Dataset Information

Defining Nonadherence and Nonpersistence to Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapies in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Poor adherence or persistence to treatment can be a barrier to optimizing clinical practice (real-world) outcomes to intravitreal injection therapy in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Currently, there is a lack of consensus on the definition and classification of adherence specific to this context.

Objective

To describe the development and validation of terminology on patient nonadherence and nonpersistence to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

Design, setting, and participants

Following a systematic review of currently used terminology in the literature, a subcommittee panel of retinal experts developed a set of definitions and classification for validation. Definitions were restricted to use in patients with nAMD requiring intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Validation by the full nAMD Barometer Leadership Coalition was established using a modified Delphi approach, with predetermined mean scores of 7.5 or more signifying consensus. Subsequent endorsement of the definitions was provided from a second set of retinal experts, with more than 50% members agreeing or strongly agreeing with all definitions.

Main outcomes and measures

Development of consensus definitions for the terms adherence and persistence and a classification system for the factors associated with treatment nonadherence or nonpersistence in patients with nAMD.

Results

Nonadherence was defined as missing 2 or more treatment or monitoring visits over a period of 12 months, with a visit considered missed if it exceeded more than 2 weeks from the recommended date. Nonpersistence was defined by nonattendance or an appointment not scheduled within the last 6 months. The additional terms planned discontinuation and transfer of care were also established. Reasons for treatment nonadherence and nonpersistence were classified into 6 dimensions: (1) patient associated, (2) condition associated, (3) therapy associated, (4) health system and health care team associated, (5) social/economic, and (6) other, with subcategories specific to treatment for nAMD.

Conclusions and relevance

This classification system provides a framework for assessing treatment nonadherence and nonpersistence over time and across different health settings in the treatment of nAMD with current intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatments. This may have additional importance, given the potential association of the coronavirus pandemic on adherence to treatment in patients with nAMD.

SUBMITTER: Okada M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8176386 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Defining Nonadherence and Nonpersistence to Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapies in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Okada Mali M Wong Tien Yin TY Mitchell Paul P Eldem Bora B Talks S James SJ Aslam Tariq T Daien Vincent V Rodriguez Francisco J FJ Gale Richard R Barratt Jane J Finger Robert P RP Loewenstein Anat A

JAMA ophthalmology 20210701 7

<h4>Importance</h4>Poor adherence or persistence to treatment can be a barrier to optimizing clinical practice (real-world) outcomes to intravitreal injection therapy in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Currently, there is a lack of consensus on the definition and classification of adherence specific to this context.<h4>Objective</h4>To describe the development and validation of terminology on patient nonadherence and nonpersistence to anti-vascular endothelial ...[more]

PMID: 34081099

Similar Datasets

Project description:TopicSystematic review of risk factors for nonadherence and nonpersistence to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injection therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).Clinical relevanceLack of adherence (nonadherence) or undertreatment (nonpersistence) with respect to evidence from clinical trials remains a significant barrier to optimizing real-world outcomes for patients with nAMD. Contributing factors and strategies to address this are poorly understood.MethodsStudies that reported factors for nonadherence and nonpersistence to anti-VEGF therapy as well as studies examining strategies to improve this were included. Trial eligibility and data extraction were conducted according to Cochrane review methods. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Method Assessment Tool and certainty of evidence evaluated according to the GRADE Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research tool. Data were collated descriptively.ResultsOf the 1284 abstract results screened, 124 articles were assessed in full and 37 studies met the inclusion criteria. Definitions of nonadherence and nonpersistence varied or were not reported. Nonpersistence occurred early, with up to 50% of patients stopping treatment by 24 months. High rates of nonadherence were similarly reported, occurring in 32% to 95% of patients. Certainty of this finding was downgraded to a moderate level because of the heterogeneity in definitions used across studies. Multiple factors determine nonadherence and nonpersistence, including at the condition, therapy, patient, social/economic, and health systems/healthcare team levels. Moderate quality evidence points to lower baseline vision and poorer response to treatment as condition-related variables. The effects of other factors were of lower certainty, predominantly due to small numbers and potential biases in retrospective assessment. Although many factors are not modifiable (e.g., patient comorbidity), other factors are potentially correctable (e.g., lack of transport or mismatched patient expectations). Evidence on strategies to improve adherence and persistence is limited, but where available, these have proven effective.ConclusionsAwareness of factors related to poor patient adherence and persistence in nAMD could help identify at-risk populations and improve real-world outcomes. Further work is required to develop uniform definitions and establish high-quality evidence on interventions that can be easily implemented.

Project description:BackgroundAge-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a common cause of severe vision loss in people 55 years and older.ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to investigate the effects of anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) modalities for treating neovascular AMD.Search strategyWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS. We handsearched ARVO abstracts for 2006, 2007 for ongoing trials.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data. We contacted trial authors for additional data. We summarized outcomes as relative risks (RR), number needed to treat (NNT) and weighted mean differences.Main resultsWe included five RCTs of good methodological quality. All five trials were conducted by pharmaceutical companies. An intention-to-treat analysis using the last observation carried forward method was done in most trials. Two trials compared pegaptanib versus sham. One trial compared ranibizumab versus sham, another compared ranibizumab/sham verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT/sham ranibizumab, and the final trial compared ranibizumab plus verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT alone. Fewer patients treated with pegaptanib lost 15 or more letters of visual acuity at one year follow-up compared to sham (pooled relative risk (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 0.84). The NNT was 6.67 (95% CI 4.35 to 14.28) for 0.3 mg pegaptanib, 6.25 (95% CI 4.17 to 12.5) for 1 mg pegaptanib and 14.28 (95% CI 6.67 to 100) for 3 mg pegaptanib. In a trial of ranibizumab versus sham, RR for loss of 15 or more letters visual acuity at one year was 0.14 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.22) in favour of ranibizumab. The NNT was 3.13 (95% CI 2.56 to 3.84) for 0.3 mg ranibizumab and 3.13 (95% CI 2.56 to 3.84) for 0.5 mg ranibizumab. In a trial of ranibizumab versus verteporfin PDT, RR for loss of 15 or more letters at one year was 0.13 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.23) favouring ranibizumab. The NNT was 3.33 (95% CI 2.56 to 4.76) for 0.3 mg ranibizumab and 3.12 (95% CI 2.43 to 4.17) for 0.5 mg ranibizumab. In another trial of combined ranibizumab plus verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT, RR for loss of 15 or more letters at one year favoured combined therapy (RR 0.3 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.60). The NNT was 4.35 (95% CI 2.78 to 11.11). Pooled RR for gain of 15 or more letters visual acuity at one year was 5.81 (95% CI 3.29 to 10.26) for ranibizumab versus sham, 6.79 (95% CI 3.41 to 13.54) for ranibizumab/sham verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT/sham ranibizumab, and 4.44 (95% CI 1.40 to 14.08) for ranibizumab plus verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT. Frequency of endophthalmitis in included studies was between 0.7% to 4.7% with ranibizumab and 1.3% with pegaptanib. Improvement in vision-specific quality of life was reported for both treatments.Authors' conclusionsPegaptanib and ranibizumab reduce the risk of visual acuity loss in patients with neovascular AMD. Ranibizumab causes gains in visual acuity in many eyes. Quality of life and cost will be important for treatment decisions. Other agents blocking VEGF are being tested in ongoing trials.

Project description:Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) treatment has been revolutionized by the introduction of vascular endothelial growth factor antagonists (anti-VEGF), but the need for frequent intravitreal injections poses a heavy burden to patients and physicians. Evolving anti-VEGF therapies include longer duration agents, approaches that target multiple pathways, topical anti-VEGF agents, sustained-release, and genetic therapies. Abicipar pegol, a designed ankyrin repeat protein (DARPin), demonstrated the ability to maintain stable visual acuity with 12-week dosing, but was not approved by the FDA due to higher than usual rates of intraocular inflammation. Conbercept, a recombinant anti-VEGF fusion protein, has been approved in China, and is in Phase 3 trials globally. KSI-301 is an anti-VEGF antibody biopolymer conjugate that allowed 66% of nAMD patients to maintain at least a 6-month treatment-free interval in Phase 1b studies. OPT-302, an inhibitor of VEGF-C/D, will be tested in phase 3 studies that compare anti-VEGF-A monotherapy against combination therapy with OPT-302. Faricimab is a bispecific anti-VEGF/Ang-2 antibody that upregulates the Tie-2 signaling pathway and promotes vascular stability; it is undergoing phase 3 trials with potential for 12- or 16-week dosing. PAN-90806 is a topical anti-VEGF agent that showed the ability to reduce injection frequency by 79% compared to ranibizumab monotherapy in a phase 1/2a trial. Sustained-release anti-VEGF therapies include the ranibizumab Port Delivery System (in phase 3 studies), GB-102 (Phase 2b), OTX-TKI (phase 1), and Durasert (preclinical). Suprachoroidal delivery of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor, axitinib, is in preclinical studies. Genetic therapies in phase 1 studies include RGX-314 and ADVM-022, which introduce a viral vector that modifies the retina's cellular apparatus to create an anti-VEGF biofactory, potentially serving as a one-time treatment. Further investigation is warranted for drugs and delivery systems that hope to advance visual outcomes and reduce treatment burden of nAMD.

Project description:PurposeTo describe outcomes 5 years after initiating treatment with bevacizumab or ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD).DesignCohort study.ParticipantsPatients enrolled in the Comparison of AMD Treatments Trials.MethodsPatients were assigned randomly to ranibizumab or bevacizumab and to 1 of 3 dosing regimens. After 2 years, patients were released from the clinical trial protocol. At 5 years, patients were recalled for examination.Main outcome measuresVisual acuity (VA) and morphologic retinal features.ResultsVisual acuity was obtained for 647 of 914 (71%) living patients with average follow-up of 5.5 years. The mean number of examinations for AMD care after the clinical trial ended was 25.3, and the mean number of treatments was 15.4. Most patients (60%) were treated 1 time or more with a drug other than their assigned drug. At the 5-year visit, 50% of eyes had VA of 20/40 or better and 20% had VA of 20/200 or worse. Mean change in VA was -3 letters from baseline and -11 letters from 2 years. Among 467 eyes with fluorescein angiography, mean total lesion area was 12.9 mm(2), a mean of 4.8 mm(2) larger than at 2 years. Geographic atrophy was present in 213 of 515 (41%) gradable eyes and was subfoveal in 85 eyes (17%). Among 555 eyes with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography, 83% had fluid (61% intraretinal, 38% subretinal, and 36% sub-retinal pigment epithelium). Mean foveal total thickness was 278 μm, a decrease of 182 μm from baseline and 20 μm from 2 years. The retina was abnormally thin (<120 μm) in 36% of eyes. Between 2 and 5 years, the group originally assigned to ranibizumab for 2 years lost more VA than the bevacizumab group (-4 letters; P = 0.008). Otherwise, there were no statistically significant differences in VA or morphologic outcomes between drug or regimen groups.ConclusionsVision gains during the first 2 years were not maintained at 5 years. However, 50% of eyes had VA of 20/40 or better, confirming anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy as a major long-term therapeutic advance for neovascular AMD.

Dataset Information

Defining Nonadherence and Nonpersistence to Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapies in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Defining Nonadherence and Nonpersistence to Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapies in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets