The Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant for the Treatment of Macular Edema Related to Retinal Vein Occlusion: Real-life Data and Prognostic Factors in a Turkish Population

Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant for the Treatment of Macular Edema Following Retinal Vein Occlusion: Post Hoc Analysis of Post-Marketing Surveillance Data in the Real-World Setting in Korea

Purpose

To supplement established efficacy and safety data, this analysis evaluated the real-world use of dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implant 700 µg for retinal vein occlusion (RVO)-related macular edema in an Asian population and baseline factors potentially associated with DEX implant efficacy.

Patients and Methods

A prospective, observational, post-marketing surveillance study was conducted at 38 sites in South Korea in patients consecutively presenting with macular edema following branch or central RVO (BRVO, CRVO), and administered a first DEX implant. Follow-up visits and subsequent DEX or other therapies conformed with local practice. Outcome measures included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), change in BCVA from baseline, responder rates, and adverse events. Associations between baseline characteristics and BCVA gains were evaluated. Month-1, -2, -4, and -6 visit analysis windows were established.

Results

In all, 700 patients (79.1% BRVO, 20.9% CRVO) received 1.12 DEX implants (mean) and were followed for 101.5 days (standard deviation, 51.7); 90% received a single implant. Among patients with analyzable data, mean BCVA improved from baseline with peak changes in Month 2 of −0.193 and −0.212 LogMAR, (P < 0.0001) and remained significant in the BRVO subgroup at the Month 4 and 6 windows (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0039, respectively). Treatment-naïve patients experienced greater BCVA increases. The proportion of patients with stable/improved BCVA tended to decrease after Month 2 through Month 6 and the decline was greater in the CRVO subgroup. At the Month-2 window, ≥1-, 2- and 3-line increases were positively associated with younger age, worse baseline BCVA, and treatment naivety. The most common adverse event was increased intraocular pressure.

Conclusion

In the real-world clinical setting in South Korea, DEX implant improved visual acuity and had a favorable safety profile similar to that reported in randomized controlled trials and observational European and North American studies. These data further support the value of DEX implant as a treatment option for RVO.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier

NCT01976650. Date of registration: November 6, 2013.

Short-term effectiveness prognostic factors after dexamethasone intravitreal implant in macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to describe functional and anatomical changes (best-corrected visual acuity [BCVA], central macular thickness [CMT], and central macular volume [CMV]) in patients with macular edema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) treated with intravitreal dexamethasone implant (IDI) and identify its clinical predictors in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Data from 111 patients who underwent IDI to treat RVO-associated ME were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic, preoperative, and postoperative variables were assessed using a logistic regression analysis to determine predictors of visual and anatomical improvement.

RESULTS

Mean BCVA, CMT, and CMV improved from baseline after IDI (p < 0.001). The strongest predictors of different treatment outcomes were: a baseline BCVA ⩽60 ETDRS letters (OR = 50.600; p < 0.001) and first IDI injection (OR = 2.988; p < 0.001) for BCVA gain ⩾15 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters; a baseline BCVA ⩽60 ETDRS letters (OR = 7.893; p = 0.002) and non-chronic ME (OR = 3.875; p = 0.019) for BCVA ⩾80 ETDRS letters achievement; a baseline CMT ⩾400 µm (OR = 49.083; p < 0.001) and a baseline CMV ⩾12 mm³ (OR = 4.235; p < 0.001) for CMT reduction ⩾50%; and a baseline CMT ⩾400 µm (OR = 11.471; p < 0.001) and a baseline CMV ⩾12 mm³ (OR = 10.284; p < 0.001) for CMV reduction ⩾15%.

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed the effectiveness of IDI to treat ME secondary to RVO and identified new predictive factors for two visual (⩾15 ETDRS letters gain and BCVA ⩾80 ETDRS letters) and two anatomical outcomes (>50% CMT and >15% CMV reduction).

Real-life study of the use of anti-VEGF therapy versus dexamethasone implant for treatment of macular edema in retinal vein occlusion

Purpose

To investigate the long-time outcome of patients with branch vein occlusion (BRVO) and central vein occlusion (CRVO) treated with anti-VEGF injections compared to the dexamethasone (DEX) implant.

Methods

This retrospective real-life study included all 492 patients presenting with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) during 2012–2013 at St. Erik Eye Hospital. Maximum follow-up was 5 years.

Results

The mean time of follow-up for patients treated for macular edema was 33.2±17.7 and 34.3±18.1 months in the BRVO and CRVO groups, respectively. At the end of follow-up, the best-corrected visual acuity improved +9.8±20.4 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters in BRVO patients receiving anti-VEGF therapy while patients treated with the DEX implant lost −2.1±23.4 letters (p<0.05). CRVO patients treated with anti-VEGF therapy improved +0.2±27.6 letters while patients receiving a DEX implant lost −9.7±32.6 letters (p=0.11). Overall, in RVO patients treated with anti-VEGF injections, the central retinal thickness decreased to 322±174μm compared to 398±174 μm in patients treated with the DEX implant (p<0.05).

Conclusions

In a clinical setting, a substantial part of patients is still in follow-up a long time after presentation. The visual and anatomical outcomes were better in patients treated with anti-VEGF agents compared to subjects receiving a DEX implant.

ASSESSING THE ABILITY OF PREOPERATIVE QUANTITATIVE SPECTRAL-DOMAIN OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY CHARACTERISTICS TO PREDICT VISUAL OUTCOME IN IDIOPATHIC MACULAR HOLE SURGERY

PURPOSE

To determine which spectral domain optical coherence tomography biomarkers of idiopathic macular hole (MH) correlate with the postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in anatomically closed MH.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of spectral domain optical coherence tomography scans of 44 patients presenting with MH followed for a mean of 17 months. Widths of MH aperture, base, and ellipsoid zone disruption were calculated from presenting foveal spectral domain optical coherence tomography B-scans. Macular hole base area and ellipsoid zone disruption area were calculated through the custom in-house software.

RESULTS

Poorer postoperative BCVA correlated with increased preoperative choroidal hypertransmission (r = 0.503, P = 0.0005), minimum diameter (r = 0.491, P = 0.0007), and base diameter (r = 0.319, P = 0.0348), but not with preoperative ellipsoid zone width (r = 0.199, P = 0.2001). Applying en-face analysis, the BCVA correlated weakly with preoperative ellipsoid zone loss area (r = 0.380, P = 0.013), but not with preoperative MH base area (r = 0.253, P = 0.1058).

CONCLUSION

Increased MH minimum diameter, base diameter, base area, and choroidal hypertransmission are correlated with a poorer postoperative BCVA. Ellipsoid zone loss measurements were not consistently correlated with a BCVA. Choroidal hypertransmission width may be an easy-to-visualize predictive imaging biomarker in MH surgery.

Intravitreal Dexamethasone Implant in the Treatment of Non-infectious Uveitis

Objectives:

To evaluate the long-term results of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX) for noninfectious uveitis.

Materials and Methods:

The study included 62 eyes of 44 patients treated with DEX implant due to noninfectious uveitis and followed up for at least a year. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central foveal thickness, intraocular pressure (IOP), vitreous haze score, indications, immunomodulatory therapy and steroid usage before/after injection, number of injections, and adverse events were analyzed retrospectively.

Results:

Average follow-up was 20 months (range 12-64 months). The female/male ratio was 29/15. Mean age was 50 years (range 22-75 years). The most frequent uveitis etiologies were idiopathic (25 patients, 40.3%) and Behçet’s uveitis. (17 patients, 27.4%) The signedmost common indication for DEX injection was cystoid macular edema together with resistant vitreous haze (26 eyes, 41.9%). Twenty-two eyes (30%) received more than one DEX injection. Mean BCVA was improved from 0.55 logMAR at baseline to 0.38, 0.32, and 0.35 after 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively (p<0.001 for each). Mean CFT was decreased from 386 μm at baseline to 288, 311, and 302 μm after 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively (p<0.001 for each). Mean IOP did not change significantly during follow-up. Five eyes (8%) received topical anti-glaucoma medication (IOP ≥25 mmHg). Eighteen (46%) of 39 phakic eyes underwent cataract surgery during follow-up. Similar efficacy of the DEX implant was observed in eyes that received multiple injections. Systemic immunomodulatory therapy did not change significantly during follow-up.

Conclusion:

Intravitreal DEX injection does not alter systemic immunomodulatory therapy, but may facilitate the management of noninfectious uveitis by suppressing local intraocular inflammation. Multiple injections yielded comparable visual and anatomical outcomes to single injections. Follow-up for ocular hypertension and cataract formation are important, especially in eyes receiving multiple injections.