Comprehensive assessment of the impact of intravitreal faricimab on retinal diseases: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Faricimab stands as the inaugural and sole bispecific antibody approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for intravitreal injection. Nonetheless, the efficacy and safety of intravitreal faricimab remained uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate faricimab.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (CRD42023398320). Five databases (Pubmed, Embase, Web of science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials gov) were searched. We calculated pooled standard mean difference or odds ratio with 95 % confident interval under a random-effect model or fixed-effect model. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was employed to ascertain the reliability of the analyses. Trial sequential analysis was performed to gauge the statistical reliability of the data in the cumulative meta-analysis.

RESULTS

8 studies (3975 participants) were included. The use of faricimab was associated with central subfield thickness (CST) change, but no difference was found in other primary efficacy outcomes. Apart from that, a correlation was observed between the use of faricimab and the risk of vitreous floaters. Based on TSA, strong evidence indicates that compared to the control group, faricimab aided in reducing CST but increasing the risk of vitreous floaters.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a correlation existed between the use of faricimab and a reduction in CST, indicating a superior therapeutic effect. Moreover, participants treated with faricimab demonstrated a higher risk of vitreous floaters. More randomized controlled trials are essential to further explore the efficacy and safety of faricimab.

Subthreshold Compared with Threshold Macular Photocoagulation for Diabetic Macular Edema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

TOPIC

To compare the efficacy and safety of subthreshold macular laser to conventional focal laser photocoagulation for the treatment of vision loss secondary to diabetic macular edema (DME).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Macular laser remains an important and cost effective treatment option for vision loss secondary to DME. Although anti-VEGF therapy is often first-line, macular laser is of utility in low-resource or remote settings, for patients at risk of loss to follow-up, and for DME not meeting country-specific reimbursement criteria for anti-VEGF therapy. Subthreshold laser is a modality that does not produce clinical or histologic evidence of thermal damage, thereby potentially limiting the common complications of conventional laser.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to September 28, 2022. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects modeling. Data were collected at 12 and 24 months for best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness, diabetic retinopathy severity scale, rate of adverse events, rate of enrolled patients not completing treatment, rate of patients receiving retreatment, and quality-of-life measures. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using Cochrane's Risk-of-Bias version 2 and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) frameworks, respectively. Subgroup analysis was performed between subthreshold laser modalities and evaluated with Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses tool.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs comprising 514 eyes receiving conventional laser and 574 eyes receiving subthreshold laser were included. Subthreshold laser likely results in no difference to BCVA (moderate GRADE certainty) compared with conventional laser. Conventional laser demonstrated a small, statistically significant improvement in central retinal thickness (low GRADE certainty); however, the magnitude of this improvement is unlikely to be clinically important. There may not be a difference in the rate of adverse events (low GRADE certainty) at 12 months when comparing subthreshold laser to conventional laser for DME.

CONCLUSION

Randomized controlled trial literature to date suggests subthreshold laser to be as effective as conventional laser in the treatment of DME. Increased follow-up duration is needed to observe any long-term safety benefit from reduced retinal damage.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

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

Comparison of intravitreal ranibizumab and aflibercept for the treatment of diabetic macular edema: a real-world study

PURPOSE

To compare the visual and anatomic outcomes of intravitreal ranibizumab versus aflibercept in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in a real-world study.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective comparative study of treatment-naïve patients who received intravitreal ranibizumab or aflibercept administration for DME for at least 12 months on an as needed regimen following three-monthly loading doses. The primary outcomes of the study were the mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and central macular volume (CMV). Factors to potentially affect these parameters were also analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 100 eyes (66 patients) were included in the study. Fifty two eyes received ranibizumab and 48 eyes in aflibercept injections. At the end of follow-up, the improvement in mean BCVA was similar in both groups (p = 0.38). While the decrease in mean CMT at the 4th-month visit was significantly higher in the aflibercept-treated group than in the ranibizumab-treated group (p = 0.02), there was no difference between the two groups at the end of the 1-year follow-up (p = 0.25). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of change in mean CMV during the follow-up (p = 0.26, p = 0.27 at 4 and 12 months, respectively). The mean number of injections were also similar between groups (4.5 ± 1 vs. 4.6 ± 1.1 respectively, p = 0.63).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, ranibizumab and aflibercept were both found to be effective in the first-line treatment of DME. Patients with DME who received fewer injections in the real-world could achieve visual and anatomical results comparable to randomized controlled trials participants.

Faricimab for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema and Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Nowadays; intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs are considered the first-line therapeutic strategy for treating macular exudative diseases; including wet age-related macular degeneration (w-AMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME). Despite the important clinical achievements obtained by anti-VEGF drugs in the management of w-AMD and DME; some limits still remain; including high treatment burden; the presence of unsatisfactory results in a certain percentage of patients and long-term visual acuity decline due to complications such as macular atrophy and fibrosis. Targeting the angiopoietin/Tie (Ang/Tie) pathway beyond the VEGF pathway may be a possible therapeutic strategy; which may has the potential to solve some of the previous mentioned challenges. Faricimab is a new; bispecific antibody targeting both VEGF-A and the Ang-Tie/pathway. It was approved by FDA and; more recently; by EMA for treating w-AMD and DME. Results from phase III trials TENAYA and LUCERNE (w-AMD) and RHINE and YOSEMITE (DME) have shown the potential of faricimab to maintain clinical efficacy with more prolonged treatment regimens compared to aflibercept (12 or 16 weeks) with a a good safety profile.

Treat and extend regimen for diabetic macular oedema-a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Various treatment regimens are currently practiced in the treatment of CI-DMO (centre-involving diabetic macular oedema). In recent years, there has been a growing body of evidence supporting a treat and extend (T&E) regimen for DMO which offers the promise of comparable visual and anatomical outcomes while reducing injection burden. This meta-analysis was hence performed to evaluate the aforementioned outcomes in the treatment of DMO. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Current Contents, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases was performed. We employed the terms 'treat AND extend AND (diabetic AND macular AND edema OR oedema)' to ensure a comprehensive search. The search workflow adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis of the mean number of injections in 1 year for T&E-aflibercept (AFL), T&E-ranibizumab (RBZ) and collectively was 9.1 (95% CI: 7.63-10.63), 10.0 (95% CI: 9.55-10.47) and 9.6 (95% CI: 8.62-10.49), respectively. Improvements in vision at 1 year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 6.26 (95% CI: 3.24-9.29), 7.14 (95% CI: 4.76-9.52) and 7.08 (95% CI: 5.32-8.84) letters, respectively. The improvements in central subfield thickness at 1 year for T&E-AFL, T&E-RBZ and collectively were 131.94 (95% CI: 100.29-163.60), 108.64 (95% CI: 82.82-134.46) and 121.32 (95% CI: 102.89-139.75) microns, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis of T&E for DMO did not show a clear advantage in reducing the number of injections compared to landmark clinical trials with pro-re-nata (PRN) treatment regimens in the first year of treatment with limited gains in visual and anatomical outcomes. However, the T&E approach offers the potential for fewer patient visits, thereby reducing treatment burden. Longer term studies on T&E with a standardised protocol would be required to assess the longevity of the vision gain in the first year despite a likely reduced treatment burden compared to the PRN trials.

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in treatment-naïve diabetic macular oedema: findings from the prospective, multicentre, AUSSIEDEX study

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX; Ozurdex) monotherapy in the patient subgroup of the AUSSIEDEX study with treatment-naïve diabetic macular oedema (DME).

METHODS

The open-label, prospective, phase 4, real-world study included pseudophakic eyes and phakic eyes scheduled for cataract surgery that were treatment-naïve or non-responsive to antivascular endothelial growth factors. No eyes were excluded based on baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) or central subfield retinal thickness (CRT). After the initial DEX injection at the baseline visit, reinjection was permitted at ≥16-week intervals. Week-16 and week-52 visits were mandatory. Primary endpoints were changes in mean BCVA and CRT from baseline to 52 weeks.

RESULTS

Of 200 eyes enrolled in the AUSSIEDEX study, 57 were treatment-naïve. Baseline mean BCVA was 58.8 letters and baseline mean CRT was 418.6 µm; changes in mean BCVA and CRT from baseline to 52 weeks in this subgroup were 3.4 letters (p=0.042) and -89.6 µm (p<0.001), respectively, with a mean 2.5 injections. The change in mean CRT from baseline was -55.8 µm at week 16 (p<0.001). The most common adverse event was increased intraocular pressure (IOP), with 20.0% of eyes requiring IOP-lowering medication. One patient was discontinued due to increased IOP. No eyes required filtration surgery. No serious, treatment-related ocular adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

In this largest prospective, real-world study of DEX monotherapy for DME to date, DEX significantly improved CRT and BCVA at 52 weeks in treatment-naïve eyes, without new safety concerns, supporting DEX use in treatment-naïve DME.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02731911.

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

INTRODUCTION

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs) are considered standard of care therapy for diabetic macular oedema (DME). This study examined treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with DME treated with anti-VEGF therapy.

METHODS

Using anonymized electronic medical record data collected from three UK sites, this retrospective cohort study assessed rates of anti-VEGF intravitreal injections in adults with treatment-naïve DME who received their first treatment between 1 September 2010 and 31 July 2018. The proportion of patients with at least one interval of at least 12 weeks between injections; the distribution of injection intervals; the discontinuation rates; and the number of anti-VEGF injection-, injection-free- and total visits were assessed during the first and second years of treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, 1606 patient eyes with DME were included, with no minimum follow-up. During the first and second year of treatment, 63.2% and 73.1% of eyes had at least one anti-VEGF injection interval of at least 12 weeks, respectively. In the first and second years of treatment, the mean (standard deviation) numbers of injections were 7.7 (1.9) and 5.6 (2.2), with 14.2 (5.7) and 13.4 (6.4) total clinic visits, and 6.6 (5.0) and 7.8 (5.8) injection-free visits, respectively. In total, 27.8% of patient eyes discontinued treatment during the first 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The high number of clinic visits and high discontinuation rates demonstrate a significant unmet need for a treatment to enable sustainable extended injection intervals, while maintaining visual acuity. This could improve patient adherence and health-related quality of life for patients with DME.

Monoclonal antibodies in diabetic retinopathy

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic retinopathy (DR), as one of the main complications of diabetes, is among the leading causes of blindness and visual impairment worldwide.

AREAS COVERED

Current clinical therapies include photocoagulation, vitrectomy, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies. Bevacizumab and ranibizumab are two monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) inhibiting angiogenesis. Intravitreal ranibizumab and bevacizumab can decrease the rate of blindness and retinal thickness, and improve visual acuity whether as monotherapy or combined with other treatments. They can increase the efficacy of other treatments and decrease their adverse events. Although administered intravitreally, they also might enter the circulation and cause systemic effects. This study is aimed to review our current knowledge about mAbs, bevacizumab and ranibizumab, in DR including superiorities, challenges, and limitations. Meanwhile, we tried to shed light on new ideas to overcome these limitations. Our latest search was done in April 2021 mainly through PubMed and Google Scholar. Relevant clinical studies were imported.

EXPERT OPINION

Future direction includes detection of more therapeutic targets considering other components of DR pathophysiology and shared pathogenesis of DR and neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease, the treat-and-extend regimen, and new ways of drug delivery and other routes of ocular drug administration.

Treat-and-Extend vs. Pro Re Nata Regimen of Ranibizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema—A Two-Year Matched Comparative Study

Purpose

To compare 2-year treatment outcomes of ranibizumab using treat-and-extend (T&E) or pro re nata (PRN) regimens for diabetic macular edema (DME) in clinical settings.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 34 patients (34 eyes) with DME treated with ranibizumab using the T&E regimen, and 34 patients (34 eyes) treated with ranibizumab using the PRN regimen and matched to cases in the treat-and-extend group by baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT). BCVA and CFT changes, number of injections and recurrence of macular edema over 2 years were compared between the groups.

Results

The average BCVA gain in the T&E and PRN groups was 16.2 and 7.6 ETDRS letters at 2 years (p = 0.011), respectively. The mean CFT reduction was 145.5 ± 127.3 and 97.3 ± 152.5 μm in the T&E and PRN groups at 2 years (p = 0.035), respectively. The T&E group had a higher proportion of patients with BCVA gain ≥ 15 letters at months 18 (p = 0.015) and 24 (p = 0.029) than the PRN group. During the 2-year treatment periods, the T&E group received more injections than the PRN group (11.0 ± 3.2 vs. 6.2 ± 2.0; p < 0.001), while the PRN group had more recurrence of macular edema than the T&E group (71 vs. 41%; p = 0.015).

Conclusions

After 2-year ranibizumab treatment for DME, better visual and anatomical improvement and less recurrence of macular edema were achieved in the T&E group, with more injections administered.

Efficacy and safety of aflibercept therapy for diabetic macular edema: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose:

To assess the real-world efficacy and safety of aflibercept for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

Methods:

A systematic search was conducted across multiple databases. Articles were included if participants had DME and received aflibercept treatment for a minimum of 52 ± 4 weeks. Primary outcomes included changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT). A risk of bias assessment of studies was completed, pooled estimates were obtained, and a meta-regression was performed. Information on adverse events was collected.

Results:

The search yielded 2112 articles, of which 30 were included. Aflibercept was more effective than laser photocoagulation functionally (12-month BCVA-weighted mean difference [WMD] = 10.77 letters, P < 0.001; 24 months = 8.12 letters, P < 0.001) and anatomically (12-month CMT WMD = –114.12 μm, P < 0.001; 24 months = –90.4 μm, P = 0.004). Compared to bevacizumab, aflibercept was noninferior at improving BCVA at 12 months (WMD = 1.71 letters, P = 0.34) and 24 months (WMD = 1.58 letters, P = 0.083). One study found that aflibercept was more effective than bevacizumab anatomically at 1 and 2 years (P < 0.001 at 12 and 24 months). Compared to ranibizumab, aflibercept rendered a greater improvement in BCVA at 1 year (WMD = 1.76 letters, P = 0.001), but not 2 years (WMD = 1.66 letters, P = 0.072). CMT was not significantly different between both therapies at 12 months (WMD = −14.30 μm, P = 0.282) and 24 months (P = 0.08). One study reported greater functional improvement with aflibercept compared with dexamethasone (P = 0.004), but inferiority in reducing CMT (P < 0.001). Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that dosing schedule was found to impact outcomes at 12 and 24 months, while study design and sample size did not impact outcomes at 12 months. There were minimal safety concerns using aflibercept therapy.

Conclusions:

Aflibercept is a safe and effective therapy option for DME in the clinical setting, performing superiorly to laser photocoagulation. Evidence regarding comparisons with bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and dexamethasone is mixed and limited.

Factors affecting compliance to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in Indian patients with retinal vein occlusion, age-related macular degeneration, and diabetic macular edema

Purpose:

To evaluate the rate of compliance and the reasons for loss to follow-up in Indian patients with diabetic macular edema (DME), age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and retinal vein occlusion (RVO) being treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy.

Methods:

This was a retrospective single-center study. Patients with DME, AMD, or RVO were eligible if they initiated anti-VEGF therapy between January 2013 and December 2017. Patients' data were obtained from hospital electronic records, including the number of injections received, visits, details of follow-up, missed appointments, and reasons for loss to follow-up (>365 days).

Results:

A total of 648 patients were eligible for the study, of which 334 (51.54%) patients were lost to follow-up. Overall, 343 (64.96%) were males and the overall mean (SD) age was 66.40 (7.44) years. A total of 376 (58.0%) patients had a history of diabetes and 364 (56.2%) patients had a history of hypertension. Further, 127 (38.0), 112 (33.5), and 95 (28.4) had DME, AMD, and RVO, respectively and were lost to follow-up. The most commonly reported reason for loss to follow-up was “non-affordability” (n = 120; 41.1%) followed by “no improvement in vision” (n = 83; 28.4%). “No improvement in vision” (42.2%) and “non-affordability” (37.5%) were higher among patients with DME. No association was found in gender- and treatment-wise distribution of reasons for loss to follow-up.

Conclusion:

The results showed that around half of the patients with DME, AMD, and RVO were lost to follow-up to intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy, and the most common factors were “non-affordability” and “no improvement in vision.”

Hyperreflective foci in predicting the treatment outcomes of diabetic macular oedema after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy

This retrospective study evaluated the association of hyperreflective foci (HRF) with treatment response in diabetic macular oedema (DME) after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy. The medical records, including of ophthalmologic examinations and optical coherence tomography (OCT) images, of 106 patients with DME treated with either intravitreal ranibizumab or aflibercept were reviewed. The correlations between best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) changes and HRF along with other OCT biomarkers were analysed. The mean logMAR BCVA improved from 0.696 to 0.461 after an average of 6.2 injections in 1 year under real-world conditions. Greater visual-acuity gain was noted in patients with a greater number of HRF in the outer retina at baseline (p = 0.037), along with other factors such as poor baseline vision (p < 0.001), absence of epiretinal membrane (p = 0.048), and presence of subretinal fluid at baseline (p = 0.001). The number of HRF after treatment was correlated with the presence of hard exudate (p < 0.001) and baseline haemoglobin A1C (p = 0.001). Patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy had greater HRF reduction after treatment (p = 0.018). The number of HRF in the outer retina, in addition to other baseline OCT biomarkers, could be used to predict the treatment response in DME after anti-VEGF treatment.

Treat-and-extend therapy with aflibercept for diabetic macular edema: a prospective clinical trial

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of a treat-and-extend (T&E) regimen using aflibercept (Eylea) for diabetic macular edema (DME).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, open-label, multicenter, single-arm, nonblinded clinical study.

METHODS

Forty eyes of 40 patients with DME received a T&E regimen of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) with the longest treatment interval set to 16 weeks and adjunct focal/grid laser for 1 year. An intent-to-treat analysis was performed using the same last-observation-carried-forward method. A per-protocol analysis was also performed for patients who completed a 1-year T&E regimen. The primary endpoints were mean changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield macular thickness (CST) from baseline. Secondary endpoints included IAI-interval extension and resultant IAI numbers and the association between an early response to IAI and final BCVA gain at 1 year.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients (77.5%) completed the 1-year aflibercept T&E regimen. In these per-protocol participants, the mean CST improvement/reduction was 187.3 ± 145.0 µm (P < .001), but the mean BCVA gain was limited to 4.3 ± 12.2 letters (P = .782). Subanalysis revealed that eyes that gained ≥ 4 letters (median at week 12) after the initial 3 consecutive IAIs (induction phase) achieved greater vision improvement (13.8 ± 9.5 letters) than did the residual eyes (- 4.3 ± 9.2 letters) at 1 year (P < .001). Treatment intervals were extended to 12 and 16 weeks in 16.1% (5/31) and 45.2% (14/31) of the patients, respectively. The mean IAI number was 7.0 ± 1.1.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that although the BCVA improvement might be somewhat less than that of frequent treatment, a T&E aflibercept regimen with the longest treatment interval set to 16 weeks is a realizable rational strategy for DME treatment over 1 year.

Managing Diabetic Macular Edema in Clinical Practice: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Current Strategies and Treatment Options

Purpose

This meta-analysis aims to summarize 12-month best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) outcomes in response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy and dexamethasone implant for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) and to identify factors affecting treatment response using evidence generated from meta-regression.

Methods

A systematic review of electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-life/observational studies that reported 12-month changes in BCVA in patients with DME on anti-VEGF or dexamethasone implant treatment in monotherapy. Study factors that were analyzed are baseline patient characteristics, study type, drug employed, number of injections and 12-month change in BCVA. Data were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis with BCVA change as the main outcome. Meta-regression was conducted to assess the impact of multiple covariates.

Results

One-hundred-five heterogeneous study populations (45,032 eyes) were identified and included in the analysis. The use of anti-VEGFs and dexamethasone implant induced an overall increase of +8.13 ETDRS letters in BCVA at 12 months of follow-up. Meta-regression provided evidence that mean BCVA change using anti-VEGFs was not statistically higher for RCTs (p=0.35) compared to observational studies. Dexamethasone implant showed a trend for better results in observational studies over RCTs. Populations following a fixed aflibercept regimen performed better than those following a reactive treatment regimen. Mean BCVA gain was higher in younger populations (p<0.001), with lower baseline BCVA (p<0.0001) and longer diabetes duration (p<0.0001), receiving a higher number of injections (p<0.0001).

Conclusion

Intravitreal therapy with anti-VEGFs or dexamethasone implant produces a significant improvement in BCVA at 12 months in patients with DME. Meta-regression identified the modifiable covariates that can be targeted in order to maximize functional results.

Predictors for 2-Year Functional and Morphological Outcomes of a Treat-and-Extend Regimen with Ranibizumab in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to investigate longer term functional and morphological outcomes and their predictors in diabetic macular edema (DME) following a treat-and-extend regimen (TER) without loading dose under ranibizumab.

METHODS

Patient data were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively over a period of 24 months after initiation of TER. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), treatment frequency, and quantitative and qualitative spectral-domain optical coherence tomography parameters were assessed.

RESULTS

118 eyes of 87 patients were included. A mean of 9.74 ± 2.13 injections in the first and 7.63 ± 2.29 in the second year were applied. There were significant gains of BCVA and reductions in central retinal thickness from baseline to 12 and 24 months (all p < 0.001). Percentage of eyes with an intact inner segment/outer segment (IS/OS) junction increased from 15.3% at baseline to 42.1% at 24 months (p < 0.001). An intact IS/OS junction at baseline increased the probability of having a dry retina after 12 months by 79.3% (p = 0.017) and after 24 months by 88.1% (p = 0.040). Less IS/OS disruption at baseline predicted longer maximum recurrence-free treatment intervals at 2 years (r = -0.345, p < 0.001) and better BCVA at 1 year (r = -0.347, p < 0.001). Baseline bigger intraretinal cysts were associated with more IS/OS disruption at 24 months (r = 0.305, p = 0.007). Younger age and lower BCVA at baseline were predictive for a higher BCVA gain at 24 months (p = 0.046, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Ranibizumab applied in a TER without loading dose in DME significantly improves visual acuity and retinal anatomical structure throughout 2 years. The evaluated predictors might help guide routine clinical treatment in DME.

Development of a Patient-Oriented Organizational Management System for Intravitreal Injection Therapy in a Standardized "Treat-and-Extend" Regime at a University Eye Clinic

BACKGROUND

The treatment of macular edema with intravitreal injections has revolutionized the treatment of associated diseases in ophthalmology. However, with a few exceptions, this is a chronic treatment where patients require many injections and usually need to stay in treatment for years. Patient adherence and control of patient flow are critical to treatment success. In this manuscript, we describe the development of a patient-oriented organization management for intravitreal injections in a university hospital.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 2015, the intravitreal treatment in our clinic was switched to the treat-and-extend regime. At the same time, the optimization of the previous organizational processes in perioperative management was evaluated. For the period 2015 to 2018, we analyzed and gradually optimized the procedures of our intravitreal injection therapy in a survey with a specialized service provider.

RESULTS

Through the analysis of the original processes, the patient appointment was optimized, work processes were summarized, spatially reorganized and there was only a slight increase in the number of staff involved compared with the significant increase in the number of injections. Through these measures, the total in-hospital-time of the patients could be drastically reduced and at the same time the number of patients on one operation day could be multiplied.

CONCLUSION

In the context of chronic treatment with intravitreal injections, the care of an increased number of patients is a logistical challenge. By optimizing processes, existing resources can be better used to meet the increased demands. An optimized system offers the patient greater adherence and a better visual outcome largely independent of the medication used.

Comparison of 2-Year Outcomes between Intravitreal Ranibizumab and Intravitreal Aflibercept for Diabetic Macular Edema with "Treat-and-Extend" Regimen-Its Usefulness and Problems

BACKGROUND

To compare the effectiveness of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) and intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) performed with the treat-and-extend (TAE) regimen on eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 125 eyes of 125 treatment-naïve DME patients who received anti-VEGF injections at three consecutive monthly intervals as the loading phase. The changes in the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT), diabetic retinopathy severity scale (DRSS), and total injection numbers were compared between the two anti-VEGF agents.

RESULTS

Among 125 eyes, 26 eyes completed the treatment with the TAE regimen for 24 months (20.8%). Thirteen eyes of 13 patients (mean age, 70.9 ± 6.0 years) received intravitreal injections of 0.5 mg ranibizumab, and 13 eyes of 13 patients (65.9 ± 8.6 years) received 2 mg aflibercept. No significant differences were detected in the baseline demographics. At 24 months, BCVA was significantly improved in both groups; from 0.31 ± 0.19 to 0.10 ± 0.12 logMAR units for IVR and 0.41 ± 0.19 to 0.16 ± 0.28 logMAR units for IVA (p = 1.29 × 10^-9). CRT was significantly reduced in both groups; 440.9 ± 69.3 to 307.5 ± 66.4 μm for IVR and 473.9 ± 71.5 to 317.8 ± 71.2 μm for IVA (p = 3.55 × 10^-9). No significant differences were detected in the improvements of BCVA, CRT in both groups, and the total injection numbers for 24 months (11.0 ± 1.2 for the IVA group and 12.0 ± 1.0 the IVR group). DRSS was significantly improved in both groups (p = 0.0004 for IVR and p = 0.009 for IVA).

CONCLUSION

No significant differences were detected in the improvements of BCVA or CRT and injection numbers between the IVR and IVA groups treated with the TAE regimen. These results indicate that the results of the treatment with both agents with the TAE regimen were equally effective, but only 20.8% of patients completed 24 months of continuous treatment with the TAE regimen. Synopsis: There are no significant differences regarding effectiveness between the IVR and IVA groups treated with the TAE regimen for DME eyes.

[Ranibizumab and aflibercept for diabetic macular edema-retrospective study with real-life data after 12 months]

BACKGROUND

Currently only few data are available on a direct comparison of the treatment reality with ranibizumab and aflibercept in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). This study assessed best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) outcomes and central retinal thickness (CRT) under treatment with ranibizumab and aflibercept.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with DME involving the fovea in treatment-naïve eyes and a follow-up period of least 12 months were retrospectively identified. Patients underwent treatment with ranibizumab 0.5 mg or aflibercept 2.0 mg. The findings were obtained using clinical examination, fluorescein angiography and spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT, measuring CRT).

RESULTS

A total of 41 treatment-naïve eyes were identified in 29 patients with DME involving the fovea. The mean 12-month improvement was +9.5 letters in 19 eyes treated with ranibizumab and BCVA improving from 0.57 log MAR (95% confidence interval, CI 0.45-0.70 log MAR) to 0.38 log MAR (95% CI 0.25-0.50 log MAR; p < 0.001) and +8.5 letters in the aflibercept group with 22 eyes and BCVA improving from 0.38 log MAR (95% CI 0.25-0.51 log MAR) to 0.21 log MAR (95% CI 0.08-0.34 log MAR; p < 0.001). The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.599). When the initial visual acuity was 0.4 or less, the mean BCVA improved in 14 eyes treated with ranibizumab from 0.62 log MAR (95% CI 0.47-0.79 log MAR) to 0.38 log MAR (95% CI 0.21-0.55 log MAR), an improvement of 12.0 letters (p < 0.001), in 11 eyes treated with aflibercept from 0.63 log MAR (95% CI 0.42-0.84 log MAR) to 0.29 log MAR (95% CI 0.08-0.50 log MAR), an improvement of 17.0 letters (p < 0.001). The difference between the two groups was significant (p < 0.001). The mean number of intravitreal injections was 6.4 (95% CI 5.1-7.7) in the ranibizumab group, 7.5 (95% CI 6.2-8.8) in the aflibercept group (p = 0.199). The mean CRT decreased significantly (p < 0.001) in patients treated with both ranibizumab and aflibercept without any evidence of a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.514).

DISCUSSION

In the patients studied ranibizumab and aflibercept showed a good safety and efficacy in the treatment of DME regarding BCVA and CRT under real-life conditions after 12 months. In cases of lower initial visual acuity (0.4 or 20/50 or less) aflibercept was more effective at improving vision.

Expert-level Automated Biomarker Identification in Optical Coherence Tomography Scans

In ophthalmology, retinal biological markers, or biomarkers, play a critical role in the management of chronic eye conditions and in the development of new therapeutics. While many imaging technologies used today can visualize these, Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) is often the tool of choice due to its ability to image retinal structures in three dimensions at micrometer resolution. But with widespread use in clinical routine, and growing prevalence in chronic retinal conditions, the quantity of scans acquired worldwide is surpassing the capacity of retinal specialists to inspect these in meaningful ways. Instead, automated analysis of scans using machine learning algorithms provide a cost effective and reliable alternative to assist ophthalmologists in clinical routine and research. We present a machine learning method capable of consistently identifying a wide range of common retinal biomarkers from OCT scans. Our approach avoids the need for costly segmentation annotations and allows scans to be characterized by biomarker distributions. These can then be used to classify scans based on their underlying pathology in a device-independent way.