Joo Young Shin1, Se Joon Woo, Jeeyun Ahn, Kyu Hyung Park. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe optical coherence tomography (OCT) characteristics of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) patients refractory to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections (ranibizumab, bevacizumab) and their responses to alternative anti-VEGF agents or photodynamic therapy (PDT). METHODS: A retrospective review of 267 neovascular AMD patients treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF injections. RESULTS: Twenty patients (7.5%) were refractory to anti-VEGF injections (stationary or increased retinal exudation despite three or more monthly injections). They were grouped into either the extensive intraretinal fluid group (IRF group, 9 patients) or the subretinal fluid only group (SRF group, 11 patients) according to OCT findings. In the IRF group, response rates to subsequent treatment were 0% (0 / 7) for bevacizumab, 50% (3 / 6) for ranibizumab and 50% (3 / 6) for PDT ± anti-VEGF. Three out of four bevacizumab-refractory patients showed response to ranibizumab as a secondary treatment. In the SRF group, response rates were lower with 0% (0 / 7) for bevacizumab, 22.2% (2 / 9) for ranibizumab and 28.6% (2 / 7) for PDT ± anti-VEGF. One out of four bevacizumab-refractory patients responded to ranibizumab. The visual outcome was worse in the IRF group (median 20 / 1,000) than in the SRF group (median 20 / 100). CONCLUSIONS: In anti-VEGF-refractory neovascular AMD, patients with extensive IRF refractory to bevacizumab can be responsive to ranibizumab while patients with SRF may be refractory to both, suggesting a different pathophysiology and intraocular pharmacokinetics.
PURPOSE: To describe optical coherence tomography (OCT) characteristics of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) patients refractory to intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections (ranibizumab, bevacizumab) and their responses to alternative anti-VEGF agents or photodynamic therapy (PDT). METHODS: A retrospective review of 267 neovascular AMDpatients treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF injections. RESULTS: Twenty patients (7.5%) were refractory to anti-VEGF injections (stationary or increased retinal exudation despite three or more monthly injections). They were grouped into either the extensive intraretinal fluid group (IRF group, 9 patients) or the subretinal fluid only group (SRF group, 11 patients) according to OCT findings. In the IRF group, response rates to subsequent treatment were 0% (0 / 7) for bevacizumab, 50% (3 / 6) for ranibizumab and 50% (3 / 6) for PDT ± anti-VEGF. Three out of four bevacizumab-refractory patients showed response to ranibizumab as a secondary treatment. In the SRF group, response rates were lower with 0% (0 / 7) for bevacizumab, 22.2% (2 / 9) for ranibizumab and 28.6% (2 / 7) for PDT ± anti-VEGF. One out of four bevacizumab-refractory patients responded to ranibizumab. The visual outcome was worse in the IRF group (median 20 / 1,000) than in the SRF group (median 20 / 100). CONCLUSIONS: In anti-VEGF-refractory neovascular AMD, patients with extensive IRF refractory to bevacizumab can be responsive to ranibizumab while patients with SRF may be refractory to both, suggesting a different pathophysiology and intraocular pharmacokinetics.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bevacizumab; Drug resistance; Macular degeneration; Optical coherence tomography; Ranibizumab
Authors: Ryan M Rich; Philip J Rosenfeld; Carmen A Puliafito; Sander R Dubovy; Janet L Davis; Harry W Flynn; Serafin Gonzalez; William J Feuer; Richard C Lin; Geeta A Lalwani; Jackie K Nguyen; Gaurav Kumar Journal: Retina Date: 2006 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: David M Brown; Peter K Kaiser; Mark Michels; Gisele Soubrane; Jeffrey S Heier; Robert Y Kim; Judy P Sy; Susan Schneider Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Philip J Rosenfeld; David M Brown; Jeffrey S Heier; David S Boyer; Peter K Kaiser; Carol Y Chung; Robert Y Kim Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jonathan Shahar; Robert L Avery; Gad Heilweil; Adiel Barak; Esther Zemel; Geoffrey P Lewis; Patrick T Johnson; Steven K Fisher; Ido Perlman; Anat Loewenstein Journal: Retina Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Robert L Avery; Dante J Pieramici; Melvin D Rabena; Alessandro A Castellarin; Ma'an A Nasir; Matthew J Giust Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2006-02-03 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Rogério A Costa; Rodrigo Jorge; Daniela Calucci; José A Cardillo; Luiz A S Melo; Ingrid U Scott Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Daniel F Martin; Maureen G Maguire; Gui-shuang Ying; Juan E Grunwald; Stuart L Fine; Glenn J Jaffe Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-04-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nathan G Lambert; Xiaohui Zhang; Ruju R Rai; Hironori Uehara; Susie Choi; Lara S Carroll; Subrata K Das; Judd M Cahoon; Brian H Kirk; Blaine M Bentley; Balamurali K Ambati Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2016-01-13 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Mohamed A Hamid; Nizar S Abdelfattah; Jamshid Salamzadeh; Sahar T A Abdelaziz; Ahmed M Sabry; Khaled M Mourad; Azza A Shehab; Baruch D Kuppermann Journal: Int J Retina Vitreous Date: 2021-04-01
Authors: Laurent Kodjikian; Mariacristina Parravano; Andreas Clemens; Rosa Dolz-Marco; Frank G Holz; Marion R Munk; Massimo Nicolò; Federico Ricci; Rufino Silva; S James Talks; Rohini Kumar Verma; Javier Zarranz-Ventura; Sandrine A Zweifel Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 3.775