Effect of Initial Aflibercept, Laser, or Observation on Low-Contrast Visual Acuity in Eyes With Diabetic Macular Edema and Good Vision: Ancillary Study Within a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
To describe 2.5% low-contrast visual acuity (VA) among eyes with good vision despite center-involved diabetic macular edema and compare changes after initial management with aflibercept, laser, or observation.Methods
This was an ancillary study within a multicenter randomized clinical trial (DRCR Retina Network Protocol V). Participants had diabetes and 1 study eye with center-involved diabetic macular edema and a VA of 20/25 or better randomly assigned to aflibercept (n = 112), focal/grid laser (n = 146), or observation (n = 129). Eyes in the laser and observation groups received aflibercept if VA met prespecified worsening criteria.Results
Participants had median age of 60 years, 37% were female and 70% were non-Hispanic White. At baseline, the mean ± standard deviation (SD) high-contrast VA was 85.2 ± 3.6 letters (Snellen equivalent 20/20), mean ± SD 2.5% low-contrast VA was 47.6 ± 18.9 letters (Snellen equivalent 20/125), and low-contrast VA letter score was 2 SDs or more below the age-specific normative values in 23%. At 2 years, the mean change ± SD in low-contrast VA in the aflibercept, laser, and observation groups was 2.7 ± 20.1, -2.0 ± 19.6, and -3.1 ± 20.8 letters (adjusted difference, aflibercept vs. laser, 5.3 [95% confidence interval, -0.2 to 10.8], P = 0.06; aflibercept vs. observation, 5.5 [95% confidence interval -0.2 to 11.2], P = 0.06; and laser vs. observation, 0.2 [95% confidence interval -4.6 to 5.0], P = 0.94).Conclusions
There was no significant difference between treatment groups in low-contrast VA change from baseline to 2 years. Considering the range of the 95% confidence intervals, however, the study may have been underpowered to detect a clinically meaningful benefit between treatment groups.Translational relevance
Low-contrast VA, an important visual function, is decreased in eyes with diabetic macular edema.
SUBMITTER: Beaulieu WT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7937990 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceIntravitreous injections of antivascular endothelial growth factor agents are effective for treating diabetic macular edema (DME) involving the center of the macula (center-involved DME [CI-DME]) with visual acuity impairment (20/32 or worse). The best approach to treating patients with CI-DME and good visual acuity (20/25 or better) is unknown.ObjectiveTo compare vision loss at 2 years among eyes initially managed with aflibercept, laser photocoagulation, or observation.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized clinical trial conducted at 91 US and Canadian sites among 702 adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Participants had 1 study eye with CI-DME and visual acuity of 20/25 or better. The first participant was randomized on November 8, 2013, and the final date of follow-up was September 11, 2018.InterventionsEyes were randomly assigned to 2.0 mg of intravitreous aflibercept (n = 226) as frequently as every 4 weeks, focal/grid laser photocoagulation (n = 240), or observation (n = 236). Aflibercept was required for eyes in the laser photocoagulation or observation groups that had decreased visual acuity from baseline by at least 10 letters (≥ 2 lines on an eye chart) at any visit or by 5 to 9 letters (1-2 lines) at 2 consecutive visits.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was at least a 5-letter visual acuity decrease from baseline at 2 years. Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration adverse events (defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, or vascular or unknown death) were reported.ResultsAmong 702 randomized participants (mean age, 59 years; 38% female [n=264]), 625 of 681 (92% excluding deaths) completed the 2-year visit. For eyes with visual acuity that decreased from baseline, aflibercept was initiated in 25% (60/240) and 34% (80/236) in the laser photocoagulation and observation groups, respectively. At 2 years, the percentage of eyes with at least a 5-letter visual acuity decrease was 16% (33/205), 17% (36/212), and 19% (39/208) in the aflibercept, laser photocoagulation, and observation groups, respectively (aflibercept vs laser photocoagulation risk difference, -2% [95% CI, -9% to 5%]; relative risk, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.57-1.35; P = .79]; aflibercept vs observation risk difference, -3% [95% CI, -11% to 4%]; relative risk, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.55-1.27; P = .79]; laser photocoagulation vs observation risk difference, -1% [95% CI, -9% to 6%]; relative risk, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.64-1.41; P = .79]). Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration vascular events occurred in 15 (7%), 13 (5%), and 8 (3%) participants in the aflibercept, laser photocoagulation, and observation groups.Conclusions and relevanceAmong eyes with CI-DME and good visual acuity, there was no significant difference in vision loss at 2 years whether eyes were initially managed with aflibercept or with laser photocoagulation or observation and given aflibercept only if visual acuity worsened. Observation without treatment unless visual acuity worsens may be a reasonable strategy for CI-DME.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01909791.
| S-EPMC6537845 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We compared the efficacy of intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) to intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) injections in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME). The medical records of 49 eyes of 36 patients who were diagnosed with DME and had received IVR and 46 eyes of 40 patients who had received IVA treatment were reviewed. The central macular thickness (CMT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were measured at the baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months after the IVR or IVA. The mean number of injections of IVR was 2.6 ± 1.1 and of IVA was 2.7 ± 1.4. At 6 months, the CMT was significantly thinner than the baseline after IVR and after IVA. The mean BCVA was significantly better than the baseline after IVR only at 1 and 3 months and after IVA at 1 and 6 months. The BCVA of eyes with serous retinal detachment (SRD) was significantly better at 1 month after the IVR and at 1 month and 6 months after the IVA. The BCVAs improved more significantly in the SRD+ group than in the SRD- group. The effects of IVA persist longer than that of IVR. The effectiveness of both IVR and IVA was not dependent on the presence of SRD (IRB#2107).
| S-EPMC5512051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal Aflibercept injection (IAI) for vitrectomized eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) at one year.MethodsThis is a prospective, non-comparative, multicenter observational study including diabetic patients whose HbA1c is < 9%, with visual acuity between 20/400 to 20/40 due to DME, who have undergone vitrectomy since at least 3 months before the first aflibercept injection. Treatment protocol included 5 monthly aflibercept injection followed by a ProReNata regimen during the first year. Visual acuity, OCT findings and number of IAI were assessed at 6 months and one year.ResultsForty-six eyes were included. Indications for vitrectomy were epiretinal membrane (58.7%), intravitreal hemorrhage (26.1%), and vitreomacular traction (8.7%), retinal detachment (4.3%), and other cause (4.3%). Median duration of macular edema was 3 years. Median interval between vitrectomy and first visit was 9 months. Thirty eyes were non-naïve and received previously thermal laser (44.3%), intravitreal injection of triamcinolone (26.7%), of ranibizumab (70%), of dexamethasone implant (36.7%), or bevacizumab (6.7%). Data was available for 35 eyes at 1 year. Visual gain was significant, +6 letters (p <0.001) and central subfield thickness (CST) decreased significantly (-108μm, p < 0.001) at 1 year. Mean number of injections was 9.3 and mean interval injection was 5.8 weeks.ConclusionThese results suggest that IAI may be beneficial in vitrectomized eyes with refractory DME which require frequent injections to obtain visual and anatomical improvement.Clinical trial registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov, registration Number NCT02874859.
| S-EPMC8123959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAmong eyes with center-involved diabetic macular edema (CI-DME) and good visual acuity (VA), randomized clinical trial results showed no difference in VA loss between initial observation plus aflibercept only if VA decreased, initial focal/grid laser plus aflibercept only if VA decreased, or prompt aflibercept. Understanding the initial observation approach is relevant to patient management.ObjectiveTo assess the DRCR Retina Network protocol-defined approach and outcomes of initial observation with aflibercept only if VA worsened.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a post hoc secondary analyses of a randomized clinical trial of the DRCR Retina Network Protocol V that included 91 US and Canadian sites from November 2013 to September 2018. Participants were adults (n?=?236) with type 1 or 2 diabetes, 1 study eye with CI-DME, and VA letter score at least 79 (Snellen equivalent, 20/25 or better) assigned to initial observation. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to November 2019.InterventionsInitial observation and follow-up with aflibercept only for VA loss of at least 10 letters from baseline at 1 visit or 5 to 9 letters at 2 consecutive visits. Follow-up occurred at 8 weeks and then every 16 weeks unless VA or optical coherence tomography central subfield thickness worsened.Main outcomes and measuresWhether individuals received aflibercept.ResultsAmong 236 eyes in 236 individuals (149 [63%] male; median age, 60 years [interquartile range, 53-67 years]) randomly assigned to initial observation, 80 (34%) were treated with aflibercept during 2 years of follow-up. At 2 years, the median VA letter score was 86.0 (interquartile range, 89.0-81.0; median Snellen equivalent, 20/20 [20/16-20/25]). Receipt of aflibercept was more likely in eyes with baseline central subfield thickness at least 300 ?m (Zeiss-Stratus equivalent) vs less than 300 ?m (45% vs 26%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.98 [95% CI, 1.26-3.13], continuous P?=?.005), moderately severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study retinopathy severity level 47) and above vs moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (retinopathy severity level 43) and below (51% vs 27%; HR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.42-3.47], ordinal P?<?.001), and among participants whose nonstudy eye received DME treatment within 4 months of randomization vs not (52% vs 25%; HR, 2.55 [95% CI, 1.64-3.99], P?<?.001).Conclusions and relevanceMost eyes managed with initial observation plus aflibercept only if VA worsened maintained good vision at 2 years and did not require aflibercept for VA loss. However, the eyes in the trial were approximately twice as likely to receive aflibercept for VA loss if they had greater baseline central subfield thickness, worse diabetic retinopathy severity level, or a nonstudy eye receiving treatment for DME.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01909791.
| S-EPMC7042938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We investigated the long-term visual and anatomical outcomes of aflibercept monotherapy for exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD) with good baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). A medical chart review was performed for 40 consecutive patients with baseline decimal BCVA ≥ 0.6 secondary to exudative AMD. Three monthly injections were administrated, and thereafter additional injection was performed if needed over 5 years. In total, 13 eyes with neovascular AMD (nAMD) and 27 eyes with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) were enrolled. In both groups, the mean BCVA significantly improved at the 12-month visit (p < 0.05). However, the significant improvement in BCVA disappeared at the 24-month visit, and the final mean BCVA was equivalent to that at baseline (p = 0.17 in the nAMD group and p = 0.15 in the PCV group). The median number of injections required after the loading dose was 15.0 during the 5-year follow-up (nAMD:15.0 vs. PCV:15). During the study period, 37 (92.5%) eyes required retreatment(s). Cox regression analysis demonstrated that the protective allele of ARMS2 A69S was associated with a retreatment-free period from the initial injection (p = 0.041, repeated forward selection method). As-needed aflibercept monotherapy is a preferable treatment option for exudative AMD with good initial visual acuity regardless of nAMD or PCV during the 5-year study period.
| S-EPMC7961756 | biostudies-literature
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.).
| S-EPMC4422053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:We report the 2-year outcomes of intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) for exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD) with good visual acuity (VA) and examine the baseline factors associated with good visual outcome. Materials and methods:This multicenter, prospective study evaluated 39 eyes (39 AMD patients) enrolled from August 2013 to August 2014 at 12 and 24 months. Only patients with initial best-corrected VA (BCVA) >0.3 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (20/40 Snellen) were eligible. Three consecutive monthly IVA injections were followed by 2 monthly injections for 12 months. Thereafter, patients received injections on a treat- and-extend regimen for up to 24 months. Outcome measures included BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) at 12 and 24 months. Post hoc analysis, BCVA, and CMT were evaluated by AMD types (typical AMD [tAMD], type 1, and type 2 polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy [PCV]). Baseline characteristics and BCVA associations were evaluated with linear regression analysis and Student's t-test. Results:Mean age was 69 years and 26 of 39 eyes were male. tAMD, type 1 and type 2 PCV occurred in 18, 12, and 9 eyes, respectively. Baseline mean BCVA was 0.097 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (20/25 Snellen) and showed significant improvement to 0.058 (20/22 Snellen, P=0.03) at 12 months and 0.066 (20/23) at 24 months. CMT improved significantly from 320 (99) µm (mean [SD]) to 250 (93) µm (P=0.002) at 12 months and 240 (93) µm (P=0.0005) at 24 months. BCVA and CMT were not significantly different among the three groups. Only subretinal hemorrhage (SRH) was significantly associated with improved BCVA. BCVA change from baseline was -0.12 with SRH and -0.011 without SRH (P=0.017) at 12 months. Conclusion:IVA showed good efficacy for exudative AMD with good VA at 24 months. tAMD and type 1 and 2 PCV showed similar prognosis. Baseline SRH predicted favorable long-term vision in AMD with good VA.
| S-EPMC6022819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To compare visual acuity (VA) scores after autorefraction vs manual refraction in eyes of patients with diabetes mellitus and a wide range of VAs.The letter score from the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) test from the electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study was measured after autorefraction (AR-EVA score) and after manual refraction (MR-EVA score), which is the research protocol of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network. Testing order was randomized, study participants and VA examiners were masked to refraction source, and a second EVA test using an identical supplemental manual refraction (MR-EVAsuppl score) was performed to determine test-retest variability.In 878 eyes of 456 study participants, the median MR-EVA score was 74 (Snellen equivalent, approximately 20/32). The spherical equivalent was often similar for manual refraction and autorefraction (median difference, 0.00; 5th-95th percentile range, -1.75 to 1.13 diopters). However, on average, the MR-EVA scores were slightly better than the AR-EVA scores, across the entire VA range. Furthermore, the variability between the AR-EVA scores and the MR-EVA scores was substantially greater than the test-retest variability of the MR-EVA scores (P < .001). The variability of differences was highly dependent on the autorefractor model.Across a wide range of VAs at multiple sites using a variety of autorefractors, VA measurements tend to be worse with autorefraction than manual refraction. Differences between individual autorefractor models were identified. However, even among autorefractor models that compare most favorably with manual refraction, VA variability between autorefraction and manual refraction is higher than the test-retest variability of manual refraction. The results suggest that, with current instruments, autorefraction is not an acceptable substitute for manual refraction for most clinical trials with primary outcomes dependent on best-corrected VA.
| S-EPMC3489033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IMPORTANCE:Comparisons of the relative effect of 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents to treat diabetic macular edema warrant further assessment. OBJECTIVE:To provide additional outcomes from a randomized trial evaluating 3 anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents for diabetic macular edema within subgroups based on baseline visual acuity (VA) and central subfield thickness (CST) as evaluated on optical coherence tomography. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Post hoc exploratory analyses were conducted of randomized trial data on 660 adults with diabetic macular edema and decreased VA (Snellen equivalent, approximately 20/32 to 20/320). The original study was conducted between August 22, 2012, and August 28, 2013. Analysis was conducted from January 7 to June 2, 2015. INTERVENTIONS:Repeated 0.05-mL intravitreous injections of 2.0 mg of aflibercept (224 eyes), 1.25 mg of bevacizumab (218 eyes), or 0.3 mg of ranibizumab (218 eyes) as needed per protocol. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:One-year VA and CST outcomes within prespecified subgroups based on both baseline VA and CST thresholds, defined as worse (20/50 or worse) or better (20/32 to 20/40) VA and thicker (?400 µm) or thinner (250 to 399 µm) CST. RESULTS:In the subgroup with worse baseline VA (n?=?305), irrespective of baseline CST, aflibercept showed greater improvement than bevacizumab or ranibizumab for several VA outcomes. In the subgroup with better VA and thinner CST at baseline (61-73 eyes across 3 treatment groups), VA outcomes showed little difference between groups; mean change was +7.2, +8.4, and +7.6 letters in the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively. However, in the subgroup with better VA and thicker CST at baseline (31-43 eyes), there was a suggestion of worse VA outcomes in the bevacizumab group; mean change from baseline to 1 year was +9.5, +5.4, and +9.5 letters in the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively, and VA letter score was greater than 84 (approximately 20/20) in 21 of 33 (64%), 7 of 31 (23%), and 21 of 43 (49%) eyes, respectively. The adjusted differences and 95% CIs were 39% (17% to 60%) for aflibercept vs bevacizumab, 25% (5% to 46%) for ranibizumab vs bevacizumab, and 13% (-8% to 35%) for aflibercept vs ranibizumab. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:These post hoc secondary findings suggest that for eyes with better initial VA and thicker CST, some VA outcomes may be worse in the bevacizumab group than in the aflibercept and ranibizumab groups. Given the exploratory nature of these analyses and the small sample size within subgroups, caution is suggested when using the data to guide treatment considerations for patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01627249.
| S-EPMC5567793 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIM:To report the efficacy of intravitreal ziv-aflibercept injections in eyes with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusions (RVOs). METHODS:Consecutive patients with persistent or recurrent macular edema (central macula thickness >250 ?m) due to RVO were enrolled in this prospective study. Study eyes received intravitreal injections of ziv-aflibercept (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) at baseline. Patients were reassessed monthly for 4 months and given additional injections pro re nata for worsening best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraretinal edema or subretinal fluid seen on spectral domain optical coherence tomography, or central macular thickness (CMT) measurements >250 ?m. The primary endpoint was improvement in mean CMT at 4 months. Secondary endpoints included improvement in mean BCVA, and ocular and systemic safety signals. RESULTS:Nine eyes (five central and four branch RVOs) of nine patients were enrolled. The mean ± standard deviation CMT decreased from 604±199 ?m at baseline to 319±115 ?m (P=0.001) at 1 month and to 351±205 ?m (P=0.026) at 4 months. The mean BCVA did not improve significantly from baseline (1.00 LogMAR) to the 1-month (0.74 LogMAR; P=0.2) and 4-month (0.71 LogMAR; P=0.13) visits. No safety signals were noted. CONCLUSION:In this small prospective study, intravitreal ziv-aflibercept significantly improved mean CMT in eyes with persistent or recurrent macular edema due to RVOs. Prospective, randomized trials comparing ziv-aflibercept with standard pharmacotherapy are needed to better define efficacy and safety.
| S-EPMC5038569 | biostudies-literature