Mark C Gillies1, Lyndell L Lim2, Anna Campain1, Godfrey J Quin1, Wedad Salem1, Ji Li1, Stephanie Goodwin1, Christine Aroney1, Ian L McAllister3, Samantha Fraser-Bell4. 1. The Save Sight and Eye Health Institute, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, Australia. 2. Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Royal Victorian Eye and Hospital, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Lions Eye Institute, Centre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science, University of Western Australia, Australia. 4. The Save Sight and Eye Health Institute, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, Australia. Electronic address: sfraserbell@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report the 12-month results of the first head-to-head comparison of a dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) versus bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) for center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Phase 2, prospective, multicenter, randomized, single-masked clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01298076). PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 88 eyes of 61 patients with center-involving DME. METHODS:Forty-two eyes were randomized to receive bevacizumab every 4 weeks and 46 eyes were randomized to receive a dexamethasone implant every 16 weeks, both pro re nata. Results were analyzed using linear regression with generalized estimation equation methods to account for between-eye correlation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of eyes that improved vision by 10 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution letters. Secondary outcomes included mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), change in central macular thickness (CMT), injection frequency, and adverse events. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire. RESULTS: Improvement in BCVA of 10 or more letters was found in 17 of 42 eyes (40%) treated with bevacizumab compared with 19 of 46 dexamethasone implant-treated eyes (41%; P = 0.83). None of the 42 bevacizumab eyes lost 10 letters or more, whereas 5 of 46 (11%) dexamethasone implant eyes did, mostly because of cataract. Mean CMT decreased by 122 μm for bevacizumab eyes and by 187 μm for dexamethasone implant eyes (P = 0.015). Bevacizumab-treated eyes received a mean of 8.6 injections compared with 2.7 injections for dexamethasone implant eyes. Significant improvement in IVI scores occurred for both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS:Dexamethasone implant achieved similar rates of visual acuity improvement compared with bevacizumab for DME, with superior anatomic outcomes and fewer injections. Both treatments were associated with improvement in visual quality-of-life scores. However, more dexamethasone implant-treated eyes lost vision, mainly because of cataract.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To report the 12-month results of the first head-to-head comparison of a dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) versus bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) for center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Phase 2, prospective, multicenter, randomized, single-masked clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01298076). PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 88 eyes of 61 patients with center-involving DME. METHODS: Forty-two eyes were randomized to receive bevacizumab every 4 weeks and 46 eyes were randomized to receive a dexamethasone implant every 16 weeks, both pro re nata. Results were analyzed using linear regression with generalized estimation equation methods to account for between-eye correlation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of eyes that improved vision by 10 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution letters. Secondary outcomes included mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), change in central macular thickness (CMT), injection frequency, and adverse events. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire. RESULTS: Improvement in BCVA of 10 or more letters was found in 17 of 42 eyes (40%) treated with bevacizumab compared with 19 of 46 dexamethasone implant-treated eyes (41%; P = 0.83). None of the 42 bevacizumab eyes lost 10 letters or more, whereas 5 of 46 (11%) dexamethasone implant eyes did, mostly because of cataract. Mean CMT decreased by 122 μm for bevacizumab eyes and by 187 μm for dexamethasone implant eyes (P = 0.015). Bevacizumab-treated eyes received a mean of 8.6 injections compared with 2.7 injections for dexamethasone implant eyes. Significant improvement in IVI scores occurred for both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS:Dexamethasone implant achieved similar rates of visual acuity improvement compared with bevacizumab for DME, with superior anatomic outcomes and fewer injections. Both treatments were associated with improvement in visual quality-of-life scores. However, more dexamethasone implant-treated eyes lost vision, mainly because of cataract.