Dataset Information

Real-World Effectiveness, Treatment Pattern, and Safety of Ranibizumab in Korean Patients with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Subgroup Analyses from the LUMINOUS Study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To evaluate the real-world effectiveness, treatment patterns, and safety of ranibizumab in Korean patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

Methods

LUMINOUS™ is a 5-year, global, prospective, observational, open-label study. Adults aged ≥18 years who were either treatment-naïve or prior-treated were enrolled and treated with ranibizumab 0.5 mg as per the local label. Outcome measures included mean (± standard deviation [SD]) changes from baseline in visual acuity (VA) and central retinal thickness (CRT), and rate of ocular and non-ocular adverse events (AEs).

Results

Overall, 367 Korean patients with nAMD (152 treatment-naïve and 215 prior-treated) were enrolled. The mean (SD) VA changes from baseline at 1-year were +10.1 (±21.77; P=0.0005) and +1.4 (±15.17; P=0.2142) Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters, with mean numbers of injections of 5.2 and 3.4 in the treatment-naïve and prior-treated groups, respectively. VA gains were greater in patients with lower baseline VA, who received a loading dose, and with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV). Multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrated younger age, worse baseline VA, and those who received loading dose being associated with higher odds of any gain in VA at 1 year (P<0.05). Mean (SD) CRT changes from baseline were -126.7 (±174.90) µm (P<0.0001) and +10.8 (±89.62) µm (P=0.5833) in the treatment-naïve and prior-treated groups, respectively, with greater reductions observed in patients with PCV. Ocular and non-ocular AEs were reported in 8.4% (n=31) and 10.1% (n=37) of patients, respectively.

Conclusion

The LUMINOUS study confirms real-world effectiveness and safety of ranibizumab in Korean patients with nAMD; factors including age, baseline VA, and loading-dose were associated with VA gain at one-year post-treatment.

SUBMITTER: Sagong M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8123958 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and treatment patterns of ranibizumab 0.5 mg in prior ranibizumab-treated patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) enrolled in the LUMINOUS™ study.Patients and methodsLUMINOUS, a 5-year, prospective, multicenter, observational study, recruited 30,138 adult patients (treatment-naïve or prior ranibizumab-treated or other ocular treatments) across all approved indications for ranibizumab. Patients were treated as per local ranibizumab label of participating countries. Here we report the mean change in visual acuity (VA) at Year 1, treatment exposure, overall incidence of ocular, non-ocular adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) in prior ranibizumab-treated nAMD patients (n = 16,167).ResultsAt baseline, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of patients was 78.4 (9.0) years, 59.0% were female, and 80.0% were Caucasian. At Year 1 (n = 10,168), the mean (SD) VA change was -1.6 (12.6) letters (baseline VA: 58.3 [19.0] letters) with a mean (SD) of 4.7 (3.1) ranibizumab injections. Stratified by duration of prior ranibizumab treatment of <1 (n = 4,112), 1 to <2 (n = 2,095), 2 to <3 (n = 1,506), 3 to <4 (n = 1,123), 4 to <5 (n = 689), and ≥5 (n = 256) years, the mean (SD) VA change at Year 1 were -1.2 (13.5), -2.0 (12.3), -2.0 (11.3), -1.9 (11.8), -2.5 (10.9), and 0.0 (11.2) letters, respectively. Mean (SD) VA change in patients who received ≤6 and >6 injections over 1 year was -1.8 (13.8) and +0.5 (12.5) letters, respectively. The rate of ocular/non-ocular AEs and SAEs across all prior ranibizumab-treated patients over 5 years were 13.29%/23.02% and 0.84%/13.66%, respectively.ConclusionsOverall, regardless of the prior ranibizumab-treatment duration, VA was maintained in these patients at Year 1, and those receiving ≥6 injections showed a trend towards gaining letters. There were no new safety signals. These results may help inform routine clinical practice to appropriately treat nAMD patients with ranibizumab to achieve optimal visual outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundClinical trials have established the efficacy of ranibizumab for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). In addition, bevacizumab is used off-label to treat AMD, despite the absence of similar supporting data.MethodsIn a multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned 1208 patients with neovascular AMD to receive intravitreal injections of ranibizumab or bevacizumab on either a monthly schedule or as needed with monthly evaluation. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity at 1 year, with a noninferiority limit of 5 letters on the eye chart.ResultsBevacizumab administered monthly was equivalent to ranibizumab administered monthly, with 8.0 and 8.5 letters gained, respectively. Bevacizumab administered as needed was equivalent to ranibizumab as needed, with 5.9 and 6.8 letters gained, respectively. Ranibizumab as needed was equivalent to monthly ranibizumab, although the comparison between bevacizumab as needed and monthly bevacizumab was inconclusive. The mean decrease in central retinal thickness was greater in the ranibizumab-monthly group (196 μm) than in the other groups (152 to 168 μm, P=0.03 by analysis of variance). Rates of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke were similar for patients receiving either bevacizumab or ranibizumab (P>0.20). The proportion of patients with serious systemic adverse events (primarily hospitalizations) was higher with bevacizumab than with ranibizumab (24.1% vs. 19.0%; risk ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.66), with excess events broadly distributed in disease categories not identified in previous studies as areas of concern.ConclusionsAt 1 year, bevacizumab and ranibizumab had equivalent effects on visual acuity when administered according to the same schedule. Ranibizumab given as needed with monthly evaluation had effects on vision that were equivalent to those of ranibizumab administered monthly. Differences in rates of serious adverse events require further study. (Funded by the National Eye Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00593450.).

Project description:IntroductionRanibizumab is an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor-A (anti-VEGF) approved for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). The treat and extend (T&E) regimen can potentially reduce the burden of clinic visits compared with a pro re nata (PRN) regimen. Retrospective, interim analyses of clinical effectiveness, treatment and resource use patterns were conducted using real-world data in England and Wales from the TERRA study.MethodsTwo cohorts, those switching from a PRN to a T&E regimen ('prior PRN') and those initiating ranibizumab on the T&E regimen as their first anti-VEGF therapy ('anti-VEGF-naïve') were enrolled in TERRA. Retrospective clinical assessments were gathered from medical records, while resource use patterns were collected via an operating cost questionnaire completed by each study site.ResultsAt the interim analysis cut-off date (15 November 2016), 11 sites had enrolled 145 patients (prior PRN: n = 110; anti-VEGF-naïve: n = 35). Mean change from baseline (date of first injection) in visual acuity and central subfield retinal thickness to 12 months was +7.6 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8, 12.4; p = 0.003; n = 27] and -67.7 μm (95% CI -106.5, -28.9; p = 0.001, n = 29), respectively, in the anti-VEGF-naïve cohort. Most T&E clinics were run as one-stop services (same-day monitoring and injection), whereas 4/10 PRN clinics were run as two-stop services (monitoring and injection on different days). In general, one-stop clinics used less staff resources and were likely to be shorter in duration for healthcare providers than the cumulative time spent for two-stop clinics.ConclusionThis is the first real-world observational study conducted in England and Wales demonstrating the effectiveness of the ranibizumab T&E regimen in anti-VEGF-naïve patients. T&E is compatible with one-stop clinic services, which these real-world data suggest to be less resource intensive than two-stop clinic services, possibly providing a dosing regimen beneficial to both patients and resource burden in UK clinical practice.FundingNovartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited.

Project description:PurposeWe sought to determine the most cost-effective treatment for patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration: monthly or as-needed bevacizumab injections, or monthly or as-needed ranibizumab injections.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis.ParticipantsHypothetical cohort of 80-year-old patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration.MethodsUsing a mathematical model with a 20-year time horizon, we compared the incremental cost-effectiveness of treating a hypothetical cohort of 80-year-old patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration using monthly bevacizumab, as-needed bevacizumab, monthly ranibizumab, or as-needed ranibizumab. Data came from the Comparison of Age-related macular degeneration Treatment Trial (CATT), the Medicare Fee Schedule, and the medical literature.Main outcome measuresCosts, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained.ResultsCompared with as-needed bevacizumab, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of monthly bevacizumab is $24,2 357/QALY. Monthly ranibizumab gains an additional 0.02 QALYs versus monthly bevacizumab at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of >$10 million/QALY. As-needed ranibizumab was dominated by monthly bevacizumab, meaning it was more costly and less effective. In sensitivity analyses assuming a willingness to pay of $100,000/QALY, the annual risk of serious vascular events would have to be ≥2.5 times higher with bevacizumab than that observed in the CATT trial for as-needed ranibizumab to have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of <$100,000/QALY. In another sensitivity analysis, even if every patient receiving bevacizumab experienced declining vision by 1 category (e.g., from 20/25-20/40 to 20/50-20/80) after 2 years but every patient receiving ranibizumab retained their vision level, as-needed ranibizumab would have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $97,340/QALY.ConclusionsEven after considering the potential for differences in risks of serious adverse events and therapeutic effectiveness, bevacizumab confers considerably greater value than ranibizumab for the treatment of neovascular macular degeneration.

Project description:PurposeNeovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) shows variable treatment response to intravitreal anti-VEGF. This analysis compared the potential of different artificial intelligence (AI)-based machine learning models using OCT and clinical variables to accurately predict at baseline the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 9 months in response to ranibizumab in patients with nAMD.DesignRetrospective analysis.ParticipantsBaseline and imaging data from patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular dengeration.MethodsBaseline data from 502 study eyes from the HARBOR (NCT00891735) prospective clinical trial (monthly ranibizumab 0.5 and 2.0 mg arms) were pooled; 432 baseline OCT volume scans were included in the analysis. Seven models, based on baseline quantitative OCT features (Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator [Lasso] OCT minimum [min], Lasso OCT 1 standard error [SE]); on quantitative OCT features and clinical variables at baseline (Lasso min, Lasso 1SE, CatBoost, RF [random forest]); or on baseline OCT images only (deep learning [DL] model), were systematically compared with a benchmark linear model of baseline age and BCVA. Quantitative OCT features were derived by a DL segmentation model on the volume images, including retinal layer volumes and thicknesses, and retinal fluid biomarkers, including statistics on fluid volume and distribution.Main outcome measuresPrognostic ability of the models was evaluated using coefficient of determination (R2) and median absolute error (MAE; letters).ResultsIn the first cross-validation split, mean R2 (MAE) of the Lasso min, Lasso 1SE, CatBoost, and RF models was 0.46 (7.87), 0.42 (8.43), 0.45 (7.75), and 0.43 (7.60), respectively. These models ranked higher than or similar to the benchmark model (mean R2, 0.41; mean MAE, 8.20 letters) and better than OCT-only models (mean R2: Lasso OCT min, 0.20; Lasso OCT 1SE, 0.16; DL, 0.34). The Lasso min model was selected for detailed analysis; mean R2 (MAE) of the Lasso min and benchmark models for 1000 repeated cross-validation splits were 0.46 (7.7) and 0.42 (8.0), respectively.ConclusionsMachine learning models based on AI-segmented OCT features and clinical variables at baseline may predict future response to ranibizumab treatment in patients with nAMD. However, further developments will be needed to realize the clinical utility of such AI-based tools.Financial disclosuresProprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.