Dataset Information

Treatment contentment and preference of patients undergoing intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The aim of this study is to investigate patients´ treatment preference between the pro re nata (PRN) and treat and extend (T&E) regimens and their feelings and contentment undergoing intravitreal injections (IVI) with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents.

Methods

Six months after the switch of the treatment regimen from PRN to T&E, answers of a 16-item questionnaire of 105 patients under IVI therapy regarding age, sex and treatment preference (T&E or PRN regimen), as well as burden and anxiety resulting from therapy, were evaluated. Analysis of associations between answers of the questionnaire was executed using Pearson's Chi² test and Mann-Whitney U test. P values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Nearly all patients (90.5%) felt well informed about disease and therapy. Comparing treatment regimen, 13.7% thought PRN was better and 23.3% felt T&E was better. The majority considered PRN and T&E to be equal (60.3%). No significant association between treatment regimen and age (p = 0.15), gender (p = 0.35) and duration of IVI therapy (p = 0.42) was seen. The examination results are associated with fear in the majority of patients (53.3%). Fear about the IVI was indicated by 47.6% of individuals and was significantly associated with pain during treatment (p = 0.0003), pain after treatment (p = 0.004) and fear about unfavourable examination results regarding disease activity (p = 7.94 × 10^-7).

Conclusions

Most patients are satisfied with the IVI therapy and the treatment regimen. Fear of the IVI and particularly of unfavourable examination results demonstrate the high treatment burden for patients undergoing anti-VEGF therapy. These aspects should be taken into account by healthcare professionals.

SUBMITTER: Kellner U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8298185 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeIntravitreal (IVT) injections of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab are commonly prescribed to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Studies comparing inflammation rates in large populations of patients receiving these agents and the treatment of ocular inflammation post-IVT anti-VEGF injections are scarce. In this study, we compared rates of endophthalmitis claims (sterile and infectious) following IVT anti-VEGF injections to determine the risk factors associated with developing endophthalmitis, and examined the claims for subsequent treatment.Patients and methodsThis retrospective cohort study of USA claims data examined the risk of developing endophthalmitis following IVT injection of aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab in patients with nAMD between 11/18/2011 and 5/31/2013. The primary study outcome was occurrence of endophthalmitis within 30 days of a claim for an IVT anti-VEGF injection. Endophthalmitis rates were calculated separately for aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab, followed by pairwise comparisons of endophthalmitis frequencies among the 3 treatments.ResultsThis analysis included 818,558 injections from 156,594 patients with nAMD. The rates (% [n/N]) of endophthalmitis following aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab IVT injections were 0.100% (136/135,973), 0.056% (268/481,572), and 0.047% (94/201,013), respectively. In a multivariate analysis, aflibercept was associated with a significantly higher risk of endophthalmitis vs ranibizumab (adjusted odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CI: 1.68-2.85; P<0.0001). The risk of endophthalmitis was similar for bevacizumab and ranibizumab. Within 14 days after endophthalmitis, 38.6% of cases received injectable antibiotics, 15.3% received injectable steroids, and 30.3% underwent vitrectomy.ConclusionThe rate of endophthalmitis was very low, but higher following IVT injection with aflibercept compared with both bevacizumab and ranibizumab in patients with nAMD.

Project description:BackgroundWhile randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are based on strict inclusion/exclusion criteria, non-interventional studies (NISs) might provide additional information to guide management in patients more representative to the real-world setting. The aim of this study was to compare baseline characteristics of patients receiving intravitreal treatment in the NIS OCEAN with those from published RCTs.MethodsThe ongoing OCEAN study enrolled patients treated with ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), diabetic macular oedema (DME) or branch/central retinal vein occlusion (B/CRVO). Baseline patient characteristics were compared by indication within the OCEAN cohort. Furthermore, the characteristics were set in reference to those of published RCTs in the same indications. Confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and assessed for statistically significant differences as indicated by non-overlapping CIs.ResultsPatient characteristics in the NIS OCEAN were evaluated for 3,614 patients with nAMD, 1,211 with DME, 204 with BRVO and 121 with CRVO. Between these groups, significant differences in mean age, gender distributions, and mean baseline VA were seen, reflecting known differences between the indications. Compared to the patient characteristics of published RCTs (trials selected by literature search: nAMD: 13 RCTs, DME: 9, RVO: 5), the OCEAN patients' mean age was significantly higher in every indication. The gender distributions across the trials were comparable, with only few differences between OCEAN and the RCTs. Regarding the mean baseline VA, notable differences were found in nAMD and in DME, with VA significantly higher in some RCTs and lower in others.ConclusionsThe described differences underline the complementarity of NISs and RCTs. OCEAN covers a broader spectrum and more variability of patients than do RCTs. As baseline values may have impact on the treatment response (ceiling effect), there is an ongoing need for research in all patient subgroups. Country-specific assessments of patient populations can better reflect the real-world situation. NISs can deliver insights that RCTs may not, as NISs can include non-typical patients, patients with comorbidities, a broader age spectrum and patients of various disease stages.Trial registrationThe NIS OCEAN was registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT02194803 ).