Search

Purpose: Ranibizumab monotherapy showed stronger effects on area of retinal neovascularization (NV) reduction while offering better visual acuity (VA) results than panretinal laser photocoagulation (PRP) monotherapy during the first 12 months of the PRIDE study. The second year of PRIDE was an observational, non-interventional follow-up, performed to evaluate long-term anatomical and functional outcomes in proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) patients under real-life conditions, prior to the approval of ranibizumab for PDR., Methods: Seventy-three PDR patients (28 from the ranibizumab group; 20 from the PRP group; 25 from the combination group) were included in the observational follow-up phase and treated at the investigators discretion. Visual acuity (VA) measurements and retinal imaging were performed at Months 12, 18 and 24., Results: Mean (± SD) NV area in the ranibizumab monotherapy and combination follow-up groups increased from 3.16 ± 4.30 mm 2 and 1.13 ± 2.78 mm 2 at Month 12 to 6.09 ± 10.79 mm 2 and 2.14 ± 4.41 mm 2 at Month 18 and 10.00 ± 17.63 mm 2 and 3.26 ± 7.05 mm 2 at Month 24, respectively. In the PRP follow-up group, NV area declined from 5.44 ± 14.55 mm 2 at Month 12 to 1.22 ± 1.67 mm 2 at Month 18, but increased again to 4.05 ± 11.66 mm 2 at Month 24. During the observational phase, only 2 (6;8) patients in the ranibizumab (PRP;combination) follow-up group were treated with anti-VEGF medications, while 17 (6;10) patients received PRP laser therapy., Conclusion: Discontinuation of ranibizumab treatment in PDR patients may result in an increase of NV area and VA loss. Tight monitoring of disease activity and continued treatment beyond the first year is needed to maintain disease control., (© 2021 Novartis Pharma GmbH. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Purpose: Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) is the current standard of care in proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). However, treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents might offer better patient outcomes with fewer side-effects. The PRIDE study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab with or without PRP compared with PRP alone in patients with PDR., Methods: A total of 106 PDR patients without diabetic macular oedema were randomized to receive ranibizumab 0.5 mg monotherapy (n = 35), PRP (n = 35) or combined ranibizumab 0.5 mg/PRP (n = 36). The primary objective of this 12-month, multicentre, phase II study was to investigate the change in area of retinal neovascularization (NV). Complete regression of leakage and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were key secondary end-points., Results: At Month 12, there was a statistically significant difference of -2.83 mm² in the least square mean change in NV area between the ranibizumab monotherapy and PRP group, favouring ranibizumab (95% CI [-5.45; -0.21], p = 0.0344). At Month 3, 67%/0%/67% of the patients in the ranibizumab/PRP/combination groups, respectively, showed complete regression of leakage from NVs, while at Month 12, 28%/8%/18% showed complete regression of leakage from NVs. BCVA change was greater in the ranibizumab group compared with the PRP monotherapy group at Month 12 (+1.6 letters; 95% CI [-2.3; 5.5] versus -3.9 letters; 95% CI [-7.8; -0.1], p = 0.0495)., Conclusions: Ranibizumab monotherapy is an alternative treatment option to laser treatment in patients with PDR. Ranibizumab showed stronger effects on NV leakage and area reduction while offering better visual acuity results than PRP alone., (© 2019 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Purpose: The COMRADE studies are the first randomized controlled head-to-head trials comparing the efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab versus dexamethasone (DEX) in patients with macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO). The COMRADE extension trial was designed to provide additional 6-month data of patients who completed the core studies., Methods: In this open-label, phase IV study patients who completed the COMRADE core studies were prospectively enrolled. Overall, 92 branch RVO (BRVO) patients (ranibizumab 52, DEX 40) and 83 central RVO (CRVO) patients (ranibizumab 61, DEX 22) were treated, and 94.6% of BRVO patients and 97.6% of CRVO patients completed the extension study. Patients were assigned to the same treatment group as in the core studies. Patients were monitored monthly and received either 0.5 mg ranibizumab or a 0.7 mg DEX implant as needed., Results: Over the course of the extension, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of the study eye occurred in 55.8% of BRVO patients on ranibizumab and in 62.5% of those on DEX. Among CRVO patients, 65.5% in the ranibizumab group and 59.1% in the DEX group developed TEAEs. Overall, elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) was more frequent with DEX than ranibizumab treatment. Mean average change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in BRVO patients was significantly better for ranibizumab than DEX (p = 0.0249). The CRVO results were consistent with BRVO's, although not significant (p = 0.1119)., Conclusion: When used according to the European labels, ranibizumab revealed a better ocular safety profile and produced greater average BCVA gains than DEX. By the end of the additional 6-month study period, this difference in BCVA was more pronounced in BRVO as in CRVO patients. The main limitation of the COMRADE studies was that DEX patients received only a single intravitreal treatment during the first 6 months, which is presumably not adequate. However, frequent DEX implants could lead to more steroid-related side effects, especially to an increased intraocular pressure., (© 2018 Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: To assess efficacy and safety of intravitreal ranibizumab 0.5 mg plus laser (COMBI) versus laser monotherapy (LASER) in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular oedema (DME) in either nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) or proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and to analyse the relevance of inner versus outer retinal thickness., Methods: In this double-masked, multicentre phase IIIb study, patients (N = 128) were randomized (2:1) to receive COMBI (n = 85) versus LASER (n = 43). Patients received four initial monthly injections of ranibizumab 0.5 mg (COMBI) or sham (LASER) followed by pro re nata (PRN) injections. In both groups, patients received laser at baseline and additional laser at 3 monthly intervals, as needed. The study was started in 2010 and was prematurely terminated due to approval of ranibizumab for DME., Results: The least squares (LS) mean change in mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to month 12 was higher in the COMBI (6.5) versus LASER (2.3) group (LS mean difference: 4.2 [95% CI 0.9; 7.4] letters, p = 0.01, primary end-point). There was also a tendency in the same direction for the subgroup of 26 patients with PDR (LS mean difference 14.7, p = 0.11). Mean central retinal thickness decreased by 107.3 μm in the COMBI group and by 80.3 μm in the LASER group from baseline to month 12 (p = 0.28). Ranibizumab was well tolerated., Conclusion: This study showed that ranibizumab plus laser is a valuable treatment option for the management of DME. Patients with DME in PDR might also benefit from combined therapy compared to laser alone., (© 2017 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab 0.5 mg versus dexamethasone 0.7 mg according to their European labels in macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) in a 6-month, phase IIIb, randomized trial., Methods: Patients received either monthly ranibizumab for 3 months followed by Pro re nata (PRN) treatment (n = 126) or a sustained-release dexamethasone implant followed by PRN sham injections (n = 118). Main outcomes were mean average change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to month 1 through month 6, mean changes in BCVA and foveal centre point thickness (FCPT), and adverse events (AEs)., Results: There was no difference in BCVA gains between the treatments prior to month 3. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gain with dexamethasone declined thereafter. From month 3 to month 6, mean BCVA change from baseline was significantly higher with ranibizumab than with dexamethasone [raw means (standard deviation):+16.2 (±11) letters versus +9.3 (±10.1) letters]. At month 6, the difference in BCVA gains from baseline was +17.3 letters in the ranibizumab versus +9.2 letters in the dexamethasone group. Patients in the ranibizumab group received a mean of 2.94 loading injections and 1.74 PRN retreatment injections, while those in the dexamethasone group received a single loading injection. Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) and AEs were more frequent with dexamethasone than ranibizumab treatment., Conclusion: Ranibizumab PRN resulted in greater visual acuity (VA) gains in macular oedema following BRVO compared with single-dose dexamethasone over a 6-month study period, observed from month 3, when administered according to their European label. In clinical practice, retreatment with dexamethasone may be required prior to this point., (© 2017 Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)