Article

Expanded 2-year follow-up of ranibizumab plus prompt or deferred laser or triamcinolone plus prompt laser for diabetic macular edema.

Elman Retina Group, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Ophthalmology (Impact Factor: 5.56). 04/2011; 118(4):609-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.12.033
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To report expanded 2-year follow-up of a previously reported randomized trial evaluating intravitreal 0.5 mg ranibizumab or 4 mg triamcinolone combined with focal/grid laser compared with focal/grid laser alone for treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).
Multicenter, randomized clinical trial.
A total of 854 study eyes of 691 participants with visual acuity of 20/32 to 20/320 (approximate Snellen equivalent) and DME involving the fovea.
Continuation of procedures previously reported for the randomized trial.
Best-corrected visual acuity and safety at the 2-year visit.
At the 2-year visit, compared with the sham + prompt laser group, the mean change in the visual acuity letter score from baseline was 3.7 letters greater in the ranibizumab + prompt laser group (95% confidence interval adjusted for multiple comparisons [aCI], -0.4 to +7.7), 5.8 letters greater in the ranibizumab + deferred laser group (95% aCI, +1.9 to +9.8), and 1.5 letters worse in the triamcinolone + prompt laser group (95% aCI, -5.5 to +2.4). After the 1- to 2-year visit in the ranibizumab + prompt or deferred laser groups, the median numbers of injections were 2 and 3 (potential maximum of 13), respectively. At the 2-year visit, the percentages of eyes with central subfield thickness ≥250 μm were 59% in the sham + prompt laser group, 43% in the ranibizumab + prompt laser group, 42% in the ranibizumab + deferred laser group, and 52% in the triamcinolone + prompt laser group. No systemic events attributable to study treatment were apparent. Three eyes in 3 (0.8%) of 375 participants had injection-related endophthalmitis in the ranibizumab groups, whereas elevated intraocular pressure and cataract surgery were more frequent in the triamcinolone + prompt laser group.
The expanded 2-year results reported are similar to results published previously and reinforce the conclusions originally reported: Ranibizumab should be considered for patients with DME and characteristics similar to those of the cohort in this clinical trial, including vision impairment with DME involving the center of the macula.

1 Bookmark
 · 
122 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate systemic safety of ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically reviewed. Eligible studies were randomized trials on ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema with observation at least 6 months and ≥80% completion rate that reported systemic adverse events of cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, vascular death, and overall mortality. The numbers of adverse events were compared between patients treated with ranibizumab and those without. Furthermore, dose-dependent effect of ranibizumab was estimated for overall mortality through Poisson meta-regression. Six trials with 2,459 patients were included. All trials had exclusion criteria on systemic vascular conditions for enrollment. Risk ratio for cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, vascular death, and overall mortality were 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.37-1.73; P = 0.57), 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.46-1.80; P = 0.78), 1.29 (95% confidence interval, 0.58-2.86; P = 0.53), and 1.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.78-4.73; P = 0.16), respectively. Poisson regression model showed a significant dose-dependent increase in overall mortality in the largest randomized trial using monthly ranibizumab (P = 0.04). However, the significance disappeared (P = 0.133) when pooled with other studies using ranibizumab on pro re nata basis. Ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema is considered safe when the patients are carefully selected based on systemic vascular conditions and it is used on pro re nata basis. Further evaluation is necessary on more intensive use or on high-risk patients.
    Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.) 04/2014; 34(4):629-35. · 2.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare the functional and structural effects of ranibizumab versus macular laser therapy in patients with center-involving diabetic macular edema DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, single-masked clinical trial METHODS: Setting - single center STUDY POPULATION: - 33 eyes of 33 patients with center-involving diabetic macular edema, with best corrected visual acuity 55-79 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters at baseline, completing the 48 week study period INTERVENTION: - subjects were randomized 2:1 to ranibizumab, three loading doses then retreatment four-weekly as required; or macular laser therapy at baseline, repeated as required every twelve weeks. Exploratory outcome measures - Structural imaging studies: greatest linear dimension and area of foveal avascular zone, perifoveal capillary dropout grade; presence of morphological features of diabetic macular edema on Spectralis™ optical coherence tomography. Functional measures: visual acuity; retinal sensitivity in central 4° and 12° on microperimetry; color contrast sensitivity protan and tritan thresholds; pattern and full field electroretinogram amplitudes and implicit times; multifocal electroretinogram amplitude distribution. These are reported at 12, 24 and 48 weeks. Ranibizumab treated subjects gained 6.0 letters vs. 0.9 letters lost for laser, demonstrated improved tritan and protan color contrast thresholds and improved retinal sensitivity. Electrophysiological function also improved after ranibizumab therapy. No safety issues were evident. Retinal thickness reduction and structural improvement in optical coherence tomography features of diabetic macular edema was better seen with ranibizumab therapy than in the laser group. There was no evidence of progressive ischemia with ranibizumab therapy. Ranibizumab therapy in the treatment of diabetic macular edema appears to improve retinal function and structure as demonstrated by this evaluation of different assessment modalities.
    American journal of ophthalmology 02/2014; · 3.83 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Diabetic macular edema (DME) can be treated with intravitreal glucocorticoids, particularly triamcinolone acetonide, dexamethasone (DEX), and fluocinolone acetonide (FA). Areas covered: The pathophysiology of DME includes multiple growth factors such as VEGF and also inflammatory mediators. Glucocorticoids act on DME through multiple pathways, and current research into their efficacy, safety, and therapeutic potential when administered intravitreally is discussed. Conclusion: The intravitreal route of administration minimizes systemic side effects of glucocorticoids. Furthermore, sustained-release low-dose delivery via the DEX implant or the FA implant will limit frequent intravitreal injection and possibly some cost associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy. In addition, the durable action of these treatments facilitates combination therapy. Patients can receive these implants as foundational therapy, and then receive additional treatment with laser or intravitreal anti-VEGF agents as combination therapy, which may conceivably provide some synergistic benefit. While the FA implant lasts much longer than the DEX implant, potentially decreasing the visit and treatment burden on patients and their families, the FA implant appears to have a greater risk of inducing ocular hypertension and cataract. However, these modalities have not been directly compared in a clinical trial and there is insufficient evidence to draw more elaborate conclusions.
    Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy 03/2014; · 2.86 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
21 Downloads
Available from
Jun 3, 2014