Dataset Information

Topical mecamylamine for diabetic macular edema.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Stimulation of nicotinic acetylcholine (nACh) receptors on vascular endothelial cells promotes angiogenesis and vascular permeability in animal models. The safety and bioactivity of topical mecamylamine, an antagonist of nACh receptors, was tested in patients with diabetic macular edema.

Design

A multicenter phase I/II clinical trial.

Methods

Twenty-three patients with chronic diabetic macular edema received 1% mecamylamine topically twice daily for 12 weeks, the primary end point. Patients underwent safety assessments, measurement of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and measurement of foveal thickness using optical coherence tomography at baseline, 1, 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks.

Results

Mecamylamine drops were well tolerated and there were no drug-related safety problems. Mean improvement in BCVA at 1, 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks was 2.8, 1.9, 2.4, 0.8, and 3.1 letters, respectively. There was little change in mean excess foveal thickness. There was substantial heterogeneity in response, because 8 patients showed convincing improvement in BCVA, foveal thickness, or both, 9 patients showed equivocal or no substantial changes, and 4 patients showed worsening. Five patients showed a substantial improvement in BCVA, foveal thickness, or both between their last visit while receiving mecamylamine and 1 month after stopping mecamylamine.

Conclusions

This study suggested that administration of topical mecamylamine, a nonspecific nACh receptor blocker, may have heterogeneous effects in patients with diabetic macular edema. Variable expression of nACh receptor subtypes on endothelial cells that have different effects on permeability would provide an explanation for these results and should be investigated, because more specific nACh receptor blockers may dissociate antipermeability and propermeability effects.

SUBMITTER: Campochiaro PA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3143041 | biostudies-literature | 2010 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Topical mecamylamine for diabetic macular edema.

Campochiaro Peter A PA Shah Syed Mahmood SM Hafiz Gulnar G Heier Jeffery S JS Lit Eugene S ES Zimmer-Galler Ingrid I Channa Roomasa R Nguyen Quan Dong QD Syed Beena B Do Diana V DV Lu Lili L Monk James J Cooke John P JP Kengatharan M Ken MK Hsu Henry H HH

American journal of ophthalmology 20100226 5

<h4>Purpose</h4>Stimulation of nicotinic acetylcholine (nACh) receptors on vascular endothelial cells promotes angiogenesis and vascular permeability in animal models. The safety and bioactivity of topical mecamylamine, an antagonist of nACh receptors, was tested in patients with diabetic macular edema.<h4>Design</h4>A multicenter phase I/II clinical trial.<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty-three patients with chronic diabetic macular edema received 1% mecamylamine topically twice daily for 12 weeks, the pr ...[more]

PMID: 20189159

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe relative efficacy and safety of intravitreous aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab in the treatment of diabetic macular edema are unknown.MethodsAt 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.ResultsFrom 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).ConclusionsIntravitreous 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.).

Dataset Information

Topical mecamylamine for diabetic macular edema.

Purpose

Design

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Topical mecamylamine for diabetic macular edema.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets