Emily Y Chew1, Traci E Clemons2, John Paul Sangiovanni3, Ronald P Danis4, Frederick L Ferris5, Michael J Elman6, Andrew N Antoszyk7, Alan J Ruby8, David Orth9, Susan B Bressler10, Gary E Fish11, George Baker Hubbard12, Michael L Klein13, Suresh R Chandra14, Barbara A Blodi15, Amitha Domalpally14, Thomas Friberg16, Wai T Wong17, Philip J Rosenfeld18, Elvira Agrón5, Cynthia A Toth19, Paul S Bernstein20, Robert D Sperduto2. 1. Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 2. EMMES Corp, Rockville, Maryland. 3. National Eye Institute, Clinical Trials Branch, Bethesda, Maryland. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Wisconsin-Madison. 5. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. 6. Elman Retina Group, Baltimore, Maryland. 7. Charlotte Eye Ear Nose and Throat, Charlotte, North Carolina. 8. Associated Retinal Consultants, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan. 9. Ingalls Memorial Hospital, Harvey, Illinois. 10. Department of Ophthalmology, Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland. 11. Texas Retina Associates, Dallas, Texas. 12. Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 13. Department of Ophthalmology, Casey Eye Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland. 14. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health. 15. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health15Fundus Photograph Reading Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison. 16. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 17. Unit on Neuron-Glia Interactions in Retinal Disease, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 18. Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Miami, Florida. 19. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 20. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Moran Eye Center, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) formulation for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) contains vitamin C, vitamin E, beta carotene, and zinc with copper. The Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) assessed the value of substituting lutein/zeaxanthin in the AREDS formulation because of the demonstrated risk for lung cancer from beta carotene in smokers and former smokers and because lutein and zeaxanthin are important components in the retina. OBJECTIVE: To further examine the effect of lutein/zeaxanthin supplementation on progression to late AMD. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: The Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 is a multicenter, double-masked randomized trial of 4203 participants, aged 50 to 85 years, at risk for developing late AMD; 66% of patients had bilateral large drusen and 34% had large drusen and late AMD in 1 eye. INTERVENTIONS: In addition to taking the original or a variation of the AREDS supplement, participants were randomly assigned in a factorial design to 1 of the following 4 groups: placebo; lutein/zeaxanthin, 10 mg/2 mg; omega-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty 3 acids, 1.0 g; or the combination. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: S Documented development of late AMD by central, masked grading of annual retinal photographs or by treatment history. RESULTS In exploratory analysis of lutein/zeaxanthin vs no lutein/zeaxanthin, the hazard ratio of the development of late AMD was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82-0.99; P = .04). Exploratory analyses of direct comparison of lutein/zeaxanthin vs beta carotene showed hazard ratios of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.69-0.96; P = .02) for development of late AMD, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.64-0.94; P = .01) for development of neovascular AMD, and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.70-1.26; P = .67) for development of central geographic atrophy. In analyses restricted to eyes with bilateral large drusen at baseline, the direct comparison of lutein/zeaxanthin vs beta carotene showed hazard ratios of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.61-0.96; P = .02) for progression to late AMD, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.49-0.85; P = .002) for neovascular AMD, and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.69-1.39; P = .91) for central geographic atrophy. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The totality of evidence on beneficial and adverse effects from AREDS2 and other studies suggests that lutein/zeaxanthin could be more appropriate than beta carotene in the AREDS-type supplements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00345176.
RCT Entities:
IMPORTANCE: The Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) formulation for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) contains vitamin C, vitamin E, beta carotene, and zinc with copper. The Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) assessed the value of substituting lutein/zeaxanthin in the AREDS formulation because of the demonstrated risk for lung cancer from beta carotene in smokers and former smokers and because lutein and zeaxanthin are important components in the retina. OBJECTIVE: To further examine the effect of lutein/zeaxanthin supplementation on progression to late AMD. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: The Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 is a multicenter, double-masked randomized trial of 4203 participants, aged 50 to 85 years, at risk for developing late AMD; 66% of patients had bilateral large drusen and 34% had large drusen and late AMD in 1 eye. INTERVENTIONS: In addition to taking the original or a variation of the AREDS supplement, participants were randomly assigned in a factorial design to 1 of the following 4 groups: placebo; lutein/zeaxanthin, 10 mg/2 mg; omega-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty 3 acids, 1.0 g; or the combination. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: S Documented development of late AMD by central, masked grading of annual retinal photographs or by treatment history. RESULTS In exploratory analysis of lutein/zeaxanthin vs no lutein/zeaxanthin, the hazard ratio of the development of late AMD was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82-0.99; P = .04). Exploratory analyses of direct comparison of lutein/zeaxanthin vs beta carotene showed hazard ratios of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.69-0.96; P = .02) for development of late AMD, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.64-0.94; P = .01) for development of neovascular AMD, and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.70-1.26; P = .67) for development of central geographic atrophy. In analyses restricted to eyes with bilateral large drusen at baseline, the direct comparison of lutein/zeaxanthin vs beta carotene showed hazard ratios of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.61-0.96; P = .02) for progression to late AMD, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.49-0.85; P = .002) for neovascular AMD, and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.69-1.39; P = .91) for central geographic atrophy. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The totality of evidence on beneficial and adverse effects from AREDS2 and other studies suggests that lutein/zeaxanthin could be more appropriate than beta carotene in the AREDS-type supplements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00345176.
Authors: Emily Y Chew; Traci E Clemons; Elvira Agrón; Robert D Sperduto; John Paul Sangiovanni; Natalie Kurinij; Matthew D Davis Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2013-04-10 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Emily Y Chew; Traci Clemons; John Paul SanGiovanni; Ronald Danis; Amitha Domalpally; Wendy McBee; Robert Sperduto; Frederick L Ferris Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2012-07-26 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Cristina Augood; Usha Chakravarthy; Ian Young; Jesus Vioque; Paulus T V M de Jong; Graham Bentham; Mati Rahu; Johan Seland; Gisele Soubrane; Laura Tomazzoli; Fotis Topouzis; Johannes R Vingerling; Astrid E Fletcher Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: John Paul Sangiovanni; Elvira Agrón; A Dhananjayan Meleth; George F Reed; Robert D Sperduto; Traci E Clemons; Emily Y Chew Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2009-10-07 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: John Paul SanGiovanni; Emily Y Chew; Elvira Agrón; Traci E Clemons; Frederick L Ferris; Gary Gensler; Anne S Lindblad; Roy C Milton; Johanna M Seddon; Ronald Klein; Robert D Sperduto Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2008-09
Authors: Binxing Li; Preejith P Vachali; Aruna Gorusupudi; Zhengqing Shen; Hassan Sharifzadeh; Brian M Besch; Kelly Nelson; Madeleine M Horvath; Jeanne M Frederick; Wolfgang Baehr; Paul S Bernstein Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-06-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Joshua W Smith; Randy B Rogers; Sookyoung Jeon; Stanislav S Rubakhin; Lin Wang; Jonathan V Sweedler; Martha Neuringer; Matthew J Kuchan; John W Erdman Journal: Exp Biol Med (Maywood) Date: 2016-10-23
Authors: Jae H Kang; Juan Wu; Eunyoung Cho; Soshiro Ogata; Paul Jacques; Allen Taylor; Chung-Jung Chiu; Janey L Wiggs; Johanna M Seddon; Susan E Hankinson; Debra A Schaumberg; Louis R Pasquale Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 9.308