Treatment patterns and persistence rates with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment for diabetic macular oedema in the UK: A real-world study

An eye on equity: faricimab-driven health equity improvements in diabetic macular oedema using a distributional cost-effectiveness analysis from a UK societal perspective

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a leading cause of blindness in developed countries, with significant disease burden associated with socio-economic deprivation. Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA) allows evaluation of health equity impacts of interventions, estimation of how health outcomes and costs are distributed in the population, and assessments of potential trade-offs between health maximisation and equity. We conducted an aggregate DCEA to determine the equity impact of faricimab.

METHODS

Data on health outcomes and costs were derived from a cost-effectiveness model of faricimab compared with ranibizumab, aflibercept and off-label bevacizumab using a societal perspective in the base case and a healthcare payer perspective in scenario analysis. Health gains and health opportunity costs were distributed across socio-economic subgroups. Health and equity impacts, measured using the Atkinson inequality index, were assessed visually on an equity-efficiency impact plane and combined into a measure of societal welfare.

RESULTS

At an opportunity cost threshold of £20,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY), faricimab displayed an increase in net health benefits against all comparators and was found to improve equity. The equity impact increased the greater the concerns for reducing health inequalities over maximising population health. Using a healthcare payer perspective, faricimab was equity improving in most scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-acting therapies with fewer injections, such as faricimab, may reduce costs, improve health outcomes and increase health equity. Extended economic evaluation frameworks capturing additional value elements, such as DCEA, enable a more comprehensive valuation of interventions, which is of relevance to decision-makers, healthcare professionals and patients.

Impact of COVID-19-related lifestyle changes on diabetic macular edema

AIM

To assess diabetic macular edema (DME) progression during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, when severe societal restrictions raised the concern of possible deterioration of health in patients with systemic conditions, particularly those requiring frequent office visits.

METHODS

This is a multicenter retrospective chart review of 370 patients (724 eyes) with an established diagnosis of DME seen on 3 separate visits between January 2019 and July 2021. Period 1 was January 2019 to February 2020 (considered pre-COVID-19), period 2 was March 2020 to December 2020 (considered the height of the pandemic; highest level of pandemic-related clinical and societal regulations) and period 3 was January 2021 to July 2021 (re-adjustment to the new "pandemic norms"). Main outcome measures included visual acuity, body mass index (BMI), blood pressure (BP), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), macular thickness, patient adherence to scheduled ophthalmology visits, and DME treatment(s) received at each visit. To facilitate measurement of macular thickness, each macula was divided into 9 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS)-defined macular sectors as measured by OCT imaging.

RESULTS

There was no change of BMI, systolic BP, and diastolic BP between any of the time periods. HbA1c showed a very small increase from period 1 (7.6%) to period 2 (7.8%, P=0.015) and decreased back to 7.6% at period 3 (P=0.12). Macular thickness decreased for 100% of macular regions. The central macular thickness decreased across all 3 periods from 329.5 to 316.6 µm (P=0.0045). After analysis of multiple variables including HbA1c, BMI, adherence to scheduled appointments, different clinic centers, and treatment interventions, there was no easily identifiable subgroup of patients that experienced the increase in DME.

CONCLUSION

DME doesn't worsen during the COVID-19 pandemic, instead sustaining a very small but statistically significant improvement. While identifying a mechanism behind our findings is beyond the scope of this study, potential explanations may include a delay in retinal changes beyond our study period, an unexpected increase in treatment frequency despite pandemic restrictions, and an unanticipated pandemic-related improvement in some lifestyle factors that may have had a positive impact on DME.

Remote Monitoring of Visual Function in Patients with Maculopathy: The Aphelion Study

INTRODUCTION

Remote monitoring of vision, using tools such as the shape discrimination hyperacuity (SDH) test, can detect disease activity in patients with maculopathy. We determined the in-clinic accuracy and repeatability of three myVisionTrack expanded version (mVTx) tests for self-testing of visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity.

METHODS

Aphelion, a single-arm, prospective study conducted at two sites in the USA, included adults with any maculopathy and a baseline VA of 0.7 log of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (Snellen 20/100) or better. Participants completed the mVTx tests (tumbling E, Landolt C, contrast sensitivity, and SDH) and standard clinical tests (near and distance Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study [ETDRS] charts and the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity chart). Test-retest repeatability and agreement between the mVTx tests and the corresponding clinical test were assessed by Bland-Altman analyses. Participants also completed a usability survey.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 122 participants was 67 years. The most common diagnosis was age-related macular degeneration (42% of patients). The tumbling E test had a test-retest 95% limit of agreement (LoA) of ± 0.18 logMAR; the Landolt C test, ± 0.23 logMAR; the SDH test, ± 0.24 logMAR; and the contrast sensitivity test, ± 0.32 log contrast threshold (logCT). Compared with the distance ETDRS chart, the LoA was ± 0.35 logMAR for the tumbling E test (mean difference, - 0.07 logMAR) and ± 0.39 logMAR for the Landolt C test (mean difference, 0.03 logMAR). For the contrast sensitivity test, the LoA compared with the Pelli-Robson chart was ± 0.30 logCT (mean difference, - 0.25 logCT). Most participants (85%) reported that they learned the tests quickly. The tumbling E test scored the highest on ease of use.

CONCLUSION

The mVTx tests of VA are accurate and repeatable, supporting their potential use alongside the SDH test to detect disease progression remotely between clinic visits.

Real-World Outcomes of Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Diabetic Macular Edema in Türkiye: MARMASIA Study Group Report No. 1

Objectives

This study aimed to report the demographic and clinical characteristics of diabetic macular edema (DME) patients treated with intravitreal injection (IVI) of anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) and provide an overview of outcomes during routine clinical practice in Türkiye.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective, real-world study included 1,372 eyes (854 patients) treated with a pro re nata protocol by 21 ophthalmologists from 8 tertiary clinics on the Asian side of the Marmara region of Türkiye (MARMASIA Study Group). Five cohort groups were established by collecting the patients' baseline and 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36-month follow-up data, where each subsequent cohort may include the previous. Changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, approximate ETDRS letters) and central macular thickness (CMT, μm), number of visits and IVI, and rates of anti-VEGF switch and intravitreal dexamethasone implant (IDI) combination were evaluated.

Results

The 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36-month cohorts included 1372 (854), 1352 (838), 1185 (722), 972 (581), and 623 (361) eyes (patients), respectively. The mean baseline BCVA and CMT were 51.4±21.4 letters and 482.6±180.3 μm. The mean changes from baseline in BCVA were +7.6, +9.1, +8.0, +8.6, and +8.4 letters, and in CMT were -115.4, -140.0, -147.9, -167.3, and -215.4 μm at the 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36-month visits (p<0.001 for all). The median cumulative number of anti-VEGF IVI was 3.0, 3.0, 5.0, 7.0, and 9.0, respectively. The overall anti-VEGF switch and IDI combination rates were 18.5% (253/1372 eyes) and 35.0% (480/1372 eyes), respectively.

Conclusion

This largest real-life study of DME from Türkiye demonstrated BCVA gains inferior to randomized controlled trials, mainly due to the lower number of IVI. However, with the lower baseline BCVA and higher IDI combination rates in our cohorts, these gains were relatively superior to other real-life study counterparts.

Two different initial treatment regimens of Conbercept in diabetic macular edema: 12-month results from a multicenter randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment regimen for diabetic macular edema (DME) and predictors for its treatment`s outcome need emerging evidence but currently poorly studied.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, open label randomized controlled study among adult patients with DME was conducted. Eyes were randomized to three or six doses initial Conbercept treatments. Additional injections were suggested pro re nata (PRN) over 12 months. Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) was adopted to quantify the macular vessel density. Visual acuity gain and anatomical improvement and their associated factors were evaluated by multivariable linear regression.

RESULTS

41 patients with 59 eyes participated in current study. Patients in both 3 + PRN (n = 32 eyes) or 6 + PRN (n = 27 eyes) treatments experienced similar best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gain and anatomical improvement, including the central macular thickness, foveal avascular aone (FAZ) and the retinal vessel density. Over 12 months, eyes in the 6 + PRN group received better changes of the deep capillary plexus (2.53 ± 5.45%). In multivariate linear regression, the age significantly affected visual outcome in 3 + PRN group (β = -0.014, P = 0.028), while the initial CMT (β = -0.001, P = 0.022) and FAZ area (β = -0.946, P = 0.007) associated with visual outcome in 6 + PRN group. Furthermore, the duration of diabetes exhibited significant results on CMT among 3 + PRN group (β= -7.516, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Both 3 + and 6 + initial treatment regimens of Conbercept loading dose achieved parallel anatomical and functional visual improvement, while 6 + group had a trend of better treatment outcome. Older age, higher initial CMT and longer duration of diabetes might influence the clinical outcomes over 12 months from baseline.

Formal registration of visual impairment in people with diabetic retinopathy significantly underestimates the scale of the problem: a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary care eye hospital service in the UK

AIMS

To analyse the prevalence of visual impairment (VI), compare it to certification of visual impairment (CVI) and analyse VI associations in patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study, which included 8007 patients with DR referred from the English diabetic eye screening programme to a tertiary referral eye hospital. Main outcome measure was VI, defined as vision in the best eye of <6/24. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression for VI as primary outcome of interest, controlling for age, sex, type of diabetes, baseline DR grade, ethnicity and index of multiple deprivation (IMD).

RESULTS

Mean age was 64.5 (SD 13.6) years; 61% of patients were men; and 31% of South Asian ethnicity. There were 68 patients with CVI during the study period, and 84% (272/325) of patients with VI did not have CVI after a mean follow-up of 1.87 (SD ±0.86) years. Older age showed a positive association with VI (OR per decade rise 1.88, 95% CI 1.70 to 2.08; p=1.8×10-34). Men had a lower risk of VI (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.79, p=6.0×10-5), and less deprivation had a graded inverse association with VI (OR per IMD category increase 0.83, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.93, p value for linear trend 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The majority of people with vision impairment are not registered at the point of care, which could translate to underestimation of diabetes-related VI and all-cause VI at a national level if replicated at other centres. Further work is needed to explore rates of VI and uptake of registration.

From randomised controlled trials to real-world data: Clinical evidence to guide management of diabetic macular oedema

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are generally considered the gold-standard for providing scientific evidence for treatments' effectiveness and safety but their findings may not always be generalisable to the broader population treated in routine clinical practice. RCTs include highly selected patient populations that fit specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Although they may have a lower level of certainty than RCTs on the evidence hierarchy, real-world data (RWD), such as observational studies, registries and databases, provide real-world evidence (RWE) that can complement RCTs. For example, RWE may help satisfy requirements for a new indication of an already approved drug and help us better understand long-term treatment effectiveness, safety and patterns of use in clinical practice. Many countries have set up registries, observational studies and databases containing information on patients with retinal diseases, such as diabetic macular oedema (DMO). These DMO RWD have produced significant clinical evidence in the past decade that has changed the management of DMO. RWD and medico-administrative databases are a useful resource to identify low frequency safety signals. They often have long-term follow-up with a large number of patients and minimal exclusion criteria. We will discuss improvements in healthcare information exchange technologies, such as blockchain technology and FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources), which will connect and extend databases already available. These registries can be linked with existing or emerging retinal imaging modalities using artificial intelligence to aid diagnosis, treatment decisions and provide prognostic information. The results of RCTs and RWE are combined to provide evidence-based guidelines.

Real-World Persistence and Treatment Interval in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema Treated with Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors in the USA

INTRODUCTION

There is little understanding of long-term treatment persistence in patients receiving anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections for diabetic macular edema (DME), particularly relating to treatment intervals. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between treatment interval and discontinuation rate after 24 months of unilateral anti-VEGF treatment in patients with DME under routine clinical care in the USA.

METHODS

This was a non-interventional, retrospective cohort study to review the health insurance claims of adults with DME linked with the IBM MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases, who were continuously enrolled in a health plan for at least 6 months prior to their first anti-VEGF treatment and for a duration of at least 24 months between July 2011 and June 2017. Patients were grouped on the basis of the injection interval they achieved at 24 months of treatment. Discontinuation rate beyond 24 months and its association with treatment intervals at 24 months was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The overall discontinuation rate among the 1702 eligible patients from 24 to 60 months after treatment initiation was 30%. At 60 months, patients were more likely to remain on treatment in shorter (75.3% [4-week interval group]) versus longer treatment interval groups (62.1% [> 12-week interval group], difference = 13.2%, [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06, 2.06], p = 0.01). Patients on a > 12-week interval were twice as likely to discontinue treatment compared with those on an 8-week interval (hazard ratio = 2.01 [95% CI 1.43, 2.82], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with DME on longer anti-VEGF treatment intervals at 24 months consistently had higher discontinuation rates in the following years than those on shorter treatment intervals.

Functional Outcomes of Brolucizumab-Induced Intraocular Inflammation Involving the Posterior Segment-A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Early poor outcomes of intraocular inflammation (IOI) after intravitreal brolucizumab (IVB) have negatively affected the use of brolucizumab in clinical routine. We wished to identify factors related to the treatment details of IOI involving the posterior segment resulting from IVB for neovascular AMD (nAMD), if these were reported in detail. Articles were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials, and CENTRAL using the following search terms: <Brolucizumab> AND <AMD> AND <intraocular inflammation>. The risk of bias was rated using the JBI Critical Appraisal Tool. We included 31 reports (41 patients and 46 eyes). Patients were 75.9 ± 8.5 years, and 58.5% were female. IOI occurred 41.7 ± 37.5 (median 37.0) days after treatment initiation with 2.0 ± 1.3 (1-6) IVB injections. A mean change in visual acuity of -14.6 ± 21.0 (median -6.5) letters was reported. The mean time from first IOI signs to the initiation of any anti-inflammatory treatment was 3.3 ± 6.2 days, with 63% of the patients receiving systemic corticosteroids as standard treatment. Finally, a period effect was observed, with a change in visual acuity of -25.3 ± 27.1 and -2.6 ± 7.3 letters in the chronologically first and last third, respectively, of treated eyes (effect size: r = 0.71; p = 0.006). Functional outcomes markedly improved with increasing experience in managing IOI.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular oedema: a network meta-analysis

Background

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) can reduce oedema, improve vision, and prevent further visual loss. These drugs have replaced laser photocoagulation as the standard of care for people with DMO. In the previous update of this review, we found moderate-quality evidence that, at 12 months, aflibercept was slightly more effective than ranibizumab and bevacizumab for improving vision in people with DMO, although the difference may have been clinically insignificant (less than 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), or five Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters, or one ETDRS line).

Objectives

The objective of this updated review was to compare the effectiveness and safety of the different anti-VEGF drugs in RCTs at longer followup (24 months).

Search methods

We searched various electronic databases on 8 July 2022.

Selection criteria

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any anti-angiogenic drug with an anti-VEGF mechanism of action versus another anti-VEGF drug, another treatment, sham, or no treatment in people with DMO.

Data collection and analysis

We used standard Cochrane methods for pairwise meta-analysis and we augmented this evidence using network meta-analysis (NMA) methods. We used the Stata 'network' meta-analysis package for all analyses. We used the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) web application to grade the certainty of the evidence.

Main results

We included 23 studies (13 with industry funding) that enrolled 3513 people with DMO (median central retinal thickness (CRT) 460 microns, interquartile range (IQR) 424 to 482) and moderate vision loss (median best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) 0.48 logMAR, IQR 0.42 to 0.55. One study that investigated ranibizumab versus sham and one study that mainly enrolled people with subclinical DMO and normal BCVA were not suitable for inclusion in the efficacy NMA. Consistent with the previous update of this review, we used ranibizumab as the reference drug for efficacy, and control (including laser, observation, and sham) as the reference for systemic safety. Eight trials provided data on the primary outcome (change in BCVA at 24 months, in logMAR: lower is better). We found no evidence of a difference between the following interventions and ranibizumab alone: aflibercept (mean difference (MD) -0.05 logMAR, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.12 to 0.02; moderate certainty); bevacizumab (MD -0.01 logMAR, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.10; low certainty), brolucizumab (MD 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.07; low certainty), ranibizumab plus deferred laser (MD 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.10; low certainty), and ranibizumab plus prompt laser (MD 0.03 logMAR, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.09; very low certainty). We also analysed BCVA change at 12 months, finding moderate-certainty evidence of increased efficacy with brolucizumab (MD -0.07 logMAR, 95%CI -0.10 to -0.03 logMAR), faricimab (MD -0.08 logMAR, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.05), and aflibercept (MD -0.07 logMAR, 95 % CI -0.10 to -0.04) compared to ranibizumab alone, but the difference could be clinically insignificant. Compared to ranibizumab alone, NMA of six trials showed no evidence of a difference with aflibercept (moderate certainty), bevacizumab (low certainty), or ranibizumab with prompt (very low certainty) or deferred laser (low certainty) regarding improvement by three or more ETDRS lines at 24 months. There was moderate-certainty evidence of greater CRT reduction at 24 months with brolucizumab (MD -23 microns, 95% CI -65 to -1 9) and aflibercept (MD -26 microns, 95% CI -53 to 0.9) compared to ranibizumab. There was moderate-certainty evidence of lesser CRT reduction with bevacizumab (MD 28 microns, 95% CI 0 to 56), ranibizumab plus deferred laser (MD 63 microns, 95% CI 18 to 109), and ranibizumab plus prompt laser (MD 72 microns, 95% CI 25 to 119) compared with ranibizumab alone. Regarding all-cause mortality at the longest available follow-up (20 trials), we found no evidence of increased risk of death for any drug compared to control, although effects were in the direction of an increase, and clinically relevant increases could not be ruled out. The certainty of this evidence was low for bevacizumab (risk ratio (RR) 2.10, 95% CI 0.75 to 5.88), brolucizumab (RR 2.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 12.58), faricimab (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.45 to 8.00), ranibizumab (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.34), and very low for conbercept (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.81) and aflibercept (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.77). Estimates for Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration arterial thromboembolic events at 24 months did not suggest an increase with any drug compared to control, but the NMA was overall incoherent and the evidence was of low or very low certainty. Ocular adverse events were rare and poorly reported and could not be assessed in NMAs.

Authors' conclusions

There is limited evidence of the comparative efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF drugs beyond one year of follow-up. We found no clinically important differences in visual outcomes at 24 months in people with DMO, although there were differences in CRT change. We found no evidence that any drug increases all-cause mortality compared to control, but estimates were very imprecise. Evidence from RCTs may not apply to real-world practice, where people in need of antiangiogenic treatment are often under-treated, and the individuals exposed to these drugs may be less healthy than trial participants.

Non-adherence and non-persistence to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections play a key role in treating a range of macular diseases. The effectiveness of these therapies is dependent on patients' adherence (the extent to which a patient takes their medicines as per agreed recommendations from the healthcare provider) and persistence (continuation of the treatment for the prescribed duration) to their prescribed treatment regimens. The aim of this systematic review was to demonstrate the need for further investigation into the prevalence of, and factors contributing to, patient-led non-adherence and non-persistence, thus facilitating improved clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted in Google Scholar, Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library. Studies in English conducted before February 2023 that reported the level of, and/or barriers to, non-adherence or non-persistence to intravitreal anti-VEGF ocular disease therapy were included. Duplicate papers, literature reviews, expert opinion articles, case studies, and case series were excluded following screening by two independent authors.

RESULTS

Data from a total of 409,215 patients across 52 studies were analysed. Treatment regimens included pro re nata, monthly and treat-and-extend protocols; study durations ranged from 4 months to 8 years. Of the 52 studies, 22 included a breakdown of reasons for patient non-adherence/non-persistence. Patient-led non-adherence varied between 17.5 and 35.0% depending on the definition used. Overall pooled prevalence of patient-led treatment non-persistence was 30.0% (P = 0.000). Reasons for non-adherence/non-persistence included dissatisfaction with treatment results (29.9%), financial burden (19%), older age/comorbidities (15.5%), difficulty booking appointments (8.5%), travel distance/social isolation (7.9%), lack of time (5.8%), satisfaction with the perceived improvement in their condition (4.4%), fear of injection (4.0%), loss of motivation (4.0%), apathy towards eyesight (2.5%), dissatisfaction with facilities 2.3%, and discomfort/pain (0.3%). Three studies found non-adherence rates between 51.6 and 68.8% during the COVID-19 pandemic, in part due to fear of exposure to COVID-19 and difficulties travelling during lockdown.

DISCUSSION

Results suggest high levels of patient-led non-adherence/non-persistence to anti-VEGF therapy, mostly due to dissatisfaction with treatment results, a combination of comorbidities, loss of motivation and the burden of travel. This study provides key information on prevalence and factors contributing to non-adherence/non-persistence in anti-VEGF treatment for macular diseases, aiding identification of at-risk individuals to improve real-world visual outcomes. Improvements in the literature can be achieved by establishing uniform definitions and standard timescales for what constitutes non-adherence/non-persistence.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020216205.

Predictive factors for treatment outcomes with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections in diabetic macular edema in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections are the standard of care for diabetic macular edema (DME), a common complication of diabetes. This study aimed to identify factors influencing DME intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment outcomes in real-world practice.

METHODS

This was a multi-center retrospective observational study using medical chart review of participants receiving anti-VEGF injections for DME (N = 248). Demographic and clinical variables were assessed for association with best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) outcomes using regression models.

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement in BCVA (p < 0.001) and CMT (p < 0.001) after 12 months of treatment, although 21% of participants had decreased BCVA, and 41% had a < 10% CMT reduction at 12 months. Higher baseline BCVA (p = 0.022, OR=-0.024, 95% CI=-0.046,-0.004) and longer duration of diabetic retinopathy (p = 0.048, OR=-0.064, 95% CI=-0.129,-0.001) were negative predictors for BCVA response, whereas Aflibercept treatment (p = 0.017, OR = 1.107, 95% CI = 0.220,2.051) compared with other drugs and a positive "early functional response" (p < 0.001, OR=-1.393, 95% CI=-1.946,-0.857) were positive predictors. A higher baseline CMT (p < 0.001, OR = 0.019, 95% CI = 0.012,0.0261) and an "early anatomical response", (p < 0.001, OR=-1.677, 95% CI=-2.456, -0.943) were predictors for greater reduction in CMT. Overall, the variables could predict only 23% of BCVA and 52% of CMT response.

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows a significant proportion of DME patients do not respond to anti-VEGF therapy and identifies several clinical predictors for treatment outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was approved through the Human Research Ethics Committee, University of Tasmania (approval number H0012902), and the Southern Adelaide Clinical Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number 86 - 067).

Brolucizumab in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Diabetic Macular Edema: Ophthalmology and Diabetology Treatment Aspects

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies have become the standard of care in the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME), resulting in a remarkable decrease in disease-related vision loss. However, the need for regular injections places a significant burden on patients, caregivers, and the healthcare system and improvements in vision may not be maintained long term. As a result of its drying potency and duration of action, brolucizumab, an intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy approved for the treatment of nAMD and DME, could decrease injection frequency for patients and provide an efficacious treatment; however, balancing its benefits and risks can be challenging. There have been reports of intraocular inflammation (IOI) in patients treated with brolucizumab, which, if left untreated, may result in severe vision loss. Recent evidence, however, indicates that early recognition of IOI and prompt and aggressive systemic corticosteroid treatment in response to posterior segment involvement can lead to favorable outcomes in these relatively rare but severe cases. A series of consensus meetings were conducted in 2022 between Swiss medical retina experts and diabetologists, discussing the current data for brolucizumab and exploring various challenges to its use, including the associated risk of IOI. The outcome is a collation of practical insights and guidance for ophthalmologists on the use of brolucizumab in patients with nAMD and DME, including patient selection and assessment, treatment regimen and monitoring, and the recognition and management of adverse events.