Dataset Information

Dissociations of the Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial and Follow-up Study.

ABSTRACT: To describe fluocinolone acetonide implant dissociations in the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial.Randomized clinical trial with extended follow-up.Review of data collected on the first implant in the eye(s) of participants. Dissociation was defined as the drug pellet no longer being affixed to the strut and categorized as spontaneous or surgically related.A total of 250 eyes (146 patients) had at least 1 implant placed. Median follow-up time after implant placement was 6 years (range 0.5-9.2 years). Thirty-four dissociations were reported in 30 participants. There were 22 spontaneous events in 22 participants; 6-year cumulative risk of a spontaneous dissociation was 4.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.4%-9.1%). The earliest event occurred 4.8 years after placement. Nine of 22 eyes with data had a decline in visual acuity ?5 letters temporally related to the dissociation. Thirty-nine implant removal surgeries were performed, 33 with replacement. Twelve dissociations were noted during implant removal surgeries in 10 participants (26%, 95% CI 15%-48%); 5 of these eyes had a decline in visual acuity ?5 letters after surgery. The time from implant placement to removal surgery was longer for the surgeries at which dissociated implants were identified than for those without one (5.7 vs 3.7 years, P < .001). Overall, visual acuity declined 15 or more letters from pre-implant values in 22% of affected eyes; declines were frequently associated with complications of uveitis or its treatment.There is an increasing risk of dissociation of Retisert implants during follow-up; the risk is greater with removal/exchange surgeries, but the risk of both spontaneous and surgically related events increases with longevity of the implants. In 22% of affected eyes visual acuity declined by 15 letters. In the context of eyes with moderate to severe uveitis for years, this rate is not unexpected.

SUBMITTER: Holbrook JT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4811688 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dissociations of the Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial and Follow-up Study.

Holbrook Janet T JT Sugar Elizabeth A EA Burke Alyce E AE Vitale Albert T AT Thorne Jennifer E JE Davis Janet L JL Jabs Douglas A DA

American journal of ophthalmology 20151231

<h4>Purpose</h4>To describe fluocinolone acetonide implant dissociations in the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial.<h4>Design</h4>Randomized clinical trial with extended follow-up.<h4>Methods</h4>Review of data collected on the first implant in the eye(s) of participants. Dissociation was defined as the drug pellet no longer being affixed to the strut and categorized as spontaneous or surgically related.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 250 eyes (146 patients) had at least 1 implant pla ...[more]

PMID: 26748056

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo compare the benefits of fluocinolone acetonide implant therapy versus systemic corticosteroid therapy supplemented (when indicated) with immunosuppression for intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, and panuveitis.DesignAdditional follow-up of a randomized comparative effectiveness trial cohort.ParticipantsTwo hundred fifty-five patients with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis randomized to implant or systemic therapy.Main outcome measuresBest-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), visual field mean deviation (MD), activity of uveitis, and presence of macular edema (per reading center grading) ascertained prospectively.MethodsTrial participants were followed-up for 54 months from original randomization.ResultsThe visual function trajectory in uveitic eyes demonstrated a similar (P = 0.73) degree of modest (not statistically significant) improvement from baseline to 54 months in both groups (mean improvement in BCVA at 54 months, 2.4 and 3.1 letters in the implant and systemic groups, respectively). Many had excellent initial visual acuity, limiting the potential for improvement. The mean automated perimetry MD score remained similar to baseline throughout 48 months of follow-up in both groups. Overall control of inflammation was superior in the implant group at every time point assessed (P < 0.016), although most eyes in the systemic therapy arm also showed substantial improvement, achieving complete control or low levels of inflammation. Although macular edema improved significantly more often with implant treatment within the first 6 months, the systemic group gradually improved over time such that the proportions with macular edema converged in the 2 groups by 36 months and overlapped thereafter (P = 0.41 at 48 months).ConclusionsVisual outcomes of fluocinolone acetonide implant and systemic treatment for intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, and panuveitis were similarly favorable through 54 months. The implant maintained a clear advantage in controlling inflammation through 54 months. Nevertheless, with systemic therapy, most patients also experienced greatly improved inflammatory status. Macular edema improved equally with longer follow-up. Based on cost effectiveness and side-effect considerations, systemic therapy may be indicated as the initial treatment for many bilateral uveitis cases. However, implant therapy is a reasonable alternative, especially for unilateral cases and when systemic therapy is not feasible or is not successful.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the relative effectiveness of systemic corticosteroids plus immunosuppression when indicated (systemic therapy) versus fluocinolone acetonide implant (implant therapy) for noninfectious intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis (uveitis).DesignRandomized controlled parallel superiority trial.ParticipantsPatients with active or recently active uveitis.MethodsParticipants were randomized (allocation ratio 1:1) to systemic or implant therapy at 23 centers (3 countries). Implant-assigned participants with bilateral uveitis were assigned to have each eye that warranted study treatment implanted. Treatment-outcome associations were analyzed by assigned treatment for all eyes with uveitis.Main outcome measuresMasked examiners measured the primary outcome: change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported quality of life, ophthalmologist-graded uveitis activity, and local and systemic complications of uveitis or therapy. Reading Center graders and glaucoma specialists assessing ocular complications were masked. Participants, ophthalmologists, and coordinators were unmasked.ResultsOn evaluation of changes from baseline to 24 months among 255 patients randomized to implant and systemic therapy (479 eyes with uveitis), the implant and systemic therapy groups had an improvement in visual acuity of +6.0 and +3.2 letters (P = 0.16, 95% confidence interval on difference in improvement between groups, -1.2 to +6.7 letters, positive values favoring implant), an improvement in vision-related quality of life of +11.4 and +6.8 units (P = 0.043), a change in EuroQol-EQ5D health utility of +0.02 and -0.02 (P = 0.060), and residual active uveitis in 12% and 29% (P=0.001), respectively. Over the 24 month period, implant-assigned eyes had a higher risk of cataract surgery (80%, hazard ratio [HR] = 3.3, P < 0.0001), treatment for elevated intraocular pressure (61%, HR=4.2, P < 0.0001), and glaucoma (17%, HR=4.2, P = 0.0008). Patients assigned to systemic therapy had more prescription-requiring infections than patients assigned to implant therapy (0.60 vs 0.36/person-year, P=0.034), without notable long-term consequences; systemic adverse outcomes otherwise were unusual in both groups, with minimal differences between groups.ConclusionsIn each treatment group, mean visual acuity improved over 24 months, with neither approach superior to a degree detectable with the study's power. Therefore, the specific advantages and disadvantages identified should dictate selection between the alternative treatments in consideration of individual patients' particular circumstances. Systemic therapy with aggressive use of corticosteroid-sparing immunosuppression was well tolerated, suggesting that this approach is reasonably safe for local and systemic inflammatory disorders.Financial disclosure(s)Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Project description:PURPOSE:To evaluate the risks and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes of fluocinolone acetonide implant versus systemic therapy with corticosteroid and immunosuppression when indicated for intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, and panuveitis. DESIGN:Additional follow-up of a randomized trial cohort. PARTICIPANTS:Two hundred fifty-five patients with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis, randomized to implant or systemic therapy. METHODS:Randomized subjects with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis (479 eyes) were followed up over 54 months, with 79.2% completing the 54-month visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Local and systemic potential complications of the therapies and self-reported health utility and vision-related and generic health-related QoL were studied prospectively. RESULTS:Among initially phakic eyes, cataract and cataract surgery occurred significantly more often in the implant group (hazard ratio [HR], 3.0; P = 0.0001; and HR, 3.8; P < 0.0001, respectively). In the implant group, most cataract surgery occurred within the first 2 years. Intraocular pressure elevation measures occurred more frequently in the implant group (HR range, 3.7-5.6; all P < 0.0001), and glaucoma (assessed annually) also occurred more frequently (26.3% vs. 10.2% by 48 months; HR, 3.0; P = 0.0002). In contrast, potential complications of systemic therapy, including measures of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, bone disease, and hematologic and serum chemistry indicators of immunosuppression toxicity, did not differ between groups through 54 months. Indices of QoL initially favored implant therapy by a modest margin. However, all summary measures of health utility and vision-related or generic health-related QoL were minimally and nonsignificantly different by 54 months, with the exception of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey physical component summary score, which favored implant by a small margin at 54 months (3.17 on a scale of 100; P = 0.01, not adjusted for multiple comparisons). Mean QoL results were favorable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS:These results suggest that fluocinolone acetonide implant therapy is associated with a clinically important increased risk of glaucoma and cataract with respect to systemic therapy, suggesting that careful monitoring and early intervention to prevent glaucoma is warranted with implant therapy. Systemic therapy subjects avoided a significant excess of toxicities of systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressive therapies in the trial. Self-reported QoL measures initially favored implant therapy, but over time the measures converged, with generally favorable QoL in both groups.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the long-term efficacy and safety of the intravitreal 0.2-μg/day fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAi) to treat noninfectious uveitis (NIU) of the posterior segment (PS).DesignThree-year, phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, controlled, prospective study (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02746991).ParticipantsOverall, 153 patients in India with NIU-PS in ≥ 1 eye (with or without anterior uveitis) for ≥ 1 year who had ≥ 2 separate recurrences of uveitis requiring ocular injections or systemic therapy in the prior 12 months.MethodsPatients were randomized 2:1 for baseline FAi or sham injection and monitored for main outcome measures.Main outcome measuresIncidence and timing of uveitis recurrence, use of adjunctive therapy, best-corrected visual acuity, central foveal thickness, and monitoring of intraocular pressure (IOP)- and cataract-related events over 36 months.ResultsOverall, 153 patients (FAi, n = 101; treated sham, n = 52) were enrolled. Fluocinolone acetonide implant-treated eyes had significantly reduced uveitis recurrence rates versus treated sham (46.5% vs. 75.0%, respectively; P = 0.001) and a longer median time to recurrence (1116.0 [95% confidence interval, 847.00 to not evaluable] vs. 190.5 [95% confidence interval, 100.0-395.0] days for treated sham). Systemic adjunctive treatments were similar between groups, but fewer FAi-treated eyes required adjunctive injections (8.9% vs. 51.9% for treated sham). Visual outcomes were similar between groups, and residual macular edema was more common at 36 months in treated sham versus FAi-treated eyes (46.2% vs. 24.2%, respectively). The FAi-treated group had a lower central foveal thickness from month 12 onward. Intraocular pressure-lowering surgeries were stable in both groups, but, as expected, rates of IOP elevations were more frequent in the FAi-treated group than in the treated sham (IOP > 25 mmHg: 23.8% vs. 3.8%; IOP > 30 mmHg: 16.8% vs. 1.9%, respectively), and FAi-treated eyes had a higher incidence of cataract surgery than the treated sham (70.5% vs. 26.5%, respectively).ConclusionsIn patients with NIU-PS, the 0.2-μg/day FAi is associated with reduced-uveitis recurrence and increased time to first recurrence while controlling macular edema, maintaining stable IOP levels, and providing an expected safety profile, including a higher occurrence of cataract formation over 36 months.Financial disclosuresThe authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate longitudinal vision-related quality of life (VRQoL) in patients with noninfectious uveitis.DesignCohort study using randomized controlled trial data.ParticipantsPatients with active or recently active intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis enrolled in the Multicenter Steroid Treatment Trial and Follow-up Study.MethodsData from the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25) for the first 3 years after randomization were evaluated semiannually. Analyses were stratified by assigned treatment (129 implants vs. 126 systemic therapies) because of substantial differences in the trajectories of VRQoL. The impact of baseline measurements of visual function (visual acuity and visual field), demographics, and disease characteristics was assessed using generalized estimating equations.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was the NEI-VFQ-25 composite score over 3 years after randomization.ResultsIndividuals in both treatment groups showed similar improvement in NEI-VFQ-25 scores after 3 years of follow-up (implant: 11.9 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.6-15.2; P < 0.001; systemic: 9.0 points; 95% CI, 5.6-12.3; P < 0.001; P = 0.21 for interaction). Individuals in the implant group showed a substantial improvement during the first 6 months followed by stable scores, whereas individuals in the systemic group showed a steady improvement over the course of follow-up. Worse initial visual acuity and visual fields were associated with lower initial NEI-VFQ-25 scores for both treatment groups. In the systemic group, these differences were maintained throughout follow-up. In the implant group, individuals with initial visual acuity worse than 20/40 showed additional improvement in NEI-VFQ-25 score to come within -7 points (95% CI, -15.0 to 0.9) of those with visual acuity 20/40 or better initially, a clinically meaningful but not statistically significant difference (P = 0.081). Results based on sensitivity analyses showed similar patterns.ConclusionsBoth treatment groups demonstrated significant improvements in NEI-VFQ-25 scores; however, the improvement was immediate for the implant group as opposed to gradual for the systemic group. Poorer visual function was associated significantly with initial differences in NEI-VFQ-25 scores. However, only individuals in the implant group with poor visual acuity were able to overcome their initial deficits by the end of 3 years.

Project description:The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited Alimera Sciences, the company manufacturing fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant (FAc) 0.19 mg (tradename ILUVIEN®), to submit evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of FAc for treating recurrent non-infectious uveitis. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, in collaboration with Maastricht University Medical Centre?+?, was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This paper contains a summary of the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence submitted by the company, the ERG's critique on the submitted evidence, and the guidance issued by the NICE Appraisal Committee (AC). The company submission (CS) was mainly informed by the PSV-FAI-001 trial in which FAc was compared with (limited) current practice [(L)CP], which was not considered to be representative of UK clinical practice by the ERG. There was no comparison of FAc to any treatment listed in the final scope, and especially to the dexamethasone intravitreal implant (dexamethasone), which was considered to be a relevant comparator by the AC. The primary outcome of the PSV-FAI-001 was recurrence of uveitis in the treated eye. Most of the events for the primary outcome were imputed during the PSV-FAI-001 trial, which probably led to an overestimation of the number of recurrences of disease, and a biased estimate of the relative effectiveness of FAc versus (L)CP. Finally, the place of FAc in the treatment pathway was not clearly defined by the company. Substantial uncertainty surrounded the cost-effectiveness results due to the shortcomings of the clinical evidence. Additionally, the quality of life of patients was not measured during the PSV-FAI-001 trial and long-term effectiveness data of FAc were lacking. The ERG adjusted several issues identified in the CS and added dexamethasone as a comparator in the decision analytic model. The ERG presented multiple analyses as base-cases because several elements of the assessment remained uncertain. The fully incremental ERG results ranged from dexamethasone (extendedly) dominating FAc (when assuming a hazard ratio of 1 or 0.7 for dexamethasone versus FAc) to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £30,153 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for FAc versus (L)CP [when assuming a hazard ratio of 0.456 for dexamethasone versus (L)CP]. The ICER of FAc versus (L)CP ranged from £12,325 to £30,153 per QALY gained. After a second AC meeting where alternative company scenarios comparing FAc with dexamethasone were considered by the AC, the AC concluded that "the results of the company's analyses ranged from the fluocinolone acetonide implant being dominant (that is, it was more effective and costs less), to an ICER of £29,461 per QALY gained, and most of the ICERs were below £20,000 per QALY gained". Therefore, the AC recommended FAc as a cost-effective use of National Health Service (NHS) resources for treating recurrent non-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment of the eye in the final TA590 guidance (published July 2019).

Project description:PurposeTo assess the visual outcomes of cataract surgery in eyes that received fluocinolone acetonide implant or systemic therapy with oral corticosteroids and immunosuppression during the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial.DesignNested prospective cohort study of patients enrolled in a randomized clinical trial.ParticipantsPatients that underwent cataract surgery during the first 2 years of follow-up in the MUST Trial.MethodsVisual outcomes of cataract surgery were evaluated 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery using logarithmic visual acuity charts. Change in visual acuity over time was assessed using a mixed-effects model.Main outcome measuresBest-corrected visual acuity.ResultsAfter excluding eyes that underwent cataract surgery simultaneously with implant surgery, among the 479 eyes in the MUST Trial, 117 eyes (28 eyes in the systemic, 89 in the implant group) in 82 patients underwent cataract surgery during the first 2 years of follow-up. Overall, visual acuity increased by 23 letters from the preoperative visit to the 3-month visit (95% confidence interval [CI], 17-29 letters; P < 0.001) and was stable through 9 months of follow-up. Eyes presumed to have a more severe cataract, as measured by inability to grade vitreous haze, gained an additional 42 letters (95% CI, 34-56 letters; P < 0.001) beyond the 13-letter gain in eyes that had gradable vitreous haze before surgery (95% CI, 9-18 letters; P < 0.001) 3 months after surgery, making up for an initial difference of -45 letters at the preoperative visit (95% CI, -56 to -34 letters; P < 0.001). Black race, longer time from uveitis onset, and hypotony were associated with worse preoperative visual acuity (P < 0.05), but did not affect postsurgical recovery (P > 0.05, test of interaction). After adjusting for other risk factors, there was no significant difference in the improvement in visual acuity between the 2 treatment groups (implant vs. systemic therapy, 2 letters; 95% CI, -10 to 15 letters; P = 0.70).ConclusionsCataract surgery resulted in substantial, sustained, and similar visual acuity improvement in the eyes of patients with uveitis treated with the fluocinolone acetonide implant or standard systemic therapy.

Dataset Information

Dissociations of the Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial and Follow-up Study.

Publications

Dissociations of the Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant: The Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) Trial and Follow-up Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets