Literature DB >> 21459216

Long-term benefit of sustained-delivery fluocinolone acetonide vitreous inserts for diabetic macular edema.

Peter A Campochiaro1, David M Brown, Andrew Pearson, Thomas Ciulla, David Boyer, Frank G Holz, Michael Tolentino, Amod Gupta, Lilianne Duarte, Steven Madreperla, John Gonder, Barry Kapik, Kathleen Billman, Frances E Kane.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of intravitreal inserts releasing 0.2 μg/day (low dose) or 0.5 μg/day (high dose) fluocinolone acetonide (FA) in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).
DESIGN: Two parallel, prospective, randomized, sham injection-controlled, double-masked, multicenter clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects with persistent DME despite at least 1 macular laser treatment were randomized 1:2:2 to sham injection (n = 185), low-dose insert (n = 375), or high-dose insert (n = 393).
METHODS: Subjects received study drug or sham injection at baseline and after 6 weeks were eligible for rescue laser. Based on retreatment criteria, additional study drug or sham injections could be given after 1 year. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with improvement from baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Trial (ETDRS) letter score of 15 or more at month 24. Secondary outcomes included other parameters of visual function and foveal thickness (FTH).
RESULTS: The percentage of patients with improvement from baseline ETDRS letter score of 15 or more at month 24 was 28.7 and 28.6 in the low- and high-dose insert groups, respectively, compared with 16.2 in the sham group (P = 0.002 for each). Benefit occurred for both doses compared with sham at 3 weeks and all subsequent time points. The mean improvement in BCVA letter score between baseline and month 24 was 4.4 and 5.4 in the low- and high-dose groups, respectively, compared with 1.7 in the sham group (P = 0.02 and P = 0.016). At all time points compared with sham, there was significantly more improvement in FTH. Subjects requiring cataract surgery were more frequent in the insert groups, and their visual benefit was similar to that of subjects who were pseudophakic at baseline. Glaucoma requiring incisional surgery occurred in 3.7%, 7.6%, and 0.5% of the low-dose, high-dose, and sham groups, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both low- and high-dose FA inserts significantly improved BCVA in patients with DME over 2 years, and the risk-to-benefit ratio was superior for the low-dose insert. This is the first pharmacologic treatment that can be administered by an outpatient injection to provide substantial benefit in patients with DME for at least 2 years.
Copyright © 2011 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21459216     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.12.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  106 in total

1.  Steroid differentiation: the safety profile of various steroids on retinal cells in vitro and their implications for clinical use (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis).

Authors:  Baruch D Kuppermann; Leandro Cabral Zacharias; M Cristina Kenney
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2014-07

Review 2.  [Diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of diabetic eye control].

Authors:  Stephan Radda; Matthias Bolz; Stefan Egger; Vanessa Gasser-Steiner; Martina Kralinger; Stefan Mennel; Christoph Scholda; Ulrike Stolba; Andreas Wedrich; Katharina Krepler
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 1.704

Review 3.  The role of inflammation in diabetic eye disease.

Authors:  Marina Mesquida; Faye Drawnel; Sascha Fauser
Journal:  Semin Immunopathol       Date:  2019-06-07       Impact factor: 9.623

Review 4.  Single compartment drug delivery.

Authors:  Michael J Cima; Heejin Lee; Karen Daniel; Laura M Tanenbaum; Aikaterini Mantzavinou; Kevin C Spencer; Qunya Ong; Jay C Sy; John Santini; Carl M Schoellhammer; Daniel Blankschtein; Robert S Langer
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2014-05-04       Impact factor: 9.776

5.  Reply to 'Comments on Long-term outcomes of phakic patients with diabetic macular oedema treated with intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implants'.

Authors:  Y Yang; C Bailey; F G Holz; N Eter; M Weber; C Baker; S Kiss; U Menchini; J M Ruiz Moreno; P Dugel; A Lotery
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2016-03-11       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Comments on 'Long-term outcomes of phakic patients with diabetic macular oedema treated with intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implants'.

Authors:  B Takkar; S Azad
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2016-03-11       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 7.  Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for diabetic macular edema.

Authors:  David S Boyer; J Jill Hopkins; Jonathan Sorof; Jason S Ehrlich
Journal:  Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.565

Review 8.  The therapeutic potential of intraocular depot steroid systems: developments aimed at prolonging duration of efficacy.

Authors:  Martin M Nentwich; Michael W Ulbig
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 5.594

9.  Current treatments in diabetic macular oedema: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  John Alexander Ford; Noemi Lois; Pamela Royle; Christine Clar; Deepson Shyangdan; Norman Waugh
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Intravitreal dexamethasone implants for diabetic macular edema.

Authors:  Alicia Pareja-Ríos; Paloma Ruiz-de la Fuente-Rodríguez; Sergio Bonaque-González; Maribel López-Gálvez; Virginia Lozano-López; Pedro Romero-Aroca
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 1.779

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.