Diabetic macular edema: current and emerging therapies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wenick AS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3277023 | biostudies-other | 2012 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Diabetic macular edema: current and emerging therapies.
Wenick Adam S AS Bressler Neil M NM
Middle East African journal of ophthalmology 20120101 1
Diabetic macular edema is a leading cause of vision impairment among people within the working- age population. This review discusses the pathogenesis of diabetic macular edema and the treatment options currently available for the treatment of diabetic macular edema, including for focal/grid photocoagulation, intravitreal corticosteroids and intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents. The biologic rationale for novel therapeutic agents, many of which are currently being evaluate ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The treatment of diabetic macular edema is rapidly evolving. The era of laser therapy is being quickly replaced by an era of pharmacotherapy. Several pharmacotherapies have been recently developed for the treatment of retinal vascular diseases such as diabetic macular edema. Several intravitreal injections or sustained delivery devices have undergone phase 3 testing while others are currently being evaluated. The results of clinical trials have shown the superiority of some of these agents to laser therapy. However, with the availability of several of these newer agents, it may be difficult to individualize treatment options especially those patients respond differently to various therapies. As such, more effort is still needed in order to determine the best treatment regimen for a given patient. In this article, we briefly summarize the major new therapeutic additions for the treatment of diabetic macular edema and allude to some future promising therapies.
| S-EPMC3874493 | biostudies-other
Project description:Diabetic retinopathy (DR), with increasing incidence, is the major cause of vision loss and blindness worldwide in working-age adults. Diabetic macular edema (DME) remains the main cause of vision impairment in diabetic patients, with its pathogenesis still not completely elucidated. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of DR and DME. Currently, intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents remains as the first-line therapy in DME treatment due to the superior anatomic and functional outcomes. However, some patients do not respond satisfactorily to anti-VEGF injections. More than 30% patients still exist with persistent DME even after regular intravitreal injection for at least 4 injections within 24 weeks, suggesting other pathogenic factors, beyond VEGF, might contribute to the pathogenesis of DME. Recent advances showed nearly all the retinal cells are involved in DR and DME, including breakdown of blood-retinal barrier (BRB), drainage dysfunction of Müller glia and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), involvement of inflammation, oxidative stress, and neurodegeneration, all complicating the pathogenesis of DME. The profound understanding of the changes in proteomics and metabolomics helps improve the elucidation of the pathogenesis of DR and DME and leads to the identification of novel targets, biomarkers and potential therapeutic strategies for DME treatment. The present review aimed to summarize the current understanding of DME, the involved molecular mechanisms, and the changes in proteomics and metabolomics, thus to propose the potential therapeutic recommendations for personalized treatment of DME.
| S-EPMC9655436 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a major ocular complication of diabetes mellitus (DM), leading to significant visual impairment. DME's pathogenesis is multifactorial. Focal edema tends to occur when primary metabolic abnormalities lead to a persistent hyperglycemic state, causing the development of microaneurysms, often with extravascular lipoprotein in a circinate pattern around the focal leakage. On the other hand, diffusion edema is due to a generalized breakdown of the inner blood-retinal barrier, leading to profuse early leakage from the entire capillary bed of the posterior pole with the subsequent extravasation of fluid into the extracellular space. The pathogenesis of DME occurs through the interaction of multiple molecular mediators, including the overexpression of several growth factors, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), insulin-like growth factor-1, angiopoietin-1, and -2, stromal-derived factor-1, fibroblast growth factor-2, and tumor necrosis factor. Synergistically, these growth factors mediate angiogenesis, protease production, endothelial cell proliferation, and migration. Treatment for DME generally involves primary management of DM, laser photocoagulation, and pharmacotherapeutics targeting mediators, namely, the anti-VEGF pathway. The emergence of anti-VEGF therapies has resulted in significant clinical improvements compared to laser therapy alone. However, multiple factors influencing the visual outcome after anti-VEGF treatment and the presence of anti-VEGF non-responders have necessitated the development of new pharmacotherapies. In this review, we explore the pathophysiology of DME and current management strategies. In addition, we provide a comprehensive analysis of emerging therapeutic approaches to the treatment of DME.
| S-EPMC9221813 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe Diabetic Macular Edema Treated with Ozurdex (DMEO) Trial measured aqueous pro-permeability factors (PPFs) in diabetic macular edema (DME) patients before and after injection of dexamethasone implant or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-neutralizing protein and correlated changes in levels with changes in excess foveal thickness (EFT) to identify potential PPFs contributing to DME.DesignProspective, randomized crossover clinical trial.MethodsTwenty DME patients randomized to dexamethasone implant or VEGF-neutralizing protein had aqueous taps and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) at baseline and every 4 weeks for 28 weeks. Aqueous levels of 55 vasoactive proteins were measured with protein array. Crossover at week 16 provided changes in protein levels after each intervention in all 20 patients.ResultsAfter dexamethasone implant there was significant correlation between changes in levels of 13 vasoactive proteins with changes in EFT, including 3 known PPFs: angiopoietin-2 (r = 0.40, P = .001), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF; r = 0.31, P = .02), and endocrine gland-VEGF (EG-VEGF, r = 0.43, P < .001). Reduction of prolactin, insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3, and matrix metalloproteinase-9 correlated with edema reduction after injection of a VEGF-neutralizing protein as well as dexamethasone implant, suggesting their modulation is likely secondary to changes in edema rather than causative.ConclusionsCorrelation of edema reduction with reduction in the PPFs angiopoietin-2, HGF, and EG-VEGF provides potential insight into the multifactorial molecular mechanism by which dexamethasone implants reduce edema and suggest that additional study is needed to investigate the contributions of these 3 factors to chronic DME.
| S-EPMC5482180 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo relate costs and treatment benefits for diabetic macular edema (DME), branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO), and central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO).DesignA model of resource use, outcomes, and cost-effectiveness and utility.ParticipantsNone.MethodsResults from published clinical trials (index studies) of laser, intravitreal corticosteroids, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents, and vitrectomy trials were used to ascertain visual benefit and clinical protocols. Calculations followed from the costs of 1 year of treatment for each treatment modality and the visual benefits as ascertained.Main outcome measuresVisual acuity (VA) saved, cost of therapy, cost per line saved, cost per line-year saved, and costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).ResultsThe lines saved for DME (0.26-2.02), BRVO (0.74-4.92), and CRVO (1.2-3.75) yielded calculations of costs/line of saved VA for DME ($1329-$11,609), BRVO ($494-$13,039), and CRVO ($704-$7611); costs/line-year for DME ($60-$561), BRVO ($25-$754), and CRVO ($45-$473); and costs/QALY ($824 to $25,566).ConclusionsRelative costs and benefits should be considered in perspective when applying and developing treatment strategies.
| S-EPMC3483086 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeStimulation of nicotinic acetylcholine (nACh) receptors on vascular endothelial cells promotes angiogenesis and vascular permeability in animal models. The safety and bioactivity of topical mecamylamine, an antagonist of nACh receptors, was tested in patients with diabetic macular edema.DesignA multicenter phase I/II clinical trial.MethodsTwenty-three patients with chronic diabetic macular edema received 1% mecamylamine topically twice daily for 12 weeks, the primary end point. Patients underwent safety assessments, measurement of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and measurement of foveal thickness using optical coherence tomography at baseline, 1, 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks.ResultsMecamylamine drops were well tolerated and there were no drug-related safety problems. Mean improvement in BCVA at 1, 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks was 2.8, 1.9, 2.4, 0.8, and 3.1 letters, respectively. There was little change in mean excess foveal thickness. There was substantial heterogeneity in response, because 8 patients showed convincing improvement in BCVA, foveal thickness, or both, 9 patients showed equivocal or no substantial changes, and 4 patients showed worsening. Five patients showed a substantial improvement in BCVA, foveal thickness, or both between their last visit while receiving mecamylamine and 1 month after stopping mecamylamine.ConclusionsThis study suggested that administration of topical mecamylamine, a nonspecific nACh receptor blocker, may have heterogeneous effects in patients with diabetic macular edema. Variable expression of nACh receptor subtypes on endothelial cells that have different effects on permeability would provide an explanation for these results and should be investigated, because more specific nACh receptor blockers may dissociate antipermeability and propermeability effects.
| S-EPMC3143041 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo investigate the clinical features of diabetic macular edema (DME) in eyes with pachychoroid phenotypes using multimodal retinal imaging.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 210 eyes from 210 DME patients and analyzed the clinical and imaging parameters, including visual acuity, central macular thickness (CMT), subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) and neural retina layer thickness (NRT). The DME eyes were divided into two groups: group 1 (80 eyes with submacular detachment [SMD]) and group 2 (130 eyes without SMD). The clinical and imaging parameters of 285 eyes from 285 diabetic patients without DME were collected as a control group.ResultsDME eyes with pachychoroid phenotypes were more frequent in group 1 than in group 2 (53 eyes [66.25%] and 53 eyes [40.77%], respectively, P < 0.001). Pachychoroid phenotypes were identified in 108 (37.90%) of the control eyes. CMT and NRT were greater in group 1 than in group 2. In group 1, 37 eyes had SMD combined with focal edema, and 43 eyes had SMD combined with diffuse-type edema. No significant difference in pachychoroid phenotypes was found between the focal and diffuse types (26 [70.27%] and 27 [62.79%], respectively, P = 0.481). In group 2, 70 eyes had focal-type edema, and 60 eyes had diffuse-type edema. No significant difference in the frequency of pachychoroid phenotypes was found (32 [45.71%] and 21 [35.00%], respectively, P = 0.215). Interestingly, among the 70 eyes with focal edema in group 2, 13 (40.6%) and 5 (13.2%) eyes with and without pachychoroid phenotypes showed no definite microaneurysms, respectively.ConclusionSMD and focal edema without definite microaneurysms may be clinical manifestations of DME with pachychoroid phenotypes and possibly related to choroidal circulation disturbance in DME.
| S-EPMC7532553 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Diabetic macular edema is the most common cause of visual impairment in patients with diabetes mellitus. The pathogenesis of macular edema is complex and multifactorial. For many years, laser photocoagulation has been considered the standard therapy for the treatment of diabetic macular edema; however, few patients achieve significant improvements in visual acuity. Today the intravitreal administration of anti-inflammatory or anti-angiogenic agents together with the use of laser photocoagulation represents the standard of care for the treatment of this complication. The intravitreal route of administration minimizes the systemic side effects of corticosteroids. Steroid-related ocular side effects are elevated intraocular pressure and cataract, while injection-related complications include endophthalmitis, vitreous hemorrhage, and retinal detachment. In order to reduce the risks and complications, intravitreal implants have been developed recently to provide sustained release of corticosteroids and reduce repeated injections for the management of diabetic macular edema. In this review, the efficacy, safety, and therapeutic potential of intravitreal corticosteroids in diabetic macular edema are discussed with a review of recent literature.
| S-EPMC5468529 | biostudies-other
Project description:Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are very important diabetes-related lesions that can lead to serious physical consequences like amputations of limbs and equally severe social, psychological, and economic outcomes. It is reported that up to 25% of patients with diabetes develop a DFU in their lifetime, and more than half of them become infected. Therefore, it is essential to manage infection and ulcer recovery to prevent negatives outcomes. The available information plays a significant role in keeping both physicians and patients aware of the emerging therapies against DFUs. The purpose of this review is to compile the currently available approaches in the managing and treatment of DFUs, including molecular and regenerative medicine, antimicrobial and energy-based therapies, and the use of plant extracts, antimicrobial peptides, growth factors, ozone, devices, and nano-medicine, to offer an overview of the assessment of this condition.
| S-EPMC6963879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo determine the effect of vitrectomy for center-involved diabetic macular edema (CI-DME).MethodsThis was a retrospective study of 53 eyes of 45 patients who had vitrectomy for CI-DME and were followed up for at least 12 months. Charts were reviewed for visual acuity (VA), central subfield mean thickness measured by optical coherence tomography, presurgical and postsurgical interventions for CI-DME, and number of office visits in the first 12 months after surgery. Preoperative spectral domain optical coherence tomography was performed on 38 patients, and they were graded for ellipsoid zone (EZ) intactness by three independent graders with assessment of agreement between graders using intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analysis.ResultsThe median VA improved from 20/100 (interquartile range [IQR], 20/63-20/200) at baseline to 20/63 (IQR, 20/32-20/125) at 12 months. The median central subfield mean thickness improved from 505 μm (IQR, 389-597 μm) at baseline to 279 μm (IQR, 246-339 μm) at 12 months. Intergrader agreement for EZ intactness was moderate (intraclass correlation coefficients 0.4294-0.6356). There was no relationship between preoperative intactness of the EZ and the 12-month change in VA.ConclusionVitrectomy consistently thins the macula in CI-DME and, on average, leads to clinically significant improvement in VA comparable in size to that reported with serial intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections. A large, comparative, prospective, randomized clinical trial of these two treatments is needed to determine which is more effective and cost-effective.
| S-EPMC4854422 | biostudies-literature