W. Lloyd Clark

Intravitreal aflibercept injection for macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: 1-year results from the phase 3 COPERNICUS study.

PURPOSE To evaluate intravitreal aflibercept injections (IAI; also called VEGF Trap-Eye) for patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). DESIGN Randomized controlled trial. METHODS This multicenter study randomized 189 patients (1 eye/patient) with macular edema secondary to CRVO to receive 6 monthly injections of either 2 mg intravitreal aflibercept (IAI 2Q4) (n = 115) or sham (n = 74). From week 24 to week 52, all patients received 2 mg intravitreal aflibercept as needed (IAI 2Q4 + PRN and sham + IAI PRN) according to retreatment criteria. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who gained ≥15 ETDRS letters from baseline at week 24. Additional endpoints included visual, anatomic, and quality-of-life NEI VFQ-25 outcomes at weeks 24 and 52. RESULTS At week 24, 56.1% of IAI 2Q4 patients gained ≥15 letters from baseline compared with 12.3% of sham patients (P < .001). At week 52, 55.3% of IAI 2Q4 + PRN patients gained ≥15 letters compared with 30.1% of sham + IAI PRN patients (P < .001). At week 52, IAI 2Q4 + PRN patients gained a mean of 16.2 letters of vision vs 3.8 letters for sham + IAI PRN (P < .001). The most common adverse events for both groups were conjunctival hemorrhage, eye pain, reduced visual acuity, and increased intraocular pressure. CONCLUSIONS Monthly injections of 2 mg intravitreal aflibercept for patients with macular edema secondary to CRVO resulted in a statistically significant improvement in visual acuity at week 24, which was largely maintained through week 52 with intravitreal aflibercept PRN dosing. Intravitreal aflibercept injection was generally well tolerated.

Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Trap-Eye for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: Six-Month Results of the Phase 3 COPERNICUS Study

OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy and safety of intravitreal vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) Trap-Eye in eyes with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). DESIGN Multicenter, randomized, prospective, controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS One hundred eighty-nine eyes with macular edema secondary to CRVO. METHODS Eyes were randomized 3:2 to receive VEGF Trap-Eye 2 mg or sham injection monthly for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The proportion of eyes with a ≥15-letter gain or more in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at week 24 (primary efficacy end point), mean changes in BCVA and central retinal thickness (CRT), and proportion of eyes progressing to neovascularization of the anterior segment, optic disc, or elsewhere in the retina. RESULTS At week 24, 56.1% of VEGF Trap-Eye treated eyes gained 15 letters or more from baseline versus 12.3% of sham-treated eyes (P<0.001). The VEGF Trap-Eye treated eyes gained a mean of 17.3 letters versus sham-treated eyes, which lost 4.0 letters (P<0.001). Central retinal thickness decreased by 457.2 μm in eyes treated with VEGF Trap-Eye versus 144.8 μm in sham-treated eyes (P<0.001), and progression to any neovascularization occurred in 0 and 5 (6.8%) of eyes treated with VEGF Trap-Eye and sham-treated eyes, respectively (P = 0.006). Conjunctival hemorrhage, reduced visual acuity, and eye pain were the most common adverse events (AEs). Serious ocular AEs were reported by 3.5% of VEGF Trap-Eye patients and 13.5% of sham patients. Incidences of nonocular serious AEs generally were well balanced between both groups. CONCLUSIONS At 24 weeks, monthly intravitreal injection of VEGF Trap-Eye 2 mg in eyes with macular edema resulting from CRVO improved visual acuity and CRT, eliminated progression resulting from neovascularization, and was associated with a low rate of ocular AEs related to treatment.

Intravitreal aflibercept injection for macular edema due to central retinal vein occlusion: two-year results from the COPERNICUS study.

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) for the treatment of macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). DESIGN Randomized, double-masked, phase 3 trial. PARTICIPANTS A total of 188 patients with macular edema secondary to CRVO. METHODS Patients received IAI 2 mg (IAI 2Q4) (n = 114) or sham injections (n = 74) every 4 weeks up to week 24. During weeks 24 to 52, patients from both arms were evaluated monthly and received IAI as needed, or pro re nata (PRN) (IAI 2Q4 + PRN and sham + IAI PRN). During weeks 52 to 100, patients were evaluated at least quarterly and received IAI PRN. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients who gained ≥ 15 letters in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to week 24. This study reports week 100 results. RESULTS The proportion of patients gaining ≥ 15 letters was 56.1% versus 12.3% (P<0.001) at week 24, 55.3% versus 30.1% (P<0.001) at week 52, and 49.1% versus 23.3% (P<0.001) at week 100 in the IAI 2Q4 + PRN and sham + IAI PRN groups, respectively. The mean change from baseline BCVA was also significantly higher in the IAI 2Q4 + PRN group compared with the sham + IAI PRN group at week 24 (+17.3 vs. -4.0 letters; P<0.001), week 52 (+16.2 vs. +3.8 letters; P<0.001), and week 100 (+13.0 vs. +1.5 letters; P<0.0001). The mean reduction from baseline in central retinal thickness was 457.2 versus 144.8 μm (P<0.001) at week 24, 413.0 versus 381.8 μm at week 52 (P = 0.546), and 390.0 versus 343.3 μm at week 100 (P = 0.366) in the IAI 2Q4 + PRN and sham + IAI PRN groups, respectively. The mean number (standard deviation) of PRN injections in the IAI 2Q4 + PRN and sham + IAI PRN groups was 2.7 ± 1.7 versus 3.9 ± 2.0 during weeks 24 to 52 and 3.3 ± 2.1 versus 2.9 ± 2.0 during weeks 52 to 100, respectively. The most frequent ocular serious adverse event from baseline to week 100 was vitreous hemorrhage (0.9% vs. 6.8% in the IAI 2Q4 + PRN and sham + IAI PRN groups, respectively). CONCLUSIONS The visual and anatomic improvements after fixed dosing through week 24 and PRN dosing with monthly monitoring from weeks 24 to 52 were diminished after continued PRN dosing, with a reduced monitoring frequency from weeks 52 to 100.

Treatment strategies and visual acuity outcomes in chronic postoperative propionibacterium acnes endophthalmitis

PURPOSE To report the treatment strategies and visual acuity outcomes of chronic postoperative endophthalmitis caused by Propionibacterium acnes. DESIGN Retrospective noncomparative case series. PARTICIPANTS All patients presenting 8 or more weeks after cataract surgery with intraocular inflammation caused by culture-proven P. acnes infection and treated at two institutions from 1974 through 1996 were included. METHODS Patients underwent three different initial treatment strategies. The study did not have a defined treatment protocol, but all patients received intraocular antibiotics. Patients were not randomly assigned to the various treatment strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Final visual acuity and effectiveness of various treatment procedures either as initial or follow-up therapy were assessed. RESULTS Using the 3 initial strategies, 36 patients were treated: (1) intraocular antibiotic injection alone (IOAB; n = 12); (2) pars plana vitrectomy and IOAB injection (PPV; n = 10); and (3) PPV with subtotal capsulectomy and IOAB injection (PPV-PC; n = 14). The number of patients with recurrent or persistent inflammation after one of the three initial treatment strategies were as follows: (1) IOAB alone, 12 (100%); (2) PPV, 5 (50%); and (3) PPV-PC, 2 (14%). None of the patients that underwent subsequent PPV, total capsular bag removal, IOAB injection, and either intraocular lens (IOL) exchange or removal had persistent or recurrent intraocular inflammation. Overall, final visual acuity was 20/40 or better in 18 patients (50%), and a total of 28 patients (78%) retained 20/400 or better vision. The mean follow-up after the last treatment was 2.9 years. CONCLUSIONS In this series of chronic P. acnes endophthalmitis, initial treatment with IOAB injection alone or vitrectomy without capsulectomy was associated with high rates of recurrent or persistent intraocular inflammation. Pars plana vitrectomy, partial capsulectomy, and IOAB injection without IOL exchange was usually successful on long-term follow-up. In patients with recurrent intraocular inflammation, pars plana vitrectomy, total capsular bag removal, IOAB injection, and IOL exchange or removal was a uniformly successful strategy. In contrast to other types of postoperative endophthalmitis, IOL exchange can be considered in these patients after total capsular bag removal.

Long-term outcomes with as-needed aflibercept in diabetic macular oedema: 2-year outcomes of the ENDURANCE extension study

Background/aims To evaluate the efficacy and safety of individualised 2.0 mg intravitreal aflibercept retreatment for diabetic macular oedema (DME) through the fifth year of management. Methods This is a phase IV, 2-year, open-label extension study. Sixty patients completing the 3-year VISTA DME (Study of Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema) phase III trial enrolled in the ENDURANCE (Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Aflibercept for the Treatment of DME in Subjects Who Completed the VISTA DME Trial) extension study. All patients received aflibercept in the presence of clinically relevant DME. Intervals between visits were prescribed according to disease activity. The main outcome measure was mean aflibercept injections given through 2 years. Results A mean of 7.7 aflibercept injections were administered through 2 years. Fifteen (25%) patients required no retreatment and 48% (n=29) of patients received five or fewer injections through 2 years. Among patients who received at least one aflibercept retreatment during ENDURANCE, the mean number of injections through 2 years was 9.5. The mean visual acuity and central retinal thickness gains achieved during VISTA DME were maintained and stable during ENDURANCE. The most notable safety signal was progression of diabetic retinopathy. Six (10%) patients converted from non-proliferative to proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), and a total of eight patients experienced PDR events occurring at a mean of 387 days following the previous aflibercept treatment. Conclusion The need for aflibercept retreatment was substantially reduced in the fourth and fifth years of aflibercept dosing for DME following initiation of therapy in the VISTA DME trial. While vision gains achieved during the 3-year VISTA DME trial were maintained through ENDURANCE with a reduced treatment burden, clinically relevant worsening of diabetic retinopathy was observed with progression to PDR in 10% of the eyes. Trial registration number NCT02299336

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration management in the third year: Final results from the TREX-AMD randomised trial

Background/Aims Prospectively evaluate outcomes in the third year of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) management using ranibizumab with continued treat and extend (TREX) dosing compared with monthly visits with retreatment upon evidence of exudative disease activity (PRN, pro re nata). Methods Subjects with treatment-naïve neovascular AMD were randomised 1:2 to Monthly or TREX and managed through 2 years. In the third year, subjects randomised to Monthly were managed PRN while subjects randomised to TREX were continued on TREX dosing or transitioned to PRN after achieving an interval of 12 weeks between visits. Results Sixty subjects enrolled and 46 (77%) completed month 36 (M36). Transition from Monthly to PRN was associated with a decline in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (+10.5 letters (month 24) to +5.4 (M36, p=0.09)); three (15%) subjects required no dosing during year 3, and 47% (114/243) of possible PRN injections were delivered, yielding a mean of 6.1 injections during year 3. Among the 9 (23%) TREX subjects transitioned to PRN, the need for ongoing anti-vascular endothelial growth factor retreatments was small, with 4 (4%) intravitreal injections being delivered among 106 PRN visits; this subgroup displayed an inferior BCVA trajectory compared with the remainder of subjects. Outcomes among subjects continued on TREX were more favourable, with a mean gain of +5.0 letters at M36. Conclusions Upon transition to PRN, subjects randomised to monthly dosing experienced a decline in BCVA. Among subjects initially randomised to TREX who transitioned to PRN after achieving a 12-week interval between visits, the overall need for additional treatment was low. Trial registration number NCT01748292, Results.

Integrated results from the COPERNICUS and GALILEO studies.

Objectives To report on the efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in an integrated analysis of COPERNICUS and GALILEO. Patients and methods Patients were randomized to receive intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 4 weeks or sham injections until week 24. From week 24 to week 52, all intravitreal aflibercept-treated patients in both studies and sham-treated patients in COPERNICUS were eligible to receive intravitreal aflibercept based on prespecified criteria. In GALILEO, sham-treated patients continued to receive sham treatment through week 52. Results At week 24, mean gain in best-corrected visual acuity and mean reduction in central retinal thickness were greater for intravitreal aflibercept-treated patients compared with sham, consistent with individual trial results. At week 52, after 6 months of intravitreal aflibercept as-needed treatment in COPERNICUS, patients originally randomized to sham group experienced visual and anatomic improvements but did not improve to the extent of those initially treated with intravitreal aflibercept, while the sham group in GALILEO did not improve over week 24 mean best-corrected visual acuity scores. Ocular serious adverse events occurred in <10% of patients. Conclusion This analysis of integrated data from COPERNICUS and GALILEO confirmed that intravitreal aflibercept is an effective treatment for macular edema following CRVO.

Optimizing Anti-VEGF Treatment Outcomes for Patients with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

BACKGROUND The introduction of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) drugs to ophthalmology has revolutionized the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Despite this significant progress, gaps and challenges persist in the diagnosis of nAMD, initiation of treatment, and management of frequent intravitreal injections. Thus, nAMD remains a leading cause of blindness in the United States. OBJECTIVE To present current knowledge, evidence, and expert perspectives on anti-VEGF therapies in nAMD to support managed care professionals and providers in decision making and collaborative strategies to overcome barriers to optimize anti-VEGF treatment outcomes among nAMD patients. SUMMARY Three anti-VEGF therapies currently form the mainstay of treatment for nAMD, including 2 therapies approved by the FDA for treatment of nAMD (aflibercept and ranibizumab) and 1 therapy approved by the FDA for oncology indications and used off-label for treatment of nAMD (bevacizumab). In clinical trials, each of the 3 agents maintained visual acuity (VA) in approximately 90% or more of nAMD patients over 2 years. However, in long-term and real-world settings, significant gaps and challenges in diagnosis, treatment, and management pose barriers to achieving optimal outcomes for patients with nAMD. Many considerations, including individual patient characteristics, on-label versus off-label treatment, repackaging, and financial considerations, add to the complexity of nAMD decision making and management. Many factors may contribute to additional challenges leading to suboptimal long-term outcomes among nAMD patients, such as delays in diagnosis and/or treatment approval and initiation, individual patient response to different anti-VEGF therapies, lapses in physician regimentation of anti-VEGF injection and monitoring, and inadequate patient adherence to treatment and monitoring. These latter factors highlight the considerable logistical, emotional, and financial burdens of long-term, frequent intravitreal injections and the vital importance of personalized approaches to anti-VEGF treatment decision making and management for patients with nAMD. To address these challenges and reduce the number of yearly injections, studies have examined alternative dosing regimens, including extended fixed intervals, as needed, and treat-and-extend strategies in specific nAMD patient populations. New clinical evidence and insights into expert clinical practice discussed in this article can support managed care professionals in the key role they play in addressing challenges in nAMD treatment and management and optimizing patient outcomes through appropriate management of anti-VEGF treatment. DISCLOSURES PRIME Education is an independent medical education company and has been an accredited provider of continuing education for 23 years. There is no fee for this activity as it is sponsored by PRIME through an educational grant from Regeneron. All authors contributed to the writing and reviewing of the article. Wykoff reports consultancies/research grants from Alcon Laboratories, Genentech/Roche, Clearside, and Iconic Therapeutics; consultancies/honoraria, research grants, and speaker fees from Allergan and Regeneron; research grants from Allegro, Apellis, Aura, NEI, NIH, Novartis, OHR Pharmaceuticals, Ophthotech, pSivida, Roche, Santen, SciFluor, Tyrogenex; and consultancies for Alimera Sciences, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, DORC, ONL Therapeutics, Thrombogenics, and Valeant. Clark reports advisory board work, consultancies, research grants, and speaker fees from Genentech/Roche and Regeneron and consultancy for Bayer. Brill reports consultancies for Aries Pharma, Avella, BaroNova, Braeburn Pharmaceuticals, Cardinal Health, Endogastric Solutions, GeneNews, Halt Medical, Lumendi, Medtronic, Monteris Medical, Natera, Phosphorus, Rebiotix, Seno Medical, UCB, Vermillion, Echosens, and HAP Innovations. Brill is a shareholder in EndoChoice, GeneNews, SonarMD, and SynerZ and reports advisory board work with Nestle Health Sciences, Indivior Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Bayer, and AstraZeneca. Nielson reports advisory board work/consultancy and research grants for Genentech/Roche; advisory board work and research grants from Regeneron; and research grants from Alcon and Ophthotech.