Risk Factors for Meeting Criteria for Switching from Bevacizumab to Aflibercept When Treating Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema and Visual Acuity of < 20/40

PURPOSE

To identify factors for meeting prespecified criteria for switching from bevacizumab to aflibercept in eyes with center-involved diabetic macular edema (CI-DME) and moderate vision loss initially treated with bevacizumab in DRCR Retina Network protocol AC.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred seventy participants with one or both eyes harboring CI-DME with visual acuity (VA) letter score of 69 to 24 (Snellen equivalent, 20/50-20/320).

METHODS

Eligible eyes were assigned to receive intravitreal aflibercept monotherapy (n = 158) or bevacizumab followed by aflibercept if prespecified criteria for switching were met between 12 weeks and 2 years (n = 154).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Meeting switching criteria: (1) at any time, (2) at 12 weeks, and (3) after 12 weeks. Associations between meeting the criteria for switching and factors measured at baseline and 12 weeks were evaluated in univariable analyses. Stepwise procedures were used to select variables for multivariable models.

RESULTS

In the group receiving bevacizumab first, older participants showed a higher risk of meeting the switching criteria at any time, with a hazard ratio (HR) for a 10-year increase in age of 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.58). Male participants or eyes with worse baseline VA were more likely to switch at 12 weeks (for male vs. female: odds ratio [OR], 4.84 [95% CI, 1.32-17.81]; 5-letter lower baseline VA: OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.03-1.63]). Worse 12-week central subfield thickness (CST; 10-μm greater: HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.04-1.07]) was associated with increased risk of switching after 12 weeks. The mean ± standard deviation improvement in visual acuity after completing the switch to aflibercept was 3.7 ± 4.9 letters compared with the day of switching.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified factors can be used to refine expectations regarding the likelihood that an eye will meet protocol criteria to switch to aflibercept when treatment is initiated with bevacizumab. Older patients are more likely to be switched. At 12 weeks, thicker CST was predictive of eyes most likely to be switched in the future.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

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

Aflibercept Monotherapy or Bevacizumab First for Diabetic Macular Edema

BACKGROUND

In eyes with diabetic macular edema, the relative efficacy of administering aflibercept monotherapy as compared with bevacizumab first with a switch to aflibercept if the eye condition does not improve sufficiently (a form of step therapy) is unclear.

METHODS

At 54 clinical sites, we randomly assigned eyes in adults who had diabetic macular edema involving the macular center and a visual-acuity letter score of 24 to 69 (on a scale from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better visual acuity; Snellen equivalent, 20/320 to 20/50) to receive either 2.0 mg of intravitreous aflibercept or 1.25 mg of intravitreous bevacizumab. The drug was administered at randomization and thereafter according to the prespecified retreatment protocol. Beginning at 12 weeks, eyes in the bevacizumab-first group were switched to aflibercept therapy if protocol-specified criteria were met. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity over the 2-year trial period. Retinal central subfield thickness and visual acuity at 2 years and safety were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 312 eyes (in 270 adults) underwent randomization; 158 eyes were assigned to receive aflibercept monotherapy and 154 to receive bevacizumab first. Over the 2-year period, 70% of the eyes in the bevacizumab-first group were switched to aflibercept therapy. The mean improvement in visual acuity was 15.0 letters in the aflibercept-monotherapy group and 14.0 letters in the bevacizumab-first group (adjusted difference, 0.8 letters; 95% confidence interval, -0.9 to 2.5; P = 0.37). At 2 years, the mean changes in visual acuity and retinal central subfield thickness were similar in the two groups. Serious adverse events (in 52% of the patients in the aflibercept-monotherapy group and in 36% of those in the bevacizumab-first group) and hospitalizations for adverse events (in 48% and 32%, respectively) were more common in the aflibercept-monotherapy group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial of treatment of moderate vision loss due to diabetic macular edema involving the center of the macula, we found no evidence of a significant difference in visual outcomes over a 2-year period between aflibercept monotherapy and treatment with bevacizumab first with a switch to aflibercept in the case of suboptimal response. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; Protocol AC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03321513.).

Refill-Exchange Procedure of the Port Delivery System With Ranibizumab: Overview and Clinical Trial Experience

PURPOSE

To describe the Port Delivery System with ranibizumab refill-exchange procedure.

METHODS

Procedure based on the clinical trial program in patients with retinal diseases.

RESULTS

The refill-exchange procedure is performed under topical anesthesia and strict aseptic conditions. Supplemental task lighting and magnification are recommended throughout the procedure. Ranibizumab is aseptically transferred from the vial with the filter needle and air is removed from the syringe. The filter needle is then replaced with the refill needle; any remaining air is removed from the syringe and the plunger is advanced to the 0.1-mL mark. Targeting the implant septum center, the refill needle is inserted perpendicularly to the globe until the soft stop contacts the conjunctiva (perpendicular orientation and conjunctival contact are maintained throughout the procedure); a cotton-tipped applicator is recommended for globe stabilization. The entire syringe contents are slowly injected over 5-10 seconds while existing solution fills the fluid collection reservoir. Once completed, the needle is carefully withdrawn while maintaining perpendicularity. The procedure can be successfully performed in rare, specific cases, including subconjunctival thickening or fibrous capsule formation, fluid-filled bleb formation, and corneal patch grafts.

CONCLUSION

The procedure is straightforward but distinct from intravitreal injections and requires adherence to standardized techniques. With appropriate preparation, the procedure can be performed in specific cases. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2022;53:257-265.].

Effect of Intravitreous Aflibercept vs Vitrectomy With Panretinal Photocoagulation on Visual Acuity in Patients With Vitreous Hemorrhage From Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Vitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy can cause loss of vision. The best management approach is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare initial treatment with intravitreous aflibercept vs vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation for vitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trial at 39 DRCR Retina Network sites in the US and Canada including 205 adults with vison loss due to vitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy who were enrolled from November 2016 to December 2017. The final follow-up visit was completed in January 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Random assignment of eyes (1 per participant) to aflibercept (100 participants) or vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation (105 participants). Participants whose eyes were assigned to aflibercept initially received 4 monthly injections. Both groups could receive aflibercept or vitrectomy during follow-up based on protocol criteria.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was mean visual acuity letter score (range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better vision) over 24 weeks (area under the curve); the study was powered to detect a difference of 8 letters. Secondary outcomes included mean visual acuity at 4 weeks and 2 years.

RESULTS

Among 205 participants (205 eyes) who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 57 [11] years; 115 [56%] men; mean visual acuity letter score, 34.5 [Snellen equivalent, 20/200]), 95% (195 of 205) completed the 24-week visit and 90% (177 of 196, excluding 9 deaths) completed the 2-year visit. The mean visual acuity letter score over 24 weeks was 59.3 (Snellen equivalent, 20/63) (95% CI, 54.9 to 63.7) in the aflibercept group vs 63.0 (Snellen equivalent, 20/63) (95% CI, 58.6 to 67.3) in the vitrectomy group (adjusted difference, -5.0 [95% CI, -10.2 to 0.3], P = .06). Among 23 secondary outcomes, 15 showed no significant difference. The mean visual acuity letter score was 52.6 (Snellen equivalent, 20/100) in the aflibercept group vs 62.3 (Snellen equivalent, 20/63) in the vitrectomy group at 4 weeks (adjusted difference, -11.2 [95% CI, -18.5 to -3.9], P = .003) and 73.7 (Snellen equivalent, 20/40) vs 71.0 (Snellen equivalent, 20/40) at 2 years (adjusted difference, 2.7 [95% CI, -3.1 to 8.4], P = .36). Over 2 years, 33 eyes (33%) assigned to aflibercept received vitrectomy and 34 eyes (32%) assigned to vitrectomy received subsequent aflibercept.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among participants whose eyes had vitreous hemorrhage from proliferative diabetic retinopathy, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of mean visual acuity letter score over 24 weeks following initial treatment with intravitreous aflibercept vs vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation. However, the study may have been underpowered, considering the range of the 95% CI, to detect a clinically important benefit in favor of initial vitrectomy with panretinal photocoagulation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02858076.

Effect of Initial Management With Aflibercept vs Laser Photocoagulation vs Observation on Vision Loss Among Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema Involving the Center of the Macula and Good Visual Acuity: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Intravitreous injections of antivascular endothelial growth factor agents are effective for treating diabetic macular edema (DME) involving the center of the macula (center-involved DME [CI-DME]) with visual acuity impairment (20/32 or worse). The best approach to treating patients with CI-DME and good visual acuity (20/25 or better) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare vision loss at 2 years among eyes initially managed with aflibercept, laser photocoagulation, or observation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trial conducted at 91 US and Canadian sites among 702 adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Participants had 1 study eye with CI-DME and visual acuity of 20/25 or better. The first participant was randomized on November 8, 2013, and the final date of follow-up was September 11, 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

Eyes were randomly assigned to 2.0 mg of intravitreous aflibercept (n = 226) as frequently as every 4 weeks, focal/grid laser photocoagulation (n = 240), or observation (n = 236). Aflibercept was required for eyes in the laser photocoagulation or observation groups that had decreased visual acuity from baseline by at least 10 letters (≥ 2 lines on an eye chart) at any visit or by 5 to 9 letters (1-2 lines) at 2 consecutive visits.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was at least a 5-letter visual acuity decrease from baseline at 2 years. Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration adverse events (defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, or vascular or unknown death) were reported.

RESULTS

Among 702 randomized participants (mean age, 59 years; 38% female [n=264]), 625 of 681 (92% excluding deaths) completed the 2-year visit. For eyes with visual acuity that decreased from baseline, aflibercept was initiated in 25% (60/240) and 34% (80/236) in the laser photocoagulation and observation groups, respectively. At 2 years, the percentage of eyes with at least a 5-letter visual acuity decrease was 16% (33/205), 17% (36/212), and 19% (39/208) in the aflibercept, laser photocoagulation, and observation groups, respectively (aflibercept vs laser photocoagulation risk difference, -2% [95% CI, -9% to 5%]; relative risk, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.57-1.35; P = .79]; aflibercept vs observation risk difference, -3% [95% CI, -11% to 4%]; relative risk, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.55-1.27; P = .79]; laser photocoagulation vs observation risk difference, -1% [95% CI, -9% to 6%]; relative risk, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.64-1.41; P = .79]). Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration vascular events occurred in 15 (7%), 13 (5%), and 8 (3%) participants in the aflibercept, laser photocoagulation, and observation groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among eyes with CI-DME and good visual acuity, there was no significant difference in vision loss at 2 years whether eyes were initially managed with aflibercept or with laser photocoagulation or observation and given aflibercept only if visual acuity worsened. Observation without treatment unless visual acuity worsens may be a reasonable strategy for CI-DME.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01909791.

Simultaneous Inhibition of Angiopoietin-2 and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-A with Faricimab in Diabetic Macular Edema: BOULEVARD Phase 2 Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

The phase 2 BOULEVARD trial compared safety and efficacy of faricimab, a novel bispecific antibody targeting angiopoietin-2 and vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A), with ranibizumab in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).

DESIGN

The BOULEVARD trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02699450) was a prospective, randomized, active comparator-controlled, double-masked, multicenter, phase 2 study conducted at 59 sites in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

The trial enrolled patients 18 years of age or older with center-involving DME, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 73 to 24 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters, and central subfield thickness (CST) of 325 μm or more.

METHODS

Anti-VEGF treatment-naïve patients were randomized 1:1:1 to intravitreal 6.0 mg faricimab, 1.5 mg faricimab, or 0.3 mg ranibizumab, and patients previously treated with anti-VEGF were randomized 1:1 to 6.0 mg faricimab or 0.3 mg ranibizumab. Patients were dosed monthly for 20 weeks, followed by an observation period up to week 36 to assess durability.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The prespecified primary outcome measure was mean change in BCVA from baseline at week 24 for faricimab versus ranibizumab in treatment-naïve patients. Key secondary and exploratory outcome measures included CST, Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score, and durability as assessed by time to re-treatment.

RESULTS

The trial enrolled 229 patients (168 treatment-naïve and 61 previously treated with anti-VEGF). In treatment-naïve patients, 6.0 mg faricimab, 1.5 mg faricimab, and 0.3 mg ranibizumab resulted in mean improvements of 13.9, 11.7, and 10.3 ETDRS letters from baseline, respectively. The 6.0-mg faricimab dose demonstrated a statistically significant gain of 3.6 letters over ranibizumab (P = 0.03). In both patient populations, faricimab resulted in dose-dependent reductions in CST, improvements in DRSS score, and longer time to re-treatment during the observation period compared with ranibizumab. Faricimab showed no new or unexpected safety signals.

CONCLUSIONS

The BOULEVARD trial met its primary end point; faricimab demonstrated statistically superior visual acuity gains versus ranibizumab at week 24 in treatment-naïve patients. Central subfield thickness reduction, DRSS score improvement, and extended durability outcomes support the primary outcome. These findings suggest the benefit of simultaneous inhibition of angiopoietin-2 and VEGF-A with faricimab for patients with DME.

Suprachoroidal silicone oil migration following retinal detachment repair

Silicone oil is a commonly used tamponade agent. We report the rare complication of a patient who presented with silicone oil in the suprachoroidal space following retinal detachment repair. The silicone oil was subsequently removed without any long-term complications.