Characterization of Intraocular Pressure Increases and Management Strategies Following Treatment With Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implants in the FAME Trials

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

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

Ocular, Visual, and Anatomical Outcomes in Eyes Requiring Incisional Intraocular Pressure-Lowering Surgery Following the 0.19-mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To assess ocular, visual, and anatomical outcomes following the 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant (ILUVIEN®) and incisional intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering surgery in diabetic macular edema.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From a 36-month, phase 4, open-label, observational study (N = 202 eyes, 159 patients), 8 eyes (7 patients) required IOP-lowering surgery post-FAc; eyes were segregated by FAc-induced (n = 5, 2.47%) versus neovascular glaucoma (NVG)-related (n = 3, 1.49%) IOP elevations and assessed for IOP, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), and cup-to-disc ratio (c/d).

RESULTS

Changes at 36 months were +5.4 letters BCVA (P > 0.05) and +0.09 c/d (P = 0.0217); IOP and CST were unchanged. FAc-induced-group eyes required fewer IOP-lowering medications than NVG-group eyes (2.0 versus 4.0; P < 0.01) but for longer duration (15.2 versus 2.6 months; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-FAc IOP-lowering surgery, regardless of cause, largely did not affect the outcomes measured; these procedures, then, may not meaningfully threaten positive outcomes. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2024;55:22-29.].

The 0.19-mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant for Diabetic Macular Edema: Intraocular Pressure-Related Effects over 36 Months

PURPOSE

To evaluate effects of the 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant (ILUVIEN) on intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a 36-month, phase IV, nonrandomized, open-label, observational study.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included 202 eyes from 159 patients who received the 0.19-mg FAc implant after a successful prior steroid challenge per the United States label indication.

METHODS

Study eyes were assessed for IOP values, incidence of IOP elevations, and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) for up to 36 months post-FAc implant.

RESULTS

Mean IOP was stable over 36 months post-FAc; IOP change from baseline peaked at 2.12 mmHg at 9 months, then declined to baseline levels. At 36 months, eyes had a 32.5% cumulative probability of an IOP event > 25 mmHg and a 15.6% probability of an IOP event > 30 mmHg (Kaplan-Meier). The probability of requiring IOP-lowering medication at any time by month 36 was 38.3%. A total of 78% of eyes did not have IOP elevations > 25 mmHg if similar values were seen with the previous steroid challenge. Although 7.4% of eyes had an IOP > 30 mmHg during a scheduled study visit, most exceeded this threshold only once (60%). Regardless of IOP status, mean BCVA remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 36 months, the 0.19-mg FAc implant was associated with relatively stable IOPs in patients with DME, and there was no significant impact of IOP elevations identified regarding their effects on long-term visual outcomes. The probability that a prior corticosteroid challenge will not predict an IOP elevation > 25 mmHg over 36 months post-FAc is 22%; therefore, routine IOP monitoring should be scheduled.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

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

Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant Injected 1 Month after Dexamethasone Implant for Diabetic Macular Oedema: the ILUVI1MOIS Study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci) injected 1 month after the last dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEXi) in chronic diabetic macular oedema (DME) patients.

METHODS

Retrospective multicentric study conducted in pseudophakic patients with chronic DME frequently treated with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEXi; time to DME recurrence ≤ 6 months), receiving FAci 1 month after the last DEXi, with at least a 6-month follow-up. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) on optical coherence tomography, intraocular pressure (IOP) and additional treatments were assessed on the day of FAci injection (M0), 1 (M1) and 3 months (M3) later and then every 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 41 eyes from 34 patients were included. At M0, patients' mean age was 68.7 ± 9.8 years, the mean DME duration was 63.9 ± 22.9 months, the mean interval between two DEXi was 14.2 ± 3.3 weeks. M12 data were available for 71% of patients. At baseline, the mean BCVA, CMT and IOP were 63.2 ± 16.6 letters, 299.4 ± 103.3 µm, and 16.2 ± 4.5 mmHg, respectively, and remained stable during the follow-up. At M12, 14% of patients required additional intravitreal treatments.

CONCLUSION

In pseudophakic patients with chronic DME showing good response to DEXi but requiring repeated injections every < 6 months, switching to FAci 1 month after the last DEXi was effective and safe. Further prospective randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings, and to determine the best interval between the last DEXi and the first FAci.

Ocular hypertension and intravitreal steroids injections, update in 2023. French guidelines of the French glaucoma society and the French ophthalmology society

These guidelines are a consensus of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in a third of the cases after corticosteroid implant intravitreal injections. They update the first guidelines published in 2017. Two implants are marketed in France: the dexamethasone implant (DEXi) and the fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci). It is essential to assess the pressure status before injecting a patient with a corticosteroid implant. A molecule-specific monitoring of the intraocular pressure is needed throughout the follow-up and at the time of reinjections. Real-life studies have allowed optimizing the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of these implants. Corticosteroid testing with DEXi should be performed before switching to FAci to optimize pressure tolerance of FAci. Beyond topical hypotensive treatments, selective laser trabeculoplasty may be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and subsequent injections.

[Intraocular pressure elevation and intravitreal steroid implant injection: State of the art in 2023. Recommendations of the French Glaucoma Society and French Ophthalmology Society [French version]]

These are the recommendations of French glaucoma and retina experts on the management of ocular hypertension (OHT) observed in 1/3 of cases after intravitreal steroid implant injections. They are an update to the recommendations first published in 2017. There are two implants on the French market: the dexamethasone (DEXi) and fluocinolone acetonide (FAci) implants. It is important to know the pressure status before injecting a patient with a steroid implant. Monitoring of the IOP adapted to the specific drug is necessary throughout follow-up and reinjections. Real-life studies have made it possible to optimize the management algorithm by significantly increasing the safety of use of these implants. A corticosteroid test with DEXi is necessary before switching to FAci to optimize the pressure tolerance of the latter. In addition to topical glaucoma medications, SLT laser can be considered in the therapeutic arsenal for the management of steroid-induced OHT and future injections.

Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant (ILUVIEN®) for the Treatment of Retinal Conditions. A Review of Clinical Studies

Fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant (Iluvien®) is a corticosteroid implant indicated for the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO) in patients who have previously received conventional treatment without good response, non-infectious posterior uveitis, and as an off-label treatment of the macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion. FAc is a non-biodegradable 0.19 mg intravitreal implant which is designed to release FAc over 3 years at a rate of approximately 0.2 mcg per day. The aim of this review is to describe the special pharmacological properties of Iluvien and display the outcomes of the most important clinical trials and real-world studies regarding its efficacy and safety for the management of the above retinal disorders.

The 0.19-mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: An Expert Consensus

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To better understand the level of agreement among retina specialists on the role of inflammation in diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME), and the use of 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant in DME treatment, a consensus survey was drafted and disseminated to retina specialists across the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the modified Delphi method, a list of 12 consensus statements were generated by the coauthors based on short-answer responses to an initial survey. In total, 56 retina specialists completed the entire consensus survey. Except for two multiple-choice questions, there were 10 consensus statements that used a modified Likert scale to indicate their level of agreement to the statement: Agree = 3, Mostly Agree = 2, Mostly Disagree = 1, Disagree = 0. Percentage agreement and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and a consensus threshold was set at > 80% agreement for each statement.

RESULTS

Seven of 10 consensus statements using the modified Likert scale reached consensus, including those on the role of inflammation in pathophysiology of DR/DME, injection burden and patient adherence, and efficacy and safety of the FAc implant. The remaining three statements displayed high agreement with average scores > 80%, but the 95% CIs were below threshold. These included the impact of the FAc implant on DR progression, FAc as baseline therapy for DME, and the effectiveness of the steroid challenge to mitigate intraocular pressure risk after FAc use. Two multiple-choice questions focused on clinical situations in which corticosteroids would be used as baseline therapy for DME (pseudophakic eye [73%], recent stroke/myocardial infarction [66%], and pregnancy/breastfeeding [66%]) and which delivery route satisfies the steroid challenge for the FAc implant (intravitreal [100%], sub-tenon/periocular [73%], and topical [57%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians highly agreed on the role of inflammation in pathophysiology of DR/DME, injection burden and patient adherence, and efficacy and safety of the FAc implant. However, full consensus was not found on the impact of the FAc implant on DR progression, FAc as baseline therapy for DME, and the effectiveness of the steroid challenge to mitigate intraocular pressure risk after FAc use. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2023;54(3):166-173.].

Diabetic Macular Oedema Guidelines: An Australian Perspective

The number of people living with diabetes is expected to rise to 578 million by 2030 and to 700 million by 2045, exacting a severe socioeconomic burden on healthcare systems around the globe. This is also reflected in the increasing numbers of people with ocular complications of diabetes (namely, diabetic macular oedema (DMO) and diabetic retinopathy (DR)). In one study examining the global prevalence of DR, 35% of people with diabetes had some form of DR, 7% had PDR, 7% had DMO, and 10% were affected by these vision-threatening stages. In many regions of the world (Australia included), DR is one of the top three leading causes of vision loss amongst working age adults (20-74 years). In the management of DMO, the landmark ETDRS study demonstrated that moderate visual loss, defined as doubling of the visual angle, can be reduced by 50% or more by focal/grid laser photocoagulation. However, over the last 20 years, antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and corticosteroid therapies have emerged as alternative options for the management of DMO and provided patients with choices that have higher chances of improving vision than laser alone. In Australia, since the 2008 NHMRC guidelines, there have been significant developments in both the treatment options and treatment schedules for DMO. This working group was therefore assembled to review and address the current management options available in Australia.

Management of Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema Switched from Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant to Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant

To assess anatomical and functional outcomes after switching from dexamethasone implant (DEXi) to fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci) in 113 diabetic macular edema eyes, a multicentric retrospective observational study was conducted. Seventy-five eyes (73.5%) were switched 1−8 weeks after their last DEXi. The mean best-corrected visual acuity improved to 59.8 letters at month 4 and remained stable during the follow-up. The mean central macular thickness (CMT) significantly decreased during the follow-up, with a minimum of 320.9 μm at month 3. The baseline CMT was higher in eyes that received the last DEXi >8 weeks versus <8 weeks before the first FAci (p < 0.021). After FAci injection, additional treatments were needed in 37 (32.7%) eyes. A longer diabetes duration (p = 0.009), a longer time between the last DEXi and the first FAci (p = 0.035), and a high baseline CMT (p = 0.003) were risk factors for additional treatments. The mean intraocular pressure was <19 mmHg at all timepoints, with no difference between eyes receiving the last DEXi ≤8 weeks or >8 weeks before the switch. Switching from DEXi to FAci in DME is effective and safe. A short time between the last DEXi and the first FAci reduced CMT fluctuations and the need for early additional treatments.

Long-acting ocular drug delivery technologies with clinical precedent

INTRODUCTION

Ocular long-acting injectables and implants (LAIIs) deliver drug at a controlled release rate over weeks to years. A reduced dose frequency eases the treatment burden on patients, minimizes the potential for treatment-related adverse effects, and improves treatment adherence and persistence.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a comprehensive landscape of ocular LAII drug delivery technologies with clinical precedent, including eight commercial products and 27 clinical programs. Analysis of this landscape, and the specific technologies with the greatest precedent, provides instructive lessons for researchers interested in this space and insights into the direction of the field.

EXPERT OPINION

Further technological advancement is required to create biodegradable LAIIs with extended release durations and LAIIs that are compatible with a broader array of therapeutic modalities. In the future, ocular LAII innovations can be applied to diseases with limited treatment options, prophylactic treatment at earlier stages of disease, and cost-effective treatment of ocular diseases in global health settings.

Intraocular Pressure Changes After Intravitreal Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: Results from Four European Countries

Introduction

The 0.19 mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) intravitreal implant delivers a continuous intravitreal corticosteroid dose for the treatment of refractory diabetic macular oedema (DMO). The aim of this study was to assess the impact of an FAc intravitreal implant on intraocular pressure (IOP).

Methods

We retrospectively collected anonymised data on the patients’ characteristics, DMO treatment, and IOP and IOP-lowering treatments before and after the FAc intravitreal implant between September 2013 and March 2020 in several European centres.

Results

A total of 221 eyes from 179 patients were included. The mean follow-up duration was 13.4 (± 12.5, range 2.4–33.5) months. Overall, 194 eyes (88.2%) had received an intravitreal dexamethasone injection before the FAc intravitreal implant. For 25 eyes (11.3%) there was a history of glaucoma, and 52 eyes (23.5%) had previous IOP-lowering treatment. Mean IOP before injection was 14.7 (3.4) mmHg and increased to 16.9 (3.7) mmHg 12 months after injection (P < 0.0001). During follow-up, 55 eyes (24.9%) required the addition or initiation of topical IOP-lowering medication, only one patient (0.5%) had laser trabeculoplasty and one patient (0.5%) a minimally invasive glaucoma surgery, and no patient required incisional IOP-lowering surgery.

Conclusion

The FAc intravitreal implant led to substantial IOP elevation. This elevation was monitored most of the time with addition or initiation of topical IOP-lowering medication.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40123-022-00504-z.

Intravitreal Therapy for Diabetic Macular Edema: An Update

Diabetic macular edema (DME) represents a prevalent and disabling eye condition. Despite that DME represents a sight-threatening condition, it is also among the most accessible to treatment. Many different treatment options including photocoagulation, intravitreal medical treatment (either vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors or corticosteroids therapies), and surgical removal are currently available. Although laser has been considered as the gold standard for many years, over the past several years vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (anti-VEGFs) have become first-line therapy. However, many patients do not adequately respond to them. With the development of sustained-release corticosteroid devices, steroids have gained a presence in the management of the DME. We review and update the role of anti-VEGF and intravitreal sustained-release corticosteroid management of DME. According to the currently available scientific evidence, the choice of one anti-VEGF over another critically depends on the baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). While aflibercept may be the drug of choice in low baseline BCVA, the three anti-VEGFs (bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept) provided similar functional outcomes when the baseline BCVA was higher. DEX implants are a valuable option for treating DME, although they are usually seen as a second choice, particularly in those eyes that have an insufficient response to anti-VEGF. The new evidence suggested that, in eyes that did not adequately respond to anti-VEGF, switching to a DEX implant at the time to 3 monthly anti-VEGF injections provided better functional outcomes.

The outcome of fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant is predicted by the response to dexamethasone implant in diabetic macular oedema

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To investigate if the visual and anatomic response to the first dexamethasone implant (DEX) predicts the 12-month clinical outcome after shifting to fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study including pseudophakic patients with previously treated DMO, undergone one or more DEX injections before FAc. Functional and morphologic response to DEX was defined based on the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) changes after the first DEX, respectively. Steroid-response was defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation ≥5 mmHg or IOP > 21 mmHg after any previous DEX exposure. Pairwise comparisons for BCVA, CMT, and IOP after FAc were performed with linear mixed models and a repeated-measure design.

RESULTS

Forty-four eyes of 33 patients were included. Patients were shifted to FAc after a mean ± standard deviation of 4.6 ± 3.2 DEX injections. Overall, BCVA and CMT improved during the first 12 months after switching to FAc (p = 0.04 and p < 0.001, respectively). Only eyes with a good morphologic response to DEX had a significant CMT reduction after FAc (p < 0.001), while no significant relationship was found between BCVA improvement after DEX and after FAc. IOP elevation occurred in 9 eyes (20%) following DEX implant. These eyes carried a 20-fold increased risk of having an IOP rise after FAc (p < 0.001), with a non-linear relationship between the IOP increase after DEX and the one after FAc.

CONCLUSION

The response to previous DEX may anticipate the morphologic response to subsequent FAc. Eyes with steroid-induced IOP elevation after DEX are at a high risk of IOP increase after FAc. The visual response after FAc was not associated with the visual response to previous steroids, indicating that FAc may have a role also in patients refractory to DEX implant.

Two-year interim safety results of the 0.2 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant for the treatment of diabetic macular oedema: the observational PALADIN study

Background

The 0.2 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant delivers continuous, low-dose, intravitreal corticosteroid for the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO). This ongoing, 3-year, observational clinical trial provides long-term, ‘real-world’ safety results for the FAc implant in DMO.

Methods

This 24-month interim analysis of a prospective, observational study investigated patients with DMO receiving the commercially available intravitreal 0.2 µg/day FAc implant. The primary outcome was incidence of intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering procedures. Other IOP-related signals and their relationship to previous corticosteroid exposure, best-corrected visual acuity, central subfield thickness (CST), ocular adverse events and frequency of other treatments were also measured.

Results

Data were collected from 95 previously steroid-challenged patients (115 study eyes) for up to 36 months pre-FAc and 24 months post-FAc implant. Mean IOP for the overall population remained stable post-FAc compared with pre-FAc implant. IOP-related procedures remained infrequent (two IOP-lowering surgeries pre-FAc; two trabeculoplasties and four IOP-lowering surgeries post-FAc). Mean visual acuity was stable post-FAc (mean improvement of 1–3 letters) and fewer DMO treatments were required per year following FAc implant. Mean CST was significantly reduced at 24 months post-FAc implant (p<0.001) and the percentage of patients with CST ≤300 µm was significantly increased (p=0.041).

Conclusion

Few IOP-related procedures were reported during the 24 months post-FAc implant. Positive efficacy outcomes were noted after treatment, with stabilisation of vision and reduction in inflammation, demonstrated by CST. The FAc implant has a favourable benefit–risk profile in the management of DMO, especially when administered after a prior steroid challenge.

Trial registration number

NCT02424019.

Corticosteroids for Diabetic Macular Edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a chronic condition with a multifactorial pathogenesis. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and several inflammatory mediators are upregulated in eyes with DME. VEGF inhibitors and corticosteroids have all been used successfully in the management of DME. Currently available corticosteroids include triamcinolone acetonide (TA), the dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant, and the fluocinolone acetonide (FA) intravitreal implant. The response to treatment can vary substantially with each treatment modality. Some cases of DME are VEGF driven, and in others, inflammation plays a key role. Chronicity appears to favor corticosteroid treatment. There are no clear guidelines to guide switching from an anti-VEGF to a corticosteroid. Combination therapy of an anti-VEGF drug and a corticosteroid does not appear to provide additional benefit over monotherapy with either drug. The main advantage of corticosteroids over VEGF inhibitors is their longer duration of action. Vitrectomy does not affect the pharmacokinetics of the corticosteroid implants. Common adverse events of corticosteroids include cataract formation, cataract progression, and ocular hypertension. TA may cause a sterile endophthalmitis and pseudoendophthalmitis. Migration of the intravitreal DEX and FA implants into the anterior chamber can be problematic. Because of their less favorable safety profile, corticosteroids are generally used as a second-line treatment for DME. Advantages of using an intravitreal corticosteroid implant include the reduction of treatment burden and predictable pharmacokinetics even in vitrectomized eyes. Pseudophakic eyes, previously vitrectomized eyes and eyes with long-standing DME, particularly of patients who have difficulty in maintaining a monthly appointment, may benefit from primary treatment with a corticosteroid intravitreal implant.

Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes mellitus is a global epidemic which is growing in prevalence, and diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of visual impairment among patients affected by this disease. Our objective is to review current and upcoming therapeutic approaches to DME.

RECENT FINDINGS

Once considered the gold standard in treatment of DME, focal/grid laser is now reserved mostly for non-center-involving DME, while anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy has become the first-line treatment. However, suboptimal responders to anti-VEGF and the burden of frequent injections have stimulated the development of novel approaches. Corticosteroids can be effective in treating DME, but adverse effects such as intraocular pressure elevation and cataract formation must be considered. Emerging therapeutics and drug delivery systems in the pipeline offer exciting potential solutions to this vision-threatening disease. Multiple types of therapeutics targeting various pathways implicated in the pathogenesis of DME may help lessen the global burden of vision loss from diabetes.

Advanced implantable drug delivery technologies: transforming the clinical landscape of therapeutics for chronic diseases

Chronic diseases account for the majority of all deaths worldwide, and their prevalence is expected to escalate in the next 10 years. Because chronic disorders require long-term therapy, the healthcare system must address the needs of an increasing number of patients. The use of new drug administration routes, specifically implantable drug delivery devices, has the potential to reduce treatment-monitoring clinical visits and follow-ups with healthcare providers. Also, implantable drug delivery devices can be designed to maintain drug concentrations in the therapeutic window to achieve controlled, continuous release of therapeutics over extended periods, eliminating the risk of patient non-compliance to oral treatment. A higher local drug concentration can be achieved if the device is implanted in the affected tissue, reducing systemic adverse side effects and decreasing the challenges and discomfort of parenteral treatment. Although implantable drug delivery devices have existed for some time, interest in their therapeutic potential is growing, with a global market expected to reach over $12 billion USD by 2018. This review discusses implantable drug delivery technologies in an advanced stage of development or in clinical use and focuses on the state-of-the-art of reservoir-based implants including pumps, electromechanical systems, and polymers, sites of implantation and side effects, and deployment in developing countries.

Treatment of refractory diabetic macular edema with a fluocinolone acetonide implant in vitrectomized and non-vitrectomized eyes

AIM

To report real-life data on the use of an intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide implant in the treatment of refractory diabetic macular edema (DME) in pars plana vitrectomized (PPV) and non-PPV eyes.

METHODS

This was a comparative retrospective observational study of 23 eyes with chronic DME. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) were recorded at baseline, 1, 4 and 12mo. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests were performed to analyze and compare PPV and non-PPV eyes.

RESULTS

Seven PPV and 16 non-PPV eyes were included in the study. Median BCVA in the non-PPV group varied from 0.65 logMAR [Interquartile range (IQR): 0.40] at baseline to 0.42 logMAR (IQR: 0.40) at 12mo. Median CMT varied from 430 µm (IQR: 131.3) at baseline to 317 µm (IQR: 107.5) at 12mo. Median BCVA in the PPV group varied from 0.60 logMAR (IQR: 0.62) at baseline to 0.74 logMAR (IQR: 0.34) at 12mo. Median CMT varied from 483 µm (IQR: 146) at baseline to 397 µm (IQR: 132) at 12mo. Of 0/7 eyes and 1/16 eyes in the PPV and non-PPV eyes respectively had a baseline visual acuity of 6/12 or better (0.3 logMAR). At last follow up, 1/7 and 5/16 eyes in the PPV and non-PPV group respectively achieved a visual acuity of 6/12 or better.

CONCLUSION

Visual outcomes are modest following the use of the fluocinolone acetonide implant for chronic DME. The steroid implant is a useful treatment option in the management of refractory DME in vitrectomized and non-vitrectmized eyes.

The USER Study: A Chart Review of Patients Receiving a 0.2 µg/day Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant for Diabetic Macular Edema

Introduction

To determine anatomical, functional, and intraocular pressure (IOP) responses to diabetic macular edema (DME) treatments pre- and post-0.2 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant administration compared with baseline and the preceding 3 years.

Methods

This was a retrospective, chart review, cohort study in four U.S. centers. Patients received the 0.2 µg/day FAc implant for the treatment of DME in at least one eye before January 1, 2016. DME treatments administered up to 36 months pre-FAc implant and up to 24 months post-FAc implant were recorded, and treatment frequency was calculated. Visual acuity (VA) was assessed using a Snellen eye chart and converted to early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) letters, and central subfield thickness (CST) was measured using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Treatment frequency, mean VA, mean CST, percentage of patients with CST of ≤ 300 µm, mean IOP, IOP events, and IOP treatments pre- and post-FAc implant administration were measured. Positive and negative predictive values for the IOP response to prior steroid therapy were also determined.

Results

In total, 160 eyes of 130 patients were studied. VA was maintained at pre-FAc levels from baseline to month 24, despite a significant reduction in treatment frequency from one treatment every 2.9 months pre-FAc implant to one treatment every 14.3 months post-FAc implant. Patients with better baseline VA required fewer DME treatments post-FAc than did patients with worse baseline VA. The majority of patients did not require additional DME treatment during the post-FAc follow-up period. A significant reduction in CST and an increase in the percentage of patients with CST of ≤ 300 µm were seen up to month 21 post-FAc implant. Pre-FAc implant IOP was maintained during the post-FAc implant period; increased IOP with prior steroid therapy was found to be highly predictive of increased IOP post-FAc implant.

Conclusion

The results of this study confirm the positive safety and efficacy profile of the FAc implant and demonstrate for the first time the effectiveness of the U.S. label indication of FAc in reducing the incidence of post-treatment pressure elevation. The FAc implant significantly reduced treatment burden in the overall population without significantly increasing the risk of steroid-induced pressure elevation.

Funding

Alimera Sciences.

Intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide implant (ILUVIEN®) for diabetic macular oedema: a literature review

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy and may lead to severe visual loss. In this review, we describe the pathophysiology of DMO and review current therapeutic options such as macular laser photocoagulation, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents, and steroid implants with a focus on the new fluocinolone acetonide implant, ILUVIEN®. The results of the Fluocinolone Acetonide in Diabetic Macular Edema (FAME) studies are also presented together with the results of real-world studies to support the clinical use of ILUVIEN® in achieving efficient resolution of DMO and improving vision and macular anatomy in this challenging group of patients.

Changes in intraocular pressure after intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide (ILUVIEN): real-world experience in three European countries

Aims

The ILUVIEN Registry Safety Study is an ongoing, multicentre, open-label, observational study collecting real-world data on the safety and effectiveness of the 0.2 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant in patients treated according to the European label requirements.

Methods

Patients included in this analysis were treated for the licensed indication of chronic diabetic macular oedema (cDMO; that is, DMO that persists or recurs despite treatment). Data presented in the current analysis were collected from patient records up to 6 March 2017. Visual acuity (VA) data, including mean change in VA over time and at last observation, intraocular pressure (IOP) over the course of the study, IOP events, use of IOP-lowering therapy and cup:disc ratio were analysed. Information on additional DMO treatments post-FAc implant was also captured.

Results

Five hundred and sixty-three patients (593 eyes) were enrolled on the study. Mean IOP for the overall population remained within the normal range throughout follow-up and 76.7% of patients did not require IOP-lowering therapy following treatment with the FAc implant. Sixty-nine per cent of eyes did not require additional DMO treatments. Mean VA in the overall population increased from 51.9 letters at baseline to 55.6 letters at month 12, with a significant increase of 2.9 letters at last observation. Patients with short-term cDMO experienced greater VA gains than those with long-term cDMO.

Conclusions

The results of this analysis are comparable with those of other studies, including the Fluocinolone Acetate for Macular Edema study. The study reinforces the good safety and effectiveness profile of FAc, and demonstrates the benefit of early FAc treatment.

Iluvien™ (Fluocinolone Acetonide 0.19 mg Intravitreal Implant) in the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: A Review

Diabetic macular edema (DMO) is a leading cause of blindness in the working age population. Although anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy provided a major advance in treatment of DMO for many patients, there is a significant proportion of patients who maintain persistent DMO and have minimal response to anti-VEGF treatment. Iluvien (fluocinolone acetonide 0.19 mg [FAc]) is an important additional treatment option for DMO. In this review we describe the clinical context and the evidence for the use of the FAc implant in treating DMO, from pilot to randomized controlled studies, to later phase real world data. These studies indicate that the FAc implant is effective, well tolerated and a cost-effective option in the treatment of insufficiently responsive DMO.

Evaluation of the clinical effectiveness in routine practice of fluocinolone acetonide 190 µg intravitreal implant in people with diabetic macular edema

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the Iluvien Clinical Evidence study in the UK (ICE-UK) was to assess the real-world effectiveness of fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) 190 µg intravitreal implant for the treatment of clinically significant chronic diabetic macular edema (DME) in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

This retrospective study collected data from patient medical records in 13 ophthalmology centers for people with DME prescribed FAc intravitreal implant between April 1, 2013 and April 15, 2015. Visual acuity (VA) and intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were collected for 12 months prior to and after implant.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eight people, contributing 233 eyes, treated with FAc implant were included. Mean age was 68.1 years and 62% were male. In the 12 months prior to FAc implant, VA declined. Median (interquartile range, IQR) VA was 0.66 (0.48-1.00) LogMAR units (equivalent to 52.0 ETDRS letters) at implant, improving to 0.60 (0.38-0.90) LogMAR units (55.0 letters) at 12 months post-implant (p < 0.001). In total, 44%, 30%, and 18% of people achieved an improvement in ETDRS score of ≥5, ≥10, and ≥15 letters, respectively, over the same period. A small but significant (p < .001) increase in median IOP was observed (median = 15.0, IQR = 13.0-18.0 mmHg at implant to 18.0, 15.0-21.0 mmHg at 12 months). In the 12 months following implant, additional IOP-lowering therapy was prescribed in 15% of subjects previously not requiring such therapy.

CONCLUSION

Following FAc implant, an overall significant improvement in VA was observed over a period of 12 months, accompanied by a significant but small increase in IOP.

Fluocinolone acetonide for the treatment of diabetic macular edema

INTRODUCTION

Fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant is a non-erodible implant approved for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) insufficiently responsive to available therapies. Areas covered: The injectable intravitreal implant releases fluocinolone acetonide at an average rate of 0.2 µg/day for at least 36 months. The two pooled pivotal FAME trials showed that, in patients with DME previously treated with laser photocoagulation, fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant was more beneficial than sham injection when looking at the proportion of patients with an improvement from baseline in visual acuity of more than 15 letters at 24 months and at 36 months. Cataract (82%) and intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation (37%) were the most common adverse events. Raised IOP was mostly treated with IOP-lowering medications, with <5% of eyes requiring incisional IOP-lowering surgery. FAME trial program results are confirmed by a series of real-world studies in eyes with chronic/recalcitrant DME. Expert opinion: data indicate that fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant is a useful second-line option for the treatment of DME.

Real-world experience with 0.2 μg/day fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant (ILUVIEN) in the United Kingdom

Aims

To compare safety outcomes and visual function data acquired in the real-world setting with FAME study results in eyes treated with 0.2 μg/day fluocinolone acetonide (FAc).

Methods

Fourteen UK clinical sites contributed to pseudoanonymised data collected using the same electronic medical record system. Data pertaining to eyes treated with FAc implant for diabetic macular oedema (DMO) was extracted. Intraocular pressure (IOP)-related adverse events were defined as use of IOP-lowering medication, any rise in IOP>30 mm Hg, or glaucoma surgery. Other measured outcomes included visual acuity, central subfield thickness (CSFT) changes and use of concomitant medications.

Results

In total, 345 eyes had a mean follow-up of 428 days. Overall, 13.9% of patients required IOP-lowering drops (included initiation, addition and switching of current drops), 7.2% had IOP elevation >30 mm Hg and 0.3% required glaucoma surgery. In patients with prior steroid exposure and no prior IOP-related event, there were no new IOP-related events. In patients without prior steroid use and without prior IOP-related events, 10.3% of eyes required IOP-lowering medication and 4.3% exhibited IOP >30 mm Hg at some point during follow-up. At 24 months, mean best-recorded visual acuity increased from 51.9 to 57.2 letters and 20.8% achieved ≥15-letter improvement. Mean CSFT reduced from 451.2 to 355.5 μm.

Conclusions

While overall IOP-related emergent events were observed in similar frequency to FAME, no adverse events were seen in the subgroup with prior steroid exposure and no prior IOP events. Efficacy findings confirm that the FAc implant is a useful treatment option for chronic DMO.

Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant 0.19 mg (ILUVIEN®): A Review in Diabetic Macular Edema

Fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant 0.19 mg (ILUVIEN^®) is a nonbiodegradable, injectable, corticosteroid implant that is approved in several countries, including the USA, for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). ILUVIEN^® releases fluocinolone acetonide at an initial rate of 0.25 µg/day (average rate 0.2 µg/day) and lasts 36 months. In the two pooled pivotal FAME trials in patients with DME previously treated with macular laser photocoagulation, fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant 0.2 µg/day was significantly more effective than sham injection with respect to the proportion of patients with an improvement from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity of ≥15 letters at 24 months (primary endpoint). This therapeutic effect was maintained at 36 months. The implant also significantly decreased foveal thickness at 24 months. FAME study results are broadly supported by real-world studies in patients with chronic DME considered insufficiently responsive to available therapies. Consistent with corticosteroid class-specific adverse events, cataract and elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) were the most common adverse events with the fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant. Raised IOP was treated with medications in most patients, with <5% requiring incisional IOP-lowering surgery. In the USA, fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant should be used only in patients who have been previously treated with a course of corticosteroids and did not have a clinically significant increase in IOP. Available data indicate that fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant 0.19 mg is a useful option for the treatment of DME in these patients.

Clinical utility of intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide (Iluvien®) implant in the management of patients with chronic diabetic macular edema: a review of the current literature

The first-line therapy for patients with center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME) is with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents, with or without adjunctive macular laser treatment. However, a significant proportion of patients have persistent and recurrent edema despite repeated anti-VEGF injections. The fluocinolone acetonide (FA) 190 μg intravitreal implant has been shown in pivotal clinical trials to be efficacious for the treatment of DME and has been approved in many countries for use in patients who have not responded to first-line therapy. In this report, we have collated the latest data from the increasing number of studies to illustrate the pattern of usage of the Iluvien FA implant for DME during the current anti-VEGF era. We have shown that there is now a wealth of published evidence from real-world studies to support the clinical utility of the FA implant in achieving further resolution of edema and improving visual acuity outcomes in this challenging group of patients.

Diabetic macular edema outcomes in eyes treated with fluocinolone acetonide 0.2 µg/d intravitreal implant: real-world UK experience

PURPOSE

To conduct an observational, multicenter study to evaluate real-world clinical efficacy and safety of the 0.2 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant in the treatment of patients with chronic diabetic macular edema (DME) in 3 large hospital ophthalmology departments in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Fluocinolone acetonide implants were inserted into the study eyes following a suitable washout period; phakic eyes received FAc implant following cataract surgery. Follow-up visits took place 2-4 weeks postinjection and then at 3, 6, and 12 months; change in central macular thickness (CMT) from baseline was measured by optical coherence tomography and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was also assessed. Adverse events and changes in intraocular pressure (IOP) were recorded in order to evaluate the safety profile for the FAc implant.

RESULTS

Improvements in BCVA and CMT were observed from 3 months and sustained for the duration of observation. At 12 months, the overall mean change from baseline CMT was -126 μm and mean increase in BCVA from baseline was 5.1 letters. Increases in IOP following FAc implant were easily managed with IOP-lowering medication. Implant migration into the anterior chamber occurred in 2 eyes where prior vitrectomy had resulted in a posterior capsule defect; this was rectified and resolved.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study provide further efficacy and safety profile data for FAc implant treatment of chronic DME in a real-world clinical setting; the FAc implant appears to be a valuable therapeutic approach for patients with chronic DME who have suboptimal response to other treatment options.

Long-term Effects of Intravitreal 0.19 mg Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant on Progression and Regression of Diabetic Retinopathy

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) on the progression to proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and the impact of FAc on changes in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity scale (DRSS) grade during the Fluocinolone Acetonide in Diabetic Macular Edema (FAME) A and B Phase III clinical trials.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of data from the 36-month prospective, randomized, FAME A and B trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) who received sham control or FAc 0.2 or 0.5 μg/day.

METHODS

A masked reading center (University of Wisconsin-Madison) determined DRSS grade and retinal perfusion status using standard 7-field stereo fundus photography and fluorescein angiography, respectively. Retinopathy changes over time were determined by DRSS step differences from baseline to month 36. Pairwise comparisons between the 3 treatment groups were performed using a log-rank test without adjustment for covariates, with the primary comparison between sham control and 0.2 μg/day FAc.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Study eye progression to PDR based on a composite clinical outcome of (1) progression from nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) to PDR based on graded fundus photographs, (2) panretinal photocoagulation (PRP), or (3) pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for PDR; and study eye changes on the DRSS.

RESULTS

In the integrated FAME data set, compared with sham control-treated subjects, time to first PDR event was significantly delayed in subjects treated with FAc (P < 0.001), and this effect was confirmed in subgroups with more severe DR and chronic DME at baseline. In addition, subjects with retinal nonperfusion at baseline showed greater reduction in progression to PDR with FAc treatment. Both FAc dosages demonstrated statistically significant improvements in mean DR severity compared with sham treatment at months 6, 12, and 18. Numerically more subjects who received FAc experienced 2-or-more- or 3-or-more-step improvements in DR severity compared with subjects who received sham; conversely, fewer subjects treated with FAc experienced 2-or-more- or 3-or-more-step worsening in DR severity. The 3-or-more-step improvement with 0.5 μg/day FAc was statistically significantly different from sham control.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with DME, sustained intraocular delivery of FAc slows development of PDR and slows progression of diabetic retinopathy.

Update on corticosteroids for diabetic macular edema

Diabetic macular edema (DME) remains an important cause of visual loss. Although anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents are generally used as first-line treatments for patients with center-involving DME, there is an important role for corticosteroids as well. Corticosteroids may be especially useful in pseudophakic patients poorly responsive to anti-VEGF therapies, in patients wishing to reduce the number of required injections, and in pregnant patients. Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide has been used for many years but is not approved for this indication. An extended-release bioerodable dexamethasone delivery system and an extended-release nonbioerodable fluocinolone acetonide insert have both achieved regulatory approval for the treatment of DME. All intravitreal corticosteroids are associated with risks of cataract progression, elevation of intraocular pressure, and endophthalmitis. There is no current consensus regarding the use of corticosteroids, but they are valuable for selected patients with center-involving DME.