Dataset Information

The RELATION study: efficacy and safety of ranibizumab combined with laser photocoagulation treatment versus laser monotherapy in NPDR and PDR patients with diabetic macular oedema.

ABSTRACT: To assess efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab 0.5 mg plus laser (COMBI) versus laser monotherapy (LASER) in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular oedema (DME) in either nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) or proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and to analyse the relevance of inner versus outer retinal thickness.In this double-masked, multicentre phase IIIb study, patients (N = 128) were randomized (2:1) to receive COMBI (n = 85) versus LASER (n = 43). Patients received four initial monthly injections of ranibizumab 0.5 mg (COMBI) or sham (LASER) followed by pro re nata (PRN) injections. In both groups, patients received laser at baseline and additional laser at 3 monthly intervals, as needed. The study was started in 2010 and was prematurely terminated due to approval of ranibizumab for DME.The least squares (LS) mean change in mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to month 12 was higher in the COMBI (6.5) versus LASER (2.3) group (LS mean difference: 4.2 [95% CI 0.9; 7.4] letters, p = 0.01, primary end-point). There was also a tendency in the same direction for the subgroup of 26 patients with PDR (LS mean difference 14.7, p = 0.11). Mean central retinal thickness decreased by 107.3 ?m in the COMBI group and by 80.3 ?m in the LASER group from baseline to month 12 (p = 0.28). Ranibizumab was well tolerated.This study showed that ranibizumab plus laser is a valuable treatment option for the management of DME. Patients with DME in PDR might also benefit from combined therapy compared to laser alone.

SUBMITTER: Lang GE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5947710 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The RELATION study: efficacy and safety of ranibizumab combined with laser photocoagulation treatment versus laser monotherapy in NPDR and PDR patients with diabetic macular oedema.

Lang Gabriele E GE Liakopoulos Sandra S Vögeler Jessica J Weiß Claudia C Spital Georg G Gamulescu Maria-Andreea MA Lohmann Chris C Wiedemann Peter P

Acta ophthalmologica 20171101 3

<h4>Purpose</h4>To assess efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab 0.5 mg plus laser (COMBI) versus laser monotherapy (LASER) in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular oedema (DME) in either nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) or proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and to analyse the relevance of inner versus outer retinal thickness.<h4>Methods</h4>In this double-masked, multicentre phase IIIb study, patients (N = 128) were randomized (2:1) to receive COMBI ...[more]

PMID: 29090846

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the relative efficacy of ranibizumab (RBZ) monotherapy or combined with laser (RBZ + Laser) versus laser monotherapy for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).MethodsA comprehensive literature search using PUBMED, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RBZ or RBZ + Laser to laser monotherapy in patients with DME. Efficacy estimates were determined by comparing weighted mean differences (WMD) in the change of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) from baseline, and the risk ratios (RR) for the proportions of patients with at least 15 letters change from baseline. Safety analysis estimated the RR of cardiac disorders at 6 to 12 months in RBZ therapy vs. laser monotherapy. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.1 software.ResultsSeven RCTs were selected for this meta-analysis, including 1749 patients (394 patients in the RBZ group, 642 patients in the RBZ + Laser group, and 713 patients in the laser group). RBZ and RBZ + Laser were superior to laser monotherapy in the mean change of BCVA and CMT from baseline (WMD?=?5.65, 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.44-6.87, P<0.00001; WMD ?=?5.02, 95% CI, 3.83-6.20, P<0.00001, and WMD ?=?-57.91, 95% CI, -77.62 to -38.20, P<0.00001; WMD ?=?-56.63, 95% CI, -104.81 to -8.44, P?=?0.02, respectively). The pooled RR comparing the proportions of patients with at least 15 letters improvement or deterioration were also in favor of RBZ and RBZ + Laser (RR?=?2.94, 95% CI, 1.82-4.77, P<0.00001; RR?=?2.04, 95% CI, 1.50-2.78, P<0.00001, and RR?=?0.21, 95% CI, 0.06-0.71, P?=?0.01; RR?=?0.52, 95% CI, 0.29-0.95, P?=?0.03, respectively). There were no significant differences between RBZ and RBZ + Laser for any of the parameters. There were no difference in the safety profile between RBZ and laser.ConclusionRBZ and RBZ + Laser had better visual and anatomic outcomes than laser monotherapy in the treatment of DME. RBZ + Laser seemed to be equivalent to RBZ.

Project description:PurposeIntravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents are effective in the treatment of central involving diabetic macular oedema (DMO). Vitreoretinal interface abnormalities (VRIA) are common in patients with DMO, and the effect of these on the response to anti-VEGF treatment is unclear. Furthermore the effect of anti-VEGF agents on the VRIA itself is uncertain.MethodProspective study of consecutive patients treated with ranibizumab (RZB) for DMO as part of routine clinical care in one eye unit over a 1-year period. Visual acuity (Va), central retinal thickness (CRT) and injection frequency data was recorded on an electronic database. Treatment was initiated with four monthly RZB injections and then a monthly PRN regime. All patients underwent high-density spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) at baseline and 12 months. The SDOCTs were graded by two observers masked to the outcome.ResultsOne hundred and four eyes (77 patients) were included in the analysis. The mean age was 62 years, and 62% were male. The mean presenting vision was 62 letters and CRT 472 ?m. Eighty eyes retained stable Va, and 17 had an improvement in Va. At baseline, 39 eyes had associated focal vitreomacular adhesion (VMA) and by 12 months this reduced to 30 (p?=?0.04), with 12 releasing VMA and three developing it. Patients with VMA had significantly better final Va than those without VMA. Improvement in CRT was greatest in those where VMA released during the study. Forty-five eyes had some degree of foveal involving epiretinal membrane (ERM) at baseline, and 28 were considered to have clinically significant ERM. There was no clinically relevant change in ERM during the study. Patients with significant ERM at baseline had a lower final vision. Multivariate analysis showed that ERM and more severe retinopathy at baseline were predictive of less visual improvement (p <?0.01). Shorter intraretinal cyst length, ERM and the absence of VMA at baseline were predictive of a worsened anatomical response (p?<?0.001).ConclusionVRIA are related to outcome in patients treated with RZB. ERM was associated with a worsened visual and anatomic response, and VMA with an improved anatomical response particularly when spontaneous VMA release occurred during treatment. The presence and severity of ERM was not affected by RZB treatment.

Dataset Information

The RELATION study: efficacy and safety of ranibizumab combined with laser photocoagulation treatment versus laser monotherapy in NPDR and PDR patients with diabetic macular oedema.

Publications

The RELATION study: efficacy and safety of ranibizumab combined with laser photocoagulation treatment versus laser monotherapy in NPDR and PDR patients with diabetic macular oedema.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets