Jennifer T. Fine

Vision-Related Function after Ranibizumab Treatment by Better- or Worse-Seeing Eye: Clinical Trial Results from MARINA and ANCHOR

OBJECTIVE To examine the effects of ranibizumab on the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25) scores in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) according to whether the study eye was the better- or worse-seeing eye at baseline. DESIGN Within 2 randomized, double-masked clinical trials (MARINA and ANCHOR), the NEI VFQ-25 was administered at 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months. PARTICIPANTS We included 646 MARINA and 379 ANCHOR patients. INTERVENTION Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to monthly intravitreal ranibizumab (0.3 or 0.5 mg) or control (sham injections for MARINA; photodynamic therapy [PDT] with verteporfin for ANCHOR). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Mean change from baseline in NEI VFQ-25 scores at 12 and 24 months. RESULTS Across all treatment arms, 21% to 38% of enrolled eyes were the better-seeing eye. At the 24-month follow-up visit, mean change in composite scores with ranibizumab seemed to be better than control for both better-seeing eyes (8.4 [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.2-11.6], 7.5 [95% CI, 3.7-11.4], and -9.4 [95% CI, -12.5 to -6.3] for the 0.3-mg, 0.5-mg, and sham groups, respectively) and worse-seeing eyes (1.7 [95% CI, -1.1 to 4.4], 1.7 [95% CI, -0.7 to 4.1], and -5.4 [95% CI, -7.9 to -2.8] for the 0.3-mg, 0.5-mg, and sham groups, respectively) in MARINA, as well as the better-seeing eye in ANCHOR (11.3 [95% CI, 5.3-17.3], 13.3 [95% CI, 7.7-19.0], and -2.7 [95% CI, -9.0 to 3.7] for the 0.3-mg, 0.5-mg, and PDT groups, respectively). When the worse-seeing eye was treated in ANCHOR, such differences could not be detected at 24 months (1.3 [95% CI, -1.7 to 4.2], 2.6 [95% CI, -1.1 to 6.3], and 0.1 [95% CI, -3.5 to 3.7] for the 0.3-mg, 0.5-mg, and PDT groups, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Analysis of patient perception of vision-related function in phase III trials evaluating ranibizumab for neovascular AMD demonstrates improved patient-reported outcomes regardless of whether the treated eye is the better- or worse-seeing eye at onset of treatment, and supports treatment of such lesions with ranibizumab, even those in the worse-seeing eye. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S) Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Diabetic Macular Edema in the United States

IMPORTANCE Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of vision loss in persons with diabetes mellitus. Although there are national estimates for the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy and its risk factors among persons with diabetes, to our knowledge, no comparable estimates are available for DME specifically. OBJECTIVES To estimate the prevalence of DME in the US population and to identify associated risk factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A cross-sectional analysis of 1038 participants aged 40 years or older with diabetes and valid fundus photographs in the 2005 to 2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The overall prevalence of DME and its prevalence according to age, race/ethnicity, and sex. RESULTS Of the 1038 persons with diabetes analyzed for this study, 55 had DME, for an overall weighted prevalence of 3.8% (95% CI, 2.7%-4.9%) or approximately 746, 000 persons in the US 2010 population aged 40 years or older. We identified no differences in the prevalence of DME by age or sex. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the odds of having DME were higher for non-Hispanic blacks than for non-Hispanic whites (odds ratio [OR], 2.64; 95% CI, 1.19-5.84; P = .02). Elevated levels of glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.26-1.71 for each 1%; P < .001) and longer duration of diabetes (OR, 8.51; 95% CI, 3.70-19.54 for ≥ 10 vs <10 years; P < .001) were also associated with DME prevalence. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These results suggest a greater burden of DME among non-Hispanic blacks, individuals with high levels of hemoglobin A1c, and those with longer duration of diabetes. Given recent treatment advances in reducing vision loss and preserving vision in persons with DME, it is imperative that all persons with diabetes receive early screening; this recommendation is even more important for those at higher risk for DME.

Improved Vision-Related Function After Ranibizumab vs Photodynamic Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE To compare patient-reported visual function in those with neovascular age-related macular degeneration treated with ranibizumab or verteporfin photodynamic therapy (PDT). DESIGN Multicenter, double-masked, phase 3 trial (ANCHOR). Participants were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 0.3 or 0.5 mg of intravitreal ranibizumab plus sham verteporfin or sham injections plus active verteporfin monthly. The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25) was administered at baseline and 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Mean change from baseline in NEI VFQ-25 scores at 12 months. RESULTS At 12 months, patients treated with ranibizumab (0.3 mg [n = 137] or 0.5 mg [n = 139]) had mean improvements in NEI VFQ-25 composite scores of 5.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6 to 8.3) and 8.1 (95% CI, 5.3 to 10.8) points, respectively; patients treated with PDT (n = 142) had a mean improvement of 2.2 points (95% CI, -0.3 to 4.7; vs 0.5 mg of ranibizumab, P < .001; vs 0.3 mg of ranibizumab, P = .003). At each dose through 24 months, patients treated with ranibizumab were more likely to improve in most subscales, including the prespecified subscales (near activities, distance activities, and vision-specific dependency). CONCLUSIONS Patients treated with ranibizumab were more likely to report clinically meaningful improvements in visual function through 24 months compared with those treated with verteporfin PDT. Application to Clinical Practice Ranibizumab treatment in neovascular age-related macular degeneration can improve patient-reported visual function. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00061594.

Validation of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25) in Age-Related Macular Degeneration

PURPOSE Patient-reported measures of visual function are increasingly incorporated into clinical trials of new treatments for age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Limited information is available regarding the associations between distance visual acuity (VA), reading speed, or contrast sensitivity and the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25) subscales judged relevant to these measures. This studys objective was to evaluate such associations along with questions on restricted activity days. METHODS This cross-sectional study was conducted in patients with clinical diagnoses of neovascular AMD. Patient-reported outcome measures included the NEI VFQ-25 and restricted activity days. Clinical assessments included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), reading speed, and contrast sensitivity. The better-seeing eye was defined based on the BCVA of each patient. Psychometric properties of the NEI VFQ-25 were examined; analyses a priori focused on the Near Activities, Distance Activities, and Vision-Specific Dependency subscales. RESULTS The final study group included 92 participants (mean age, 78 years). Cronbachs α for the subscales ranged from 0.67 to 0.92. The NEI VFQ-25 overall composite, Near Activities, Distance Activities, and Vision-Specific Dependency scores were correlated with BCVA (r = -0.48 to -0.54, all P < 0.0001), reading speed (r = 0.43 to 0.56, all P < 0.0001), and contrast sensitivity (r = -0.39 to -0.46, all P < 0.001) of the better-seeing eye and with restricted activity days (r = -0.52 to -0.55, all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS This study provides additional evidence supporting the validity of the NEI VFQ-25 in neovascular AMD patients by demonstrating correlations with a spectrum of vision measurements and a daily function measure.

Underuse of the Health Care System by Persons With Diabetes Mellitus and Diabetic Macular Edema in the United States

IMPORTANCE Thickening of the center of the retina, diabetic macular edema (DME), is the most common cause of visual loss due to diabetes mellitus. Treatment of DME has improved dramatically, and the prompt diagnosis of DME and referral of these patients have become more critical. Nonetheless, awareness of and care for DME in the US population is uncharacterized. OBJECTIVE To characterize eye care and awareness of eye disease among persons with DME in the general US population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cross-sectional analysis of data from participants in the 2005 to 2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 40 years or older with diabetes mellitus and fundus photographs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Among persons with DME, (1) awareness that diabetes has affected their eyes; (2) report on the last time they visited a diabetes specialist; (3) report on their last eye examination with pupil dilation; and (4) prevalence of visual impairment. RESULTS In 2010, only 44.7% (95% CI, 27.0%-62.4%) of US adults 40 years or older with DME reported being told by a physician that diabetes had affected their eyes or that they had retinopathy; 46.7% (95% CI, 27.5%-66.0%), that they had visited a diabetes nurse educator, dietician, or nutritionist for their diabetes mellitus more than 1 year ago or never; and 59.7% (95% CI, 43.5%-75.9%), that they had received an eye examination with pupil dilation in the last year. Among persons with DME, 28.7% (95% CI, 12.7%-44.7%) were visually impaired (defined as visual acuity worse than 20/40 in the eye with DME) based on visual acuity at the initial examination and 16.0% (95% CI, 2.5%-29.4%) based on best-corrected visual acuity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Many persons with diabetes mellitus in the United States are not getting care that can prevent visual impairment and blindness. Strategies to increase awareness are warranted, especially given the recent availability of improved therapies for DME.

Driving ability reported by neovascular age-related macular degeneration patients after treatment with ranibizumab

OBJECTIVES To determine the impact of ranibizumab on driving status, driving ability perception, and having 20/40 vision or better in patients with choroidal neovascularization resulting from age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN Phase III, multicenter, randomized clinical trials (Minimally Classic/Occult Trial of the Anti-VEGF Antibody Ranibizumab in the Treatment of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration [MARINA] and Anti-VEGF Antibody for the Treatment of Predominantly Classic Choroidal Neovascularization in Age-Related Macular Degeneration [ANCHOR]). PARTICIPANTS One thousand one hundred twenty-six patients with choroidal neovascularization resulting from AMD. METHODS Participants were assigned randomly to sham (n=238), 0.3-mg ranibizumab monthly injections (n=238), or 0.5-mg ranibizumab monthly injections (n=240) for 24 months (MARINA), or were randomized to verteporfin photodynamic therapy (PDT; n=143), 0.3-mg ranibizumab monthly injections (n=140), or 0.5-mg ranibizumab monthly injections (n=140) for 24 months (ANCHOR). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Self-reported driving status and driving ability perception were assessed as exploratory outcomes at baseline through 24 months after baseline using the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Best-corrected visual acuity in each eye was assessed monthly through 24 months. RESULTS At baseline, 68.6% of patients in the MARINA trial and 62.7% of patients in the ANCHOR trial reported driving. Among patients driving at baseline in the MARINA trial 2 years after randomization, 67.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 59.2-75.2) of sham patients and 78.4% (95% CI, 71.8-85.0) of 0.5-mg patients reported that they were still driving. Among patients driving at baseline in the ANCHOR trial at 2 years after randomization, 71.6% (95% CI, 60.8-82.4) of PDT patients and 91.4% (95% CI, 85.3-97.5) of 0.5-mg patients were still driving. Also in the ANCHOR trial, ranibizumab-treated patients who were not driving at baseline seemed more likely to drive by months 12 and 24 than PDT patients. Perception of driving ability was correlated with improvement in visual acuity (VA) in the better-seeing eye at 12 and 24 months (R2=0.17 and R2=0.20 at 12 and 24 months, respectively [P<0.001], in the MARINA trial; R2=0.13 and R2=0.14, respectively [P<0.001], in the ANCHOR trial). Visual acuity in one or both eyes 2 years after randomization was more likely to be 20/40 or better in the ranibizumab-treated groups. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that patients with neovascular AMD treated with ranibizumab are more likely to report driving ability and have vision of at least 20/40 than patients given sham treatment or PDT. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S) Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

MOdified NARanjo Causality Scale for ICSRs (MONARCSi): A Decision Support Tool for Safety Scientists

IntroductionWithin the field of Pharmacovigilance, the most common approaches for assessing causality between a report of a drug and a corresponding adverse event are clinical judgment, probabilistic methods and algorithms. Although multiple methods using these three approaches have been proposed, there is currently no universally accepted method for assessing drug-event causality in ICSRs and variability in drug-event causality assessments is well documented.ObjectiveThis study describes the development and validation of an Individual Case Safety Report (ICSR) Causality Decision Support Tool to assist Safety Professionals (SPs) performing causality assessments.MethodsRoche developed this model with nine drug-event pair features capturing important aspects of Naranjo’s scoring system, selected Bradford–Hill criteria, and internal Roche safety practices. Each of the features was weighted based on individual safety professional (n = 65) assessments of the importance of that feature when assessing causality, using an ordinal weighting scale (0 = no importance, 4 = very high importance). The mean and associated standard deviation for each feature weight was calculated and were used as inputs to a fitted logistic equation, which calculated the probability of a causal relationship between the drug and adverse event. Model training, validation, and testing were conducted by comparing MONARCSi causality classifications to previous company causality assessments for 978 randomly selected, clinical trial drug-event pairs based on their respective features and weights.ResultsThe final model test, a two-by-two comparison of the results, showed substantial agreement (Gwet Kappa = 0.77) between MONARCSi and Roche safety professionals’ assessments of causality, using global introspection. The model exhibited moderate sensitivity (65%) and high specificity (93%), high positive and negative predictive values (79 and 88%, respectively), and an F1 score of 71%.ConclusionAnalysis suggests that the MONARCSi model could potentially be a useful decision support tool to assist pharmacovigilance safety professionals when evaluating drug-event causality in a consistent and documentable manner.