Intravitreal ranibizumab versus aflibercept following treat and extend protocol for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
Aged
Angiogenesis Inhibitors
/ administration & dosage
Drug Substitution
Female
Fluorescein Angiography
/ methods
Follow-Up Studies
Fundus Oculi
Humans
Intravitreal Injections
Macula Lutea
/ pathology
Male
Ranibizumab
/ administration & dosage
Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
/ administration & dosage
Recombinant Fusion Proteins
/ administration & dosage
Retrospective Studies
Tomography, Optical Coherence
/ methods
Treatment Outcome
Visual Acuity
Wet Macular Degeneration
/ diagnosis
Aflibercept
Neovascular age-related macular degeneration
Ranibizumab
Treat and extend
Journal
Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie
ISSN: 1435-702X
Titre abrégé: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8205248
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2019
Aug 2019
Historique:
received:
04
02
2019
accepted:
14
05
2019
pubmed:
31
5
2019
medline:
7
8
2019
entrez:
31
5
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the morphological and functional outcome and stability of the "treat and extend" protocol using aflibercept compared to ranibizumab for the treatment of eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. This retrospective study included 100 eyes of 94 patients with primary onset neovascular age-related macular degeneration followed up for 12 months. We studied two groups of eyes: group 1, 50 eyes treated with 0.5 mg/0.05 mL ranibizumab and group 2, 50 eyes treated with 2.0 mg/0.05 mL aflibercept. During the first year, all eyes received 3 aflibercept or ranibizumab injections monthly as upload phase. Then, eyes were treated with a treat and extend algorithm. Main outcome measures included: best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and the number of injections. In addition, we compared recurrence rates between the two groups. BCVA (log MAR) in group 1 vs group 2 was 0.54 ± 0.31 vs 0.49 ± 0.30 (p = 0.38) before treatment and 0.49 ± 0.33 vs 0.47 ± 0.32 (p = 0.85) after treatment. The visual improvement (decimal) was 0.05 ± 0.13 vs 0.04 ± 0.12 (p = 0.91). CMT in group 1 vs group 2 was 375.6 ± 98.3 μm vs 369.6 ± 103.7 μm (p = 0.73) before treatment and 306.3 ± 71.8 μm vs 294.8 ± 96 μm (p = 0.54) after treatment. The decrease in CMT was 69.3 ± 93 μm vs 74.8 ± 96 μm (p = 0.77). The number of injections/eye after upload phase in group 1 vs group 2 was 5.88 ± 1.4 vs 6.16 ± 1.3 (p = 0.25). Finally, major recurrence rates were statistically significantly different between the two groups (2% vs 6%, p = 0.04). Significant differences regarding BCVA, central macular thickness, and the number of injections were not found between aflibercept and ranibizumab during the first year following the treat and extend protocol. However, the significantly higher major recurrence rates in the aflibercept group after extending the treatment interval to 10 weeks might suggest that aflibercept should better not to be used in longer than 8 weeks intervals during the first year of treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31144055
doi: 10.1007/s00417-019-04360-9
pii: 10.1007/s00417-019-04360-9
doi:
Substances chimiques
Angiogenesis Inhibitors
0
Recombinant Fusion Proteins
0
aflibercept
15C2VL427D
Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
EC 2.7.10.1
Ranibizumab
ZL1R02VT79
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1671-1677Références
Am J Ophthalmol. 2003 Feb;135(2):194-205
pubmed: 12566024
Nat Med. 2003 Jun;9(6):669-76
pubmed: 12778165
Retina. 2006 Oct;26(8):859-70
pubmed: 17031284
Am J Ophthalmol. 2007 Apr;143(4):679-80
pubmed: 17386275
Br J Ophthalmol. 2008 May;92(5):667-8
pubmed: 18356264
Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2009 Jun;13(6):641-51
pubmed: 19456269
Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012 Mar 30;11(4):269-70
pubmed: 22460118
Ophthalmology. 2012 Jul;119(7):1399-411
pubmed: 22578446
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013 Mar;251(3):697-704
pubmed: 22733165
Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:1175-86
pubmed: 22973088
Ophthalmology. 2012 Dec;119(12):2537-48
pubmed: 23084240
Ophthalmology. 2013 Dec;120(12):2630-2636
pubmed: 23830760
Ophthalmology. 2014 Jan;121(1):193-201
pubmed: 24084500
Retina. 2014 May;34(5):846-52
pubmed: 24240560
Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Mar;7(2):167-80
pubmed: 24483136
Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Sep;158(3):537-43.e2
pubmed: 24857687
Retina. 2014 Sep;34(9):1796-801
pubmed: 24859475
Br J Ophthalmol. 2014 Sep;98(9):1144-67
pubmed: 25136079
Br J Ophthalmol. 2015 Feb;99(2):220-6
pubmed: 25193672
Am J Ophthalmol. 2015 Jan;159(1):3-8.e1
pubmed: 25217859
Ophthalmology. 2015 Jan;122(1):146-52
pubmed: 25227499
Retina. 2015 Aug;35(8):1489-506
pubmed: 26076215
Ophthalmology. 2016 Dec;123(12):2545-2553
pubmed: 27707549
Ophthalmologe. 2019 May 16;:null
pubmed: 31098660