Dataset Information

Flow signal change in polyps after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

ABSTRACT: Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a novel, non-invasive imaging tool used to detect vascular flow. The absence of a flow signal in OCTA in polyps revealed by indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) in patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) may indicate slow or compromised filling of blood flow from choroidal vessels. Naïve patients with PCV treated with intravitreal injections of aflibercept (IVI-A) were enrolled in this study to validate the hypothesis that baseline flow may affect the outcome of polyp regression in ICGA. The flow signal of polyps in OCTA was detected by manual segmentation in the corresponding location by ICGA. Polyps were defined as high-flow if both OCTA and ICGA showed positive findings, and low-flow if OCTA showed a negative flow signal in 3 consecutive horizontal scans at the polyp area shown in ICGA. A total of 24 polyps were identified in 13 PCV patients at baseline. Of these 24 polyps, 22 (91.7%) were high-flow and 2 (8.3%) were low-flow. After 3 monthly IVI-A, all low-flow polyps had complete regression in ICGA. Among 17 (77%) high-flow polyps at baseline that had regression after treatment, 10 (58.8%) became low-flow, while 5 (22.7%) persistent polyps remained high-flow. Flow signal of polyps as detected by OCTA could be a predictive factor for treatment response in patients with PCV. Monitoring changes in flow signal after treatment is clinically relevant.

SUBMITTER: Chang CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7584188 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Flow signal change in polyps after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

Chang Chia-Jui CJ Huang Yi-Ming YM Hsieh Ming-Hung MH Li An-Fei AF Chen Shih-Jen SJ

PloS one 20201023 10

Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a novel, non-invasive imaging tool used to detect vascular flow. The absence of a flow signal in OCTA in polyps revealed by indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) in patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) may indicate slow or compromised filling of blood flow from choroidal vessels. Naïve patients with PCV treated with intravitreal injections of aflibercept (IVI-A) were enrolled in this study to validate the hypothesis that baseline ...[more]

PMID: 33095843

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:To assess systemic vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A levels after treatment with intravitreous aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab. DESIGN:Comparative-effectiveness trial with participants randomly assigned to 2 mg aflibercept, 1.25 mg bevacizumab, or 0.3 mg ranibizumab after a re-treatment algorithm. PARTICIPANTS:Participants with available plasma samples (N = 436). METHODS:Plasma samples were collected before injections at baseline and 4-week, 52-week, and 104-week visits. In a preplanned secondary analysis, systemic-free VEGF levels from an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay were compared across anti-VEGF agents and correlated with systemic side effects. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Changes in the natural log (ln) of plasma VEGF levels. RESULTS:Baseline free VEGF levels were similar across all 3 groups. At 4 weeks, mean ln(VEGF) changes were -0.30±0.61 pg/ml, -0.31±0.54 pg/ml, and -0.02±0.44 pg/ml for the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively. The adjusted differences between treatment groups (adjusted confidence interval [CI]; P value) were -0.01 (-0.12 to +0.10; P = 0.89), -0.31 (-0.44 to -0.18; P < 0.001), and -0.30 (-0.43 to -0.18; P < 0.001) for aflibercept-bevacizumab, aflibercept-ranibizumab, and bevacizumab-ranibizumab, respectively. At 52 weeks, a difference in mean VEGF changes between bevacizumab and ranibizumab persisted (-0.23 [-0.38 to -0.09]; P < 0.001); the difference between aflibercept and ranibizumab was -0.12 (P = 0.07) and between aflibercept and bevacizumab was +0.11 (P = 0.07). Treatment group differences at 2 years were similar to 1 year. No apparent treatment differences were detected at 52 or 104 weeks in the cohort of participants not receiving injections within 1 or 2 months before plasma collection. Participants with (N = 9) and without (N = 251) a heart attack or stroke had VEGF levels that appeared similar. CONCLUSIONS:These data suggest that decreases in plasma free-VEGF levels are greater after treatment with aflibercept or bevacizumab compared with ranibizumab at 4 weeks. At 52 and 104 weeks, a greater decrease was observed in bevacizumab versus ranibizumab. Results from 2 subgroups of participants who did not receive injections within at least 1 month and 2 months before collection suggest similar changes in VEGF levels after stopping injections. It is unknown whether VEGF levels return to normal as the drug is cleared from the system or whether the presence of the drug affects the assay's ability to accurately measure free VEGF. No significant associations between VEGF concentration and systemic factors were noted.

Project description:Diabetes mellitus is a serious health problem that affects over 350 million individuals worldwide. Diabetic retinopathy (DR), which is the most common microvascular complication of diabetes, is the leading cause of new cases of blindness in working-aged adults. Diabetic macular edema (DME) is an advanced, vision-limiting complication of DR that affects nearly 30% of patients who have had diabetes for at least 20 years and is responsible for much of the vision loss due to DR. The historic standard of care for DME has been macular laser photocoagulation, which has been shown to stabilize vision and reduce the rate of further vision loss by 50%; however, macular laser leads to significant vision recovery in only 15% of treated patients. Mechanisms contributing to the microvascular damage in DR and DME include the direct toxic effects of hyperglycemia, sustained alterations in cell signaling pathways, and chronic microvascular inflammation with leukocyte-mediated injury. Chronic retinal microvascular damage results in elevation of intraocular levels of vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF), a potent, diffusible, endothelial-specific mitogen that mediates many important physiologic processes, including but not limited to the development and permeability of the vasculature. The identification of VEGF as an important pathophysiologic mediator of DME suggested that anti-VEGF therapy delivered to the eye might lead to improved visual outcomes in this disease. To date, four different inhibitors of VEGF, each administered by intraocular injection, have been tested in prospective, randomized phase II or phase III clinical trials in patients with DME. The results from these trials demonstrate that treatment with anti-VEGF agents results in substantially improved visual and anatomic outcomes compared with laser photocoagulation, and avoid the ocular side effects associated with laser treatment. Thus, anti-VEGF therapy has become the preferred treatment option for the management of DME in many patients.

Project description:BackgroundNeovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a potentially blinding secondary glaucoma. It is caused by the formation of abnormal new blood vessels which prevent normal drainage of aqueous from the anterior segment of the eye. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents are specific inhibitors of the primary mediators of neovascularization. Studies have reported the effectiveness of anti-VEGFs for the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) in NVG.ObjectivesTo compare the IOP lowering effects of intraocular anti-VEGF agents to no anti-VEGF treatment, as an adjunct to existing modalities for the treatment of NVG.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE, (January 1950 to January 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to January 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov/) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 11 January 2013.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of people treated with anti-VEGF agents for NVG.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently assessed the search results for trials to be included in the review. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion with a third author. Since no trial met our inclusion criteria, no assessment of risk of bias or meta-analysis was undertaken.Main resultsNo RCTs were found that met the inclusion criteria for this review. Two RCTs of anti-VEGF agents for treating NVG were not included in the review due to the heterogeneity and uncontrolled assignment of adjunct treatments received by the study participants.Authors' conclusionsCurrently available evidence is insufficient to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-VEGF treatments, such as intravitreal ranibizumab or bevacizumab, as an adjunct to conventional treatment in lowering IOP in NVG. Well designed RCTs are needed to address this issue, particularly trials that evaluate long-term (at least six months) benefits and risks since the effects of anti-VEGF agents may be short-term only. An RCT comparing anti-VEGF agents with no anti-VEGF agents taking into account the need for co-interventions, such as panretinal photocoagulation (PRP), glaucoma shunt procedures, cyclodestructive procedures, cataract surgery, and deep vitrectomy, could be of use to investigate the additional beneficial effect of anti-VEGF agents in treating NVG. Since decisions for when and which co-interventions should be used are based on clinical criteria, they would not be appropriate for randomization. However, the design of a study on this topic should aim to balance groups by stratification of co-intervention at time of randomization or by enrolling a sufficient number of participants to conduct subgroup analysis by co-interventions (ideally 15 participants per treatment group for each subgroup). Alternatively, the inclusion criteria for a trial could limit participants to those who receive the same co-intervention.

Dataset Information

Flow signal change in polyps after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

Publications

Flow signal change in polyps after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets