded effects similar to those of standard grid photocoagulation based on the Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Retinal Vein Occlusion study, IVB or IVTA + IVB with or without rescue laser treatment resulted in improvement in visual acuity at 24 months after the start of treatment and was associated with few serious adverse side effects. Thus, these approaches could be useful for treating macular edema arising secondary to BRVO.

Treatment patterns for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: analysis of 284 380 medicare beneficiaries

PURPOSE

To examine trends in the treatment of newly diagnosed neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Among 284 380 Medicare beneficiaries with a new diagnosis between 2006 and 2008, we used the cumulative incidence function to estimate procedure rates and the mean frequency function to estimate the cumulative mean number of intravitreous injections. We used Cox log-binomial regression to estimate predictors of the use of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antagonists within 1 year after diagnosis. Discontinuation of anti-VEGF therapy was defined by absence of treatment for 12 months. Discontinuation rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients receiving anti-VEGF therapy increased from 60.3% to 72.7%, photodynamic therapy decreased from 12.8% to 5.3%, and thermal laser treatment decreased from 5.5% to 3.2%. Black patients (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.79) and patients of other/unknown race (0.83; 0.81-0.84) were less likely than white patients to receive anti-VEGF therapy. Patients with dementia were less likely to receive anti-VEGF therapy (0.88; 0.88-0.89). Among patients who received anti-VEGF therapy, the mean number of injections within 1 year of the first injection was 4.3 per treated eye. Anti-VEGF therapy was discontinued in 53.6% of eyes within 1 year, and in 61.7% of eyes within 18 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of new neovascular AMD changed significantly between 2006 and 2008, most notably in the increasing use of anti-VEGF therapies. However, few patients treated with anti-VEGF medications received monthly injections, and discontinuation rates were high.

Critical appraisal of the clinical utility of the dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex) for the treatment of macular edema related to branch retinal vein occlusion or central retinal vein occlusion

Macular edema is a common cause of visual loss in patients with retinal vein occlusions. Ozurdex^®, a dexamethasone intravitreal implant, has been shown in randomized controlled trials to reduce macular edema and improve visual acuity in patients with either branch retinal vein occlusions or central retinal vein occlusions. It was approved in the United States in 2009. Since then, new therapeutic agents and clinical data have emerged. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate the clinical utility of Ozurdex^® in the current treatment strategy of macular edema related to retinal vein occlusion.

The burden of disease of retinal vein occlusion: review of the literature

Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is the second most common cause of vision loss due to retinal vascular disease. A literature review was undertaken to understand the epidemiology, clinical consequence, current practice patterns, and cost of RVO. Pertinent articles were identified by computerized searches of the English language literature in MEDLINE supplemented with electronic and manual searches of society/association proceedings and bibliographies of electronically identified sources. Population-based studies report a prevalence rate of 0.5-2.0% for branch RVO and 0.1-0.2% for central RVO. The 15-year incidence rate is estimated to be 1.8% for branch RVO and 0.2% for central RVO. Patients with RVO report lower vision-related quality of life than those without ocular disease. Available treatment options are limited. Until recently there was no treatment for central RVO. Laser photocoagulation is only recommended for branch RVO in patients who have not experienced severe vision loss. Emerging evidence on the effectiveness of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy and dexamethasone intravitreal implant is promising. Information on the treatment patterns and cost of RVO is extremely limited with one retrospective analysis of secondary insurance payment data identified and limited to the United States population only. A better understanding of the economic and societal impact of RVO will help decision makers evaluate emerging medical interventions for this sight-threatening disease.

A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone with standard care to treat vision loss associated with macular Edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: the Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Retinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) study report 6

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of 1-mg and 4-mg doses of preservative-free intravitreal triamcinolone with standard care (grid photocoagulation in eyes without dense macular hemorrhage and deferral of photocoagulation until hemorrhage clears in eyes with dense macular hemorrhage) for eyes with vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).

METHODS

Multicenter, randomized clinical trial of 411 participants. Main Outcome Measure Gain in visual acuity letter score of 15 or more from baseline to month 12.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine percent, 26%, and 27% of participants achieved the primary outcome in the standard care, 1-mg, and 4-mg groups, respectively. None of the pairwise comparisons between the 3 groups was statistically significant at month 12. The rates of elevated intraocular pressure and cataract were similar for the standard care and 1-mg groups, but higher in the 4-mg group.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference identified in visual acuity at 12 months for the standard care group compared with the triamcinolone groups; however, rates of adverse events (particularly elevated intraocular pressure and cataract) were highest in the 4-mg group. Application to Clinical Practice Grid photocoagulation as applied in the SCORE Study remains the standard care for patients with vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to BRVO who have characteristics similar to participants in the SCORE-BRVO trial. Grid photocoagulation should remain the benchmark against which other treatments are compared in clinical trials for eyes with vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to BRVO. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00105027.

Surgical treatment of central retinal vein occlusion

The treatment of central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) is still a subject of debate. Medical therapy efforts, as well as retinal laser photocoagulation, have mostly dealt with management of the sequelae of CRVO, and have shown limited success in improving visual acuity. The unsatisfactory results of such therapeutic efforts led to the development of new treatment strategies focused on the surgical treatment of the occluded retinal vein. The purpose of this review is to summarize the outcomes of commonly reported surgical treatment strategies and to review different opinions on the various surgical approaches to the treatment of CRVO.