Search

Introduction: To evaluate real-life efficacy, safety, and treatment patterns with the dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX) in posterior segment inflammation due to non-infectious uveitis (treatment-naïve or not) in French clinics. Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, observational, non-comparative, post-reimbursement study, consecutive patients with posterior segment inflammation due to non-infectious uveitis were enrolled and evaluated at baseline (day 0). Those who received DEX on day 0 were re-evaluated at months 2, 6, and 18. Retreatment with DEX and/or alternative therapies was allowed during follow-up. Primary outcome: patients (%) with at least a 15-letter gain in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 2 months. Secondary outcomes included patients (%) with at least 15-letter BCVA gains at 6 and 18 months; mean BCVA change from baseline at 2, 6, and 18 months; and patients (%) retreated, mean central retinal thickness (CRT), and adverse events (AEs) at all post-baseline visits. Results: Ninety-seven of 245 enrolled patients with posterior segment inflammation due to non-infectious uveitis (80% previously treated) and disease duration of 5 years (average) received DEX on day 0 and were included in efficacy analyses. At month 2 (n = 91), 20.5% of patients (95% CI 12.0–28.9) gained at least 15 letters from a baseline mean of 60.9 letters; the mean gain was 6.2 letters (95% CI 3.5–8.9). At month 6, 50.0% (n = 38/76) of patients did not receive alternative treatment or DEX retreatment, mostly because inflammation had sufficiently subsided (n = 27/38, 71.1%). Although early study termination prevented efficacy analysis at 18 months (n = 12), CRT reductions persisted throughout follow-up. From baseline to month 18, 21/245 (8.6%) patients had DEX-related AEs; 17/245 (6.9%) had ocular hypertension (most common AE). Conclusion: LOUVRE 2 confirms DEX efficacy on visual acuity and CRT in predominantly DEX-pretreated patients with relatively old/stabilized uveitis. DEX tolerability was consistent with known/published data, confirming treatment benefits in posterior segment inflammation due to non-infectious uveitis. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02951975. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Surgeries for idiopathic uveitis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated uveitis in children are complex because of the high risk of inflammatory postoperative complications. There is no consensus about treatment adaptation during the perioperative period. The objectives of this study are to report the therapeutic changes made in France and to determine whether maintaining or stopping immunosuppressive therapies is associated with an increased risk of surgical site infection or an increased risk of uveitis or arthritis flare-up. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2018 in six large University Hospitals in France. Inclusion criteria were chronic idiopathic uveitis or chronic uveitis associated with juvenile idiopathic arthritis under immunosuppressive therapies at the time of the surgical procedure, operated before the age of 16. Data on perioperative treatments, inflammatory relapses and post-operative infections were collected. Results: A total of 76 surgeries (42% cataract surgeries, 30% glaucoma surgeries and 16% posterior capsule opacification surgeries) were performed on 37 children. Adaptation protocols were different in the six hospitals. Immunosuppressive therapies were discontinued in five cases (7%) before surgery. All the children in the discontinuation group had an inflammatory relapse within 3 months after surgery compared to only 25% in the other group. There were no postoperative infections. Conclusions: The results of this study show varying practices between centres. The benefit-risk balance seems to favour maintaining immunosuppressive therapies during surgery. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal perioperative treatments required to limit post-operative inflammatory relapses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab on uveitis in patients with early onset, chronic, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)-associated or idiopathic anterior uveitis and an inadequate response to topical steroids and methotrexate (MTX).Methods: Patients aged 4 years or more with ocular inflammation quantified by laser flare photometry (LFP) ≥30 photon units/ms were double-blindly randomised (1:1) to 2 groups, one treated with placebo and one with adalimumab subcutaneously at a dose of 24 mg/m2 in patients aged <13 years, 40 mg in the others, every other week. The primary outcome was response at month 2 (M2) defined as a 30% reduction of inflammation on LFP in the assessable eye with more severe baseline inflammation and no worsening on slit lamp examination. From M2 to M12, all patients received adalimumab.Results: At M2, among 31 patients included in intention-to-treat analysis, there were 9/16 responders on adalimumab and 3/15 on placebo (P=0.038, Χ2 test; relative risk=2.81, 95% CI 0.94 to 8.45; risk difference: 36.3%, 95% CI 2.1 to 60.6); there was no significant difference using the Standardised Uveitis Nomenclature classification criteria of improvement. Thirty patients continued the trial after M2 and received adalimumab (open-label phase), 29 reached M12. There were seven serious adverse events none related to study treatment.Conclusions: This trial is in favour of using adalimumab in patients with early onset, chronic anterior uveitis, which is in most cases associated with JIA, in case of inadequate response to topical therapy and MTX. LFP could be a valuable tool to assess early treatment efficacy.Trial Registration Number: NCT01385826. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]