Dataset Information

THREE-YEAR OUTCOMES IN A RANDOMIZED SINGLE-BLIND CONTROLLED TRIAL OF INTRAVITREAL RANIBIZUMAB AND ORAL SUPPLEMENTATION WITH DOCOSAHEXAENOIC ACID AND ANTIOXIDANTS FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:To report 3-year results of a randomized single-blind controlled trial of intravitreal ranibizumab combined with oral docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation versus ranibizumab alone in patients with diabetic macular edema. METHODS:There were 26 patients (31 eyes) in the DHA group and 29 (38 eyes) in the control group. Ranibizumab (0.5 mg) was administered monthly for the first 4 months followed by a pro re nata (PRN) regimen. In the experimental group, patients received oral DHA supplementation (1,050 mg/day) (Brudyretina 1.5 g). RESULTS:At 36 months, mean decrease of central subfield macular thickness was higher in the DHA-supplementation group than in controls (275 ± 50 ?m vs. 310 ± 97 ?m) with significant differences at Months 25, 30, 33, and 34. Between-group differences in best-corrected visual acuity were not found, but the percentages of ETRDS gains >5 and >10 letters were higher in the DHA-supplementation group. Differences serum HbA1c, plasma total antioxidant capacity values, erythrocyte DHA content, and serum IL-6 levels were all significant in favor of the DHA-supplementation group. CONCLUSION:The addition of a high-rich DHA dietary supplement to intravitreal ranibizumab was effective to achieve better sustained improvement of central subfield macular thickness outcomes after 3 years of follow-up as compared with intravitreal ranibizumab alone.

SUBMITTER: Lafuente M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6553973 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

THREE-YEAR OUTCOMES IN A RANDOMIZED SINGLE-BLIND CONTROLLED TRIAL OF INTRAVITREAL RANIBIZUMAB AND ORAL SUPPLEMENTATION WITH DOCOSAHEXAENOIC ACID AND ANTIOXIDANTS FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA.

Lafuente María M Ortín Lourdes L Argente María M Guindo José L JL López-Bernal María D MD López-Román Francisco J FJ Domingo Joan Carles JC Lajara Jerónimo J

Retina (Philadelphia, Pa.) 20190601 6

<h4>Purpose</h4>To report 3-year results of a randomized single-blind controlled trial of intravitreal ranibizumab combined with oral docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation versus ranibizumab alone in patients with diabetic macular edema.<h4>Methods</h4>There were 26 patients (31 eyes) in the DHA group and 29 (38 eyes) in the control group. Ranibizumab (0.5 mg) was administered monthly for the first 4 months followed by a pro re nata (PRN) regimen. In the experimental group, patients receive ...[more]

PMID: 29474306

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo report the 3-year follow-up results within a previously reported randomized trial evaluating prompt versus deferred (for ≥24 weeks) focal/grid laser treatment in eyes treated with intravitreal 0.5 mg ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema (DME).DesignMulticenter, randomized clinical trial.ParticipantsThree hundred sixty-one participants with visual acuity of 20/32 to 20/320 (approximate Snellen equivalent) and DME involving the fovea.MethodsRanibizumab every 4 weeks until no longer improving (with resumption if worsening) and random assignment to prompt or deferred (≥24 weeks) focal/grid laser treatment.Main outcome measuresBest-corrected visual acuity and safety at the 156-week (3-year) visit.ResultsThe estimated mean change in visual acuity letter score from baseline through the 3-year visit was 2.9 letters more (9.7 vs. 6.8 letters; mean difference, 2.9 letters; 95% confidence interval, 0.4-5.4 letters; P = 0.02) in the deferral group compared with the prompt laser treatment group. In the prompt laser treatment group and deferral group, respectively, the percentage of eyes with a ≥10-letter gain/loss was 42% and 56% (P = 0.02), whereas the respective percentage of eyes with a ≥10-letter gain/loss was 10% and 5% (P = 0.12). Up to the 3-year visit, the median numbers of injections were 12 and 15 in the prompt and deferral groups, respectively (P = 0.007), including 1 and 2 injections, respectively, from the 2-year up to the 3-year visit. At the 3-year visit, the percentages of eyes with central subfield thickness of 250 μm or more on time-domain optical coherence tomography were 36% in both groups (P = 0.90). In the deferral group, 54% did not receive laser treatment during the trial. Systemic adverse events seemed to be similar in the 2 groups.ConclusionsThese 3-year results suggest that focal/grid laser treatment at the initiation of intravitreal ranibizumab is no better, and possibly worse, for vision outcomes than deferring laser treatment for 24 weeks or more in eyes with DME involving the fovea and with vision impairment. Some of the observed differences in visual acuity at 3 years may be related to fewer cumulative ranibizumab injections during follow-up in the prompt laser treatment group. Follow-up through 5 years continues.

Project description:PurposeThis retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy of intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) and intravitreal dexamethasone implant (IDI) for pseudophakic vitrectomized eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) in a single institution.MethodsPseudophakic vitrectomized eyes with treatment-naïve center-involved DME were enrolled, with one eye in each patient. They were divided into two groups: one group receiving IDI every 3 to 4 months and another group receiving IVR using 3 monthly plus treat-and-extend injections, all with monthly follow-up for 6 months. Switch of intravitreal drugs or deferred macular laser was not allowed. Primary outcome measures included change in central foveal thickness (CFT) in 1 mm by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at Month 6.ResultsTwenty-two eyes were included in the IDI group and 26 eyes in the IVR group. The baseline demographics, glycosylated hemoglobin level, intraocular pressure (IOP), BCVA, and CFT did not significantly differ (p > 0.05). Compared to baseline data, CFT decreased and BCVA improved significantly after either IDI or IVR at Month 6 (p < 0.05). Significantly better mean final BCVA (0.38 logMAR vs. 0.62 logMAR, p=0.04), more mean visual gain (-0.30 logMAR vs. -0.15 logMAR, p=0.02), lower mean final CFT (310.9 μm vs. 384.2 μm, p=0.04), and larger mean CFT decrease (-150.0 μm vs. -60.1 μm, p=0.03) were found in the IDI group compared to those in the IVR group. A smaller mean treatment number (2.6 vs. 5.6, p < 0.001) and higher rate of postinjection ocular hypertension requiring topical hypotensive agent therapy (27.3% vs. 0%, p=0.0002) were demonstrated in the IDI group than those in the IVR group.ConclusionWe concluded that IDI and IVR can both effectively treat vitrectomized eyes with DME. Dexamethasone implants had significantly better visual/anatomical improvement, smaller treatment number, and higher rate of elevated IOP after injection than IVR in pseudophakic vitrectomized eyes with DME in a 6-month period.

Project description:Variability in response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment in diabetic macular edema (DME) remains a significant clinical challenge. Biomarkers could help anticipate responses to anti-VEGF therapy.To investigate aqueous humor cytokine level changes in response to intravitreal ranibizumab therapy for the management of DME, and to determine the association between baseline aqueous levels and anatomic response.In this prospective multicenter cohort study, 49 participants with diabetes mellitus complicated by center-involving DME, with a central subfield thickness of 310 μm or greater on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), were recruited from December 22, 2011, to June 13, 2013 and statistical analysis were performed from March 1, 2017, to June 1, 2017. A total of 48 participants proceeded to follow-up.Participants received monthly injections of ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, for 3 months. Aqueous fluid for cytokine analysis was obtained at baseline and repeated at the 2-month visit. Multiplex immunoassay was carried out in duplicate for VEGF, placental growth factor, transforming growth factor beta 2, intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1), interleukin 6 (IL-6), IL-8, IL-10, vascular intercellular adhesion molecule, and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1.Baseline and 2-month change in aqueous cytokine levels, 3-month change in SD-OCT central subfield thickness and macular volume (MV), and the statistical association between baseline aqueous cytokine levels and these measures of anatomic response to ranibizumab in center-involving DME.Among the 48 participants, the mean (SD) age was 61.9 (7.1) years and 36 participants (75.0%) were men. The following cytokines were lower at month 2 vs baseline: ICAM-1 (median change, -190.88; interquartile range [IQR], -634.20 to -26.54; P < .001), VEGF (median change, -639.45; IQR, -1040.61 to -502.61; P < .001), placental growth factor (median change, -1.31; IQR, -5.99 to -0.01; P < .001), IL-6 (median change, -38.61; IQR, -166.72 to -2.80; P < .001), and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 (median change, -90.13; IQR, -382.74 to 109.47; P = .01). When controlling for age, foveal avascular zone size, and severity of retinopathy, multiple linear regression determined that increasing baseline aqueous ICAM-1 was associated with a favorable anatomic response, in terms of reduced SD-OCT MV at 3 months (every additional 100 pg/mL of baseline ICAM-1 was associated with a reduction of 0.0379 mm3; P = .01). Conversely, increasing baseline aqueous VEGF was associated with a less favorable SD-OCT MV response at 3 months (every additional 100 pg/mL of baseline VEGF was associated with an increase of 0.0731 mm3; P = .02) and was associated with lower odds of being a central subfield thickness responder (odds ratio, 0.868; 95% CI, 0.755-0.998).Elevated aqueous ICAM-1 and reduced VEGF levels at baseline are associated with a favorable anatomic response to ranibizumab in DME, although there is not always direct correlation between anatomic and visual acuity response.

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

THREE-YEAR OUTCOMES IN A RANDOMIZED SINGLE-BLIND CONTROLLED TRIAL OF INTRAVITREAL RANIBIZUMAB AND ORAL SUPPLEMENTATION WITH DOCOSAHEXAENOIC ACID AND ANTIOXIDANTS FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA.

Publications

THREE-YEAR OUTCOMES IN A RANDOMIZED SINGLE-BLIND CONTROLLED TRIAL OF INTRAVITREAL RANIBIZUMAB AND ORAL SUPPLEMENTATION WITH DOCOSAHEXAENOIC ACID AND ANTIOXIDANTS FOR DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets