John A. Wells

Aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema.

BACKGROUND The relative efficacy and safety of intravitreous aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab in the treatment of diabetic macular edema are unknown. METHODS At 89 clinical sites, we randomly assigned 660 adults (mean age, 61±10 years) with diabetic macular edema involving the macular center to receive intravitreous aflibercept at a dose of 2.0 mg (224 participants), bevacizumab at a dose of 1.25 mg (218 participants), or ranibizumab at a dose of 0.3 mg (218 participants). The study drugs were administered as often as every 4 weeks, according to a protocol-specified algorithm. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity at 1 year. RESULTS From baseline to 1 year, the mean visual-acuity letter score (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better visual acuity; a score of 85 is approximately 20/20) improved by 13.3 with aflibercept, by 9.7 with bevacizumab, and by 11.2 with ranibizumab. Although the improvement was greater with aflibercept than with the other two drugs (P<0.001 for aflibercept vs. bevacizumab and P=0.03 for aflibercept vs. ranibizumab), it was not clinically meaningful, because the difference was driven by the eyes with worse visual acuity at baseline (P<0.001 for interaction). When the initial visual-acuity letter score was 78 to 69 (equivalent to approximately 20/32 to 20/40) (51% of participants), the mean improvement was 8.0 with aflibercept, 7.5 with bevacizumab, and 8.3 with ranibizumab (P>0.50 for each pairwise comparison). When the initial letter score was less than 69 (approximately 20/50 or worse), the mean improvement was 18.9 with aflibercept, 11.8 with bevacizumab, and 14.2 with ranibizumab (P<0.001 for aflibercept vs. bevacizumab, P=0.003 for aflibercept vs. ranibizumab, and P=0.21 for ranibizumab vs. bevacizumab). There were no significant differences among the study groups in the rates of serious adverse events (P=0.40), hospitalization (P=0.51), death (P=0.72), or major cardiovascular events (P=0.56). CONCLUSIONS Intravitreous aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab improved vision in eyes with center-involved diabetic macular edema, but the relative effect depended on baseline visual acuity. When the initial visual-acuity loss was mild, there were no apparent differences, on average, among study groups. At worse levels of initial visual acuity, aflibercept was more effective at improving vision. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01627249.).

Baseline Predictors for One-Year Visual Outcomes with Ranibizumab or Bevacizumab for Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration

OBJECTIVE To determine the baseline predictors of visual acuity (VA) outcomes 1 year after treatment with ranibizumab or bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN Cohort study within the Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT). PARTICIPANTS A total of 1105 participants with neovascular AMD, baseline VA 20/25 to 20/320, and VA measured at 1 year. METHODS Participants were randomly assigned to ranibizumab or bevacizumab on a monthly or as-needed schedule. Masked readers evaluated fundus morphology and features on optical coherence tomography (OCT). Visual acuity was measured using electronic VA testing. Independent predictors were identified using regression techniques. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The VA score, VA score change from baseline, and ≥3-line gain at 1 year. RESULTS At 1 year, the mean VA score was 68 letters, mean improvement from baseline was 7 letters, and 28% of participants gained ≥3 lines. Older age, larger area of choroidal neovascularization (CNV), and elevation of retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) were associated with worse VA (all P<0.005), less gain in VA (all P<0.02), and a lower proportion gaining ≥3 lines (all P<0.04). Better baseline VA was associated with better VA at 1 year, less gain in VA, and a lower proportion gaining ≥3 lines (all P<0.0001). Predominantly or minimally classic lesions were associated with worse VA than occult lesions (66 vs. 69 letters; P=0.0003). Retinal angiomatous proliferans (RAP) lesions were associated with more gain in VA (10 vs. 7 letters; P=0.03) and a higher proportion gaining ≥3 lines (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-3.1). Geographic atrophy (GA) was associated with worse VA (64 vs. 68 letters; P=0.02). Eyes with total foveal thickness in the second quartile (325-425 μm) had the best VA (P=0.01) and were most likely to gain ≥3 lines (P=0.004). Predictors did not vary by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS For all treatment groups, older age, better baseline VA, larger CNV area, predominantly or minimally classic lesion, absence of RAP lesion, presence of GA, greater total fovea thickness, and RPE elevation on optical coherence tomography were independently associated with less improvement in VA at 1 year. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Macular Dystrophy Associated with Mutations at Codon 172 in the Human Retinal Degeneration Slow Gene

BACKGROUND Recently, mutations in the retinal degeneration slow (rds) gene which codes for peripherin-rds have been implicated as a cause of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Because this gene is expressed in both rods and cones, mutations in the rds gene might be expected to cause degeneration affecting either the scotopic or photopic systems. Mutations at codon 172 of the rds gene have been identified in three families with autosomal dominantly inherited, progressive macular dystrophy. METHODS Affected individuals underwent ophthalmic examination, scotopic perimetry, dark adaptometry, measurement of color-contrast sensitivity, and electroretinography to characterize the photoreceptor dysfunction. RESULTS In all but one affected member, symptoms of progressive central visual loss developed in the third or fourth decade of life accompanied by central scotoma and well-demarcated atrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium and choriocapillaris of the macula. In general, cone and rod thresholds were elevated, and color-contrast sensitivity was absent in the central visual field. Peripherally, the scotopic sensitivities were normal, as was the recovery from bleach. Cone electroretinograms were diminished in amplitude, and delayed in all affected adults except one. Rod electroretinograms were normal or near normal in amplitude, and had normal implicit times. Affected asymptomatic children had macular changes, abnormal color-contrast sensitivity, and reduced pattern and cone electroretinograms. CONCLUSION These results indicate that mutations in the rds gene can be expressed as a macular dystrophy, with evidence of primary cone dysfunction and preservation of peripheral rod function.

Incidence of idiopathic full-thickness macular holes in fellow eyes: A 5-year prospective natural history study

PURPOSE This study aimed to determine the incidence of idiopathic full-thickness macular hole (FTMH) in normal fellow eyes and to evaluate the role of electrodiagnostic and psychophysical tests in identifying eyes at risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS A prospective longitudinal natural history study of a cohort of patients with unilateral holes and normal, asymptomatic fellow eyes without posterior vitreous detachment was conducted. Subjects underwent baseline examination, pattern reversal electroretinography, electro-oculography (EOG), and color contrast sensitivity (CCS) testing for protan, deutan, and tritan thresholds and were recalled for clinical examination at 18 months and 5 years. RESULTS At baseline, 114 patients were examined. Eighty were available for review at 18 months, of whom 6 had full-thickness macular holes develop in the fellow eye. At 5 years, 67 of the remaining 74 patients who had not developed holes at 18 months were re-examined and a further 5 were found to have holes develop in the fellow eye. A posterior vitreous detachment without hole formation had developed in 20 fellow eyes at 5 years. Although mean pattern reversal electroretinography and EOG responses were within normal limits in affected and fellow eyes at baseline, mean CCS protan, deutan, and tritan thresholds were elevated significantly in affected eyes at baseline (P = 0.0001). Unaffected fellow eyes showed normal mean protan and deutan thresholds, but significantly elevated mean tritan thresholds (P = 0.01) at baseline. Mean tritan CCS loss was, however, similar in fellow eyes in which holes later developed and in fellow eyes in which holes did not. CONCLUSIONS The Kaplan-Meier estimated risk of fellow eye involvement is 15.6% (range, 8.4%-22.3%; P = 0.05) at 5 years. Although electrodiagnostic and psychophysical testing was not predictive of fellow eye involvement, tritan CCS loss at baseline, in apparently normal fellow eyes, may indicate subclinical foveal dysfunction, the nature of which is unclear.

Surgical removal of non-age-related subfoveal choroidal neovascular membranes.

Purpose To assess anatomical and visual results following the surgical removal of nonage-related subfoveal choroidal neovascular membranes.Methods A retrospective study was carried out of 31 consecutive patients undergoing vitrectomy, parafoveal retinotomy and removal of subfoveal choroidal neovascular membranes that were either idiopathic or associated with multifocal choroiditis, high myopia, trauma or angioid streaks.Results Visual acuity improved or remained the same in 25 eyes (81%) after a mean follow-up of 10.1 months (range 3-37 months). Visual acuity improved by more than 2 lines of Snellen acuity in 5 eyes (16%) and decreased by more than 2 lines in 2 eyes (6%). There was no significant association between the final visual outcome and length of symptoms prior to surgery or pre-operative visual acuity. Atrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium and older age were associated with poor outcome. Membranes recurred in 11 eyes (35%), and eyes with subfoveal blood prior to surgery were more likely to have recurrent membranes.Conclusions The results of surgical removal of non-age-related subfoveal neovascular membranes have been encouraging, but further studies of long-term outcome and of the natural history of individual conditions are required.

Comparison of Aflibercept, Bevacizumab, and Ranibizumab for Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: Extrapolation of Data to Clinical Practice.

IMPORTANCE The Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR Network), sponsored by the National Eye Institute, reported the results of a comparative effectiveness randomized clinical trial (RCT) evaluating the 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents aflibercept (2.0 mg), bevacizumab (1.25 mg), and ranibizumab (0.3 mg) for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) involving the center of the retina and associated with visual acuity loss. The many important findings of the RCT prompted the American Society of Retina Specialists to convene a group of experts to provide their perspective regarding clinically relevant findings of the study. OBJECTIVES To describe specific outcomes of the RCT judged worthy of highlighting, to discuss how these and other clinically relevant results should be considered by specialists treating DME, and to identify unanswered questions that merit consideration before treatment. EVIDENCE REVIEW The DRCR Network-authored publication on primary outcomes of the comparative effectiveness RCT at 89 sites in the United States. The study period of the RCT was August 22, 2012, to August 28, 2013. FINDINGS On average, all 3 anti-VEGF agents led to improved visual acuity in eyes with DME involving the center of the retina and with visual acuity impairment, including mean (SD) improvements by +13.3 (11.1) letters with aflibercept vs +9.7 (10.1) letters with bevacizumab (P < .001) and +11.2 (9.4) letters with ranibizumab (P = .03). Worse visual acuity when initiating therapy was associated with greater visual acuity benefit of aflibercept (+18.9 [11.5]) over bevacizumab (+11.8 [12.0]) or ranibizumab (14.2 [10.6]) 1 year later (P < .001 for interaction with visual acuity as a continuous variable, and P = .002 for interaction with visual acuity as a categorical variable). It is unknown whether different visual acuity outcomes associated with the use of the 3 anti-VEGF agents would be noted with other treatment regimens or with adequately repackaged bevacizumab, as well as in patients with criteria that excluded them from the RCT, such as persistent DME despite recent anti-VEGF treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE On average, all 3 anti-VEGF agents led to improved visual acuity in eyes with DME involving the center of the retina and visual acuity impairment. Worse visual acuity when initiating therapy was associated with greater visual acuity benefit of aflibercept over bevacizumab or ranibizumab 1 year later. Care needs to be taken when attempting to extrapolate outcomes of this RCT to differing treatment regimens. With access to adequately repackaged bevacizumab, many specialists might initiate therapy with bevacizumab when visual acuity is good (ie, 20/32 to 20/40 as measured in the DRCR Network), recognizing that the cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab outweighs that of aflibercept or ranibizumab.

Association of Baseline Visual Acuity and Retinal Thickness With 1-Year Efficacy of Aflibercept, Bevacizumab, and Ranibizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema

IMPORTANCE Comparisons of the relative effect of 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents to treat diabetic macular edema warrant further assessment. OBJECTIVE To provide additional outcomes from a randomized trial evaluating 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents for diabetic macular edema within subgroups based on baseline visual acuity (VA) and central subfield thickness (CST) as evaluated on optical coherence tomography. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Post hoc exploratory analyses were conducted of randomized trial data on 660 adults with diabetic macular edema and decreased VA (Snellen equivalent, approximately 20/32 to 20/320). The original study was conducted between August 22, 2012, and August 28, 2013. Analysis was conducted from January 7 to June 2, 2015. INTERVENTIONS Repeated 0.05-mL intravitreous injections of 2.0 mg of aflibercept (224 eyes), 1.25 mg of bevacizumab (218 eyes), or 0.3 mg of ranibizumab (218 eyes) as needed per protocol. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES One-year VA and CST outcomes within prespecified subgroups based on both baseline VA and CST thresholds, defined as worse (20/50 or worse) or better (20/32 to 20/40) VA and thicker (≥400 µm) or thinner (250 to 399 µm) CST. RESULTS In the subgroup with worse baseline VA (n = 305), irrespective of baseline CST, aflibercept showed greater improvement than bevacizumab or ranibizumab for several VA outcomes. In the subgroup with better VA and thinner CST at baseline (61-73 eyes across 3 treatment groups), VA outcomes showed little difference between groups; mean change was +7.2, +8.4, and +7.6 letters in the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively. However, in the subgroup with better VA and thicker CST at baseline (31-43 eyes), there was a suggestion of worse VA outcomes in the bevacizumab group; mean change from baseline to 1 year was +9.5, +5.4, and +9.5 letters in the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively, and VA letter score was greater than 84 (approximately 20/20) in 21 of 33 (64%), 7 of 31 (23%), and 21 of 43 (49%) eyes, respectively. The adjusted differences and 95% CIs were 39% (17% to 60%) for aflibercept vs bevacizumab, 25% (5% to 46%) for ranibizumab vs bevacizumab, and 13% (-8% to 35%) for aflibercept vs ranibizumab. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These post hoc secondary findings suggest that for eyes with better initial VA and thicker CST, some VA outcomes may be worse in the bevacizumab group than in the aflibercept and ranibizumab groups. Given the exploratory nature of these analyses and the small sample size within subgroups, caution is suggested when using the data to guide treatment considerations for patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01627249.

Change in Diabetic Retinopathy Through 2 Years: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Aflibercept, Bevacizumab, and Ranibizumab.

Importance Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy for diabetic macular edema (DME) favorably affects diabetic retinopathy (DR) improvement and worsening. It is unknown whether these effects differ across anti-VEGF agents. Objective To compare changes in DR severity during aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab treatment for DME. Design, Setting, and Participants Preplanned secondary analysis of data from a comparative effectiveness trial for center-involved DME was conducted in 650 participants receiving aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab. Retinopathy improvement and worsening were determined during 2 years of treatment. Participants were randomized in 2012 through 2013, and the trial concluded on September 23, 2015. Interventions Random assignment to aflibercept, 2.0 mg; bevacizumab, 1.25 mg; ranibizumab, 0.3 mg, up to every 4 weeks through 2 years following a retreatment protocol. Main Outcomes and Measures Percentages with retinopathy improvement at 1 and 2 years and cumulative probabilities for retinopathy worsening through 2-year without adjustment for multiple outcomes. Results A total of 650 participants (495 [76.2%] nonproliferative DR [NPDR], 155 proliferative DR [PDR]) were analyzed; 302 (46.5%) were women and mean (SD) age was 61 (10) years; 425 (65.4%) were white. At 1 year, among 423 NPDR eyes, 44 of 141 (31.2%) treated with aflibercept, 29 of 131 (22.1%) with bevacizumab, and 57 of 151 (37.7%) with ranibizumab had improvement of DR severity (adjusted difference: 11.7%; 95% CI, 2.9% to 20.6%; P = .004 for aflibercept vs bevacizumab; 8.9%; 95% CI, 1.7% to 16.1%; P = .01 for ranibizumab vs bevacizumab; and 2.9%; 95% CI, −5.7% to 11.4%; P = .51 for aflibercept vs ranibizumab). At 2 years, 33 eyes (24.8%) in the aflibercept group, 25 eyes (22.1%) in the bevacizumab group, and 40 eyes (31.0%) in the ranibizumab group had DR improvement; no treatment group differences were identified. For 93 eyes with PDR at baseline, 1-year improvement rates were 75.9% for aflibercept, 31.4% for bevacizumab, and 55.2% for ranibizumab (adjusted difference: 50.4%; 95% CI, 26.8% to 74.0%; P < .001 for aflibercept vs bevacizumab; 20.4%; 95% CI, −3.1% to 44.0%; P = .09 for ranibizumab vs bevacizumab; and 30.0%; 95% CI, 4.4% to 55.6%; P = .02 for aflibercept vs ranibizumab). These rates and treatment group differences appeared to be maintained at 2 years. Despite the reduced numbers of injections in the second year, 66 (59.5%) of NPDR and 28 (70.0%) of PDR eyes that manifested improvement at 1 year maintained improvement at 2 years. Two-year cumulative rates for retinopathy worsening ranged from 7.1% to 10.2% and 17.2% to 26.4% among anti-VEGF groups for NPDR and PDR eyes, respectively. No statistically significant treatment differences were noted. Conclusions and Relevance At 1 and 2 years, eyes with NPDR receiving anti-VEGF treatment for DME may experience improvement in DR severity. Less improvement was demonstrated with bevacizumab at 1 year than with aflibercept or ranibizumab. Aflibercept was associated with more improvement at 1 and 2 years in the smaller subgroup of participants with PDR at baseline. All 3 anti-VEGF treatments were associated with low rates of DR worsening. These data provide additional outcomes that might be considered when choosing an anti-VEGF agent to treat DME.

Anti–Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Diabetic Macular Edema: Additional Efficacy Post Hoc Analyses of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Post hoc analyses from the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network randomized clinical trial comparing aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema (DME) might influence interpretation of study results. Objective To provide additional outcomes comparing 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents for DME. Design, Setting, and Participants Post hoc analyses performed from May 3, 2016, to June 21, 2016, of a randomized clinical trial performed from August 22, 2012, to September 23, 2015, of 660 participants comparing 3 anti-VEGF treatments in eyes with center-involved DME causing vision impairment. Exposures Randomization to intravitreous aflibercept (2.0 mg), bevacizumab (1.25 mg), or ranibizumab (0.3 mg) administered up to monthly based on a structured retreatment regimen. Focal/grid laser treatment was added after 6 months for the treatment of persistent DME. Main Outcomes and Measures Change in visual acuity (VA) area under the curve and change in central subfield thickness (CST) within subgroups based on whether an eye received laser treatment for DME during the study. Results Post hoc analyses were performed for 660 participants (mean [SD] age, 61 [10] years; 47% female, 65% white, 16% black or African American, 16% Hispanic, and 3% other). For eyes with an initial VA of 20/50 or worse, VA improvement was greater with aflibercept than the other agents at 1 year but superior only to bevacizumab at 2 years. Mean (SD) letter change in VA over 2 years (area under curve) was greater with aflibercept (+17.1 [9.7]) than with bevacizumab (+12.1 [9.4]; 95% CI, +1.6 to +7.3; P < .001) or ranibizumab (+13.6 [8.5]; 95% CI, +0.7 to +6.0; P = .009). When VA was 20/50 or worse at baseline, bevacizumab reduced CST less than the other agents at 1 year, but at 2 years the differences had diminished. In subgroups stratified by baseline VA, anti-VEGF agent, and whether focal/grid laser treatment was performed for DME, the only participants to have a substantial reduction in mean CST between 1 and 2 years were those with a baseline VA of 20/50 or worse receiving bevacizumab and laser treatment (mean [SD], -55 [108] µm; 95% CI, -82 to -28 µm; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance Although post hoc analyses should be viewed with caution given the potential for bias, in eyes with a VA of 20/50 or worse, aflibercept has the greatest improvement in VA over 2 years. Focal/grid laser treatment, ceiling and floor effects, or both may account for mean thickness reductions noted only in bevacizumab-treated eyes between 1 and 2 years. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT01627249.

Persistent Macular Thickening Following Intravitreous Aflibercept, Bevacizumab, or Ranibizumab for Central-Involved Diabetic Macular Edema With Vision Impairment: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Prevalence of persistent central-involved diabetic macular edema (DME) through 24 weeks of anti–vascular endothelial growth factor therapy and its longer-term outcomes may be relevant to treatment. Objective To assess outcomes of DME persisting at least 24 weeks after randomization to treatment with 2.0-mg aflibercept, 1.25-mg bevacizumab, or 0.3-mg ranibizumab. Design, Setting, and Participants Post hoc analyses of a clinical trial, the DRCR.net Protocol T among 546 of 660 participants (82.7%) meeting inclusion criteria for this investigation. Interventions Six monthly intravitreous anti–vascular endothelial growth factor injections (unless success after 3 to 5 injections); subsequent injections or focal/grid laser as needed per protocol to achieve stability. Main Outcomes and Measures Persistent DME through 24 weeks, probability of chronic persistent DME through 2 years, and at least 10-letter (≥ 2-line) gain or loss of visual acuity. Results The mean age of participants was 60 years, 363 (66.5%) were white, and 251 (46.0%) were women. Persistent DME through 24 weeks was more frequent with bevacizumab (118 of 180 [65.6%]) than aflibercept (60 of 190 [31.6%]) or ranibizumab (73 of 176 [41.5%]) (aflibercept vs bevacizumab, P < .001; ranibizumab vs bevacizumab, P < .001; and aflibercept vs ranibizumab, P = .05). Among eyes with persistent DME through 24 weeks (n = 251), rates of chronic persistent DME through 2 years were 44.2% with aflibercept, 68.2% with bevacizumab (aflibercept vs bevacizumab, P = .03), and 54.5% with ranibizumab (aflibercept vs ranibizumab, P = .41; bevacizumab vs ranibizumab, P = .16). Among eyes with persistent DME through 24 weeks, proportions with vs without chronic persistent DME through 2 years gaining at least 10 letters from baseline were 62% of 29 eyes vs 63% of 30 eyes (P = .88) with aflibercept, 51% of 70 vs 54% of 31 (P = .96) with bevacizumab, and 44% of 38 vs 65% of 29 (P = .10) with ranibizumab. Only 3 eyes with chronic persistent DME lost at least 10 letters. Conclusions and Relevance Persistent DME was more likely with bevacizumab than with aflibercept or ranibizumab. Among eyes with persistent DME, eyes assigned to bevacizumab were more likely to have chronic persistent DME than eyes assigned to aflibercept. These results suggest meaningful gains in vision with little risk of vision loss, regardless of anti–vascular endothelial growth factor agent given or persistence of DME through 2 years. Caution is warranted when considering switching therapies for persistent DME following 3 or more injections; improvements could be owing to continued treatment rather than switching therapies. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01627249