Ingrid U Scott1, Maria J Figueroa2, Neal L Oden2, Michael S Ip3, Barbara A Blodi4, Paul C VanVeldhuisen5. 1. Departments of Ophthalmology and Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania. 2. The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, Maryland. 3. Doheny Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, California. 4. University of Wisconsin Fundus Photograph Reading Center, Madison, Wisconsin. 5. The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, Maryland. Electronic address: pvanveldhuisen@emmes.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe baseline vision-related function, measured with the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25), in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) or hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) in the Study of COmparative Treatments for REtinal Vein Occlusion 2 (SCORE2); evaluate the baseline relationship between NEI VFQ-25 scores with visual acuity letter score (VALS) and central retinal thickness; and compare baseline NEI VFQ-25 scores in SCORE2 participants with those in normal-vision reference populations and patients in other retinal vein occlusion trials. DESIGN: Multicenter, noninferiority randomized controlled trial. METHODS: SCORE2 was designed to assess whether intravitreal bevacizumab is noninferior to intravitreal aflibercept for treatment of decreased vision attributable to macular edema owing to CRVO or HRVO. SCORE2 enrolled 362 participants, including 305 with CRVO and 57 with HRVO. Analyses were of cross-sectional baseline data. The main outcome measures were baseline NEI VFQ-25 composite and subscale scores. RESULTS: SCORE2 participants' baseline NEI VFQ-25 composite and subscale scores are significantly lower compared with 3 normal-vision reference populations (P < .01; except for ocular pain score) and similar to patients in other retinal vein occlusion clinical trials. Baseline VALS in the better eye was correlated with baseline NEI VFQ-25 composite and subscale scores of general vision, near activities, role difficulties, dependency, and color vision, with correlations ranging from 0.19 to 0.26 (P < .05 for each score). CONCLUSIONS: CRVO and HRVO patients in SCORE2 had significantly worse baseline patient-reported vision-related function than normal vision populations, despite the disease being primarily unilateral with typically excellent vision in the fellow eye.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To describe baseline vision-related function, measured with the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25), in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) or hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) in the Study of COmparative Treatments for REtinal Vein Occlusion 2 (SCORE2); evaluate the baseline relationship between NEI VFQ-25 scores with visual acuity letter score (VALS) and central retinal thickness; and compare baseline NEI VFQ-25 scores in SCORE2 participants with those in normal-vision reference populations and patients in other retinal vein occlusion trials. DESIGN: Multicenter, noninferiority randomized controlled trial. METHODS: SCORE2 was designed to assess whether intravitreal bevacizumab is noninferior to intravitreal aflibercept for treatment of decreased vision attributable to macular edema owing to CRVO or HRVO. SCORE2 enrolled 362 participants, including 305 with CRVO and 57 with HRVO. Analyses were of cross-sectional baseline data. The main outcome measures were baseline NEI VFQ-25 composite and subscale scores. RESULTS: SCORE2 participants' baseline NEI VFQ-25 composite and subscale scores are significantly lower compared with 3 normal-vision reference populations (P < .01; except for ocular pain score) and similar to patients in other retinal vein occlusion clinical trials. Baseline VALS in the better eye was correlated with baseline NEI VFQ-25 composite and subscale scores of general vision, near activities, role difficulties, dependency, and color vision, with correlations ranging from 0.19 to 0.26 (P < .05 for each score). CONCLUSIONS: CRVO and HRVO patients in SCORE2 had significantly worse baseline patient-reported vision-related function than normal vision populations, despite the disease being primarily unilateral with typically excellent vision in the fellow eye.
Authors: Rohit Varma; Neil M Bressler; Ivan Suñer; Paul Lee; Chantal M Dolan; James Ward; Shoshana Colman; Roman G Rubio Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2012-07-18 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Peter A Campochiaro; W Lloyd Clark; David S Boyer; Jeffrey S Heier; David M Brown; Robert Vitti; Husain Kazmi; Alyson J Berliner; Kristine Erickson; Karen W Chu; Yuhwen Soo; Yenchieh Cheng; Julia A Haller Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2014-10-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: David M Brown; Peter A Campochiaro; Rishi P Singh; Zhengrong Li; Sarah Gray; Namrata Saroj; Amy Chen Rundle; Roman G Rubio; Wendy Yee Murahashi Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2010-04-09 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Ingrid U Scott; Paul C VanVeldhuisen; Michael S Ip; Barbara A Blodi; Neal L Oden; Carl C Awh; Derek Y Kunimoto; Dennis M Marcus; John J Wroblewski; Jacqueline King Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-05-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Geoffrey K Broadhead; Thomas Hong; John R Grigg; Peter McCluskey; Timothy E Schlub; Kimberly Spooner; Andrew A Chang Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2020-07-14 Impact factor: 2.031
Authors: Philip Hykin; A Toby Prevost; Sobha Sivaprasad; Joana C Vasconcelos; Caroline Murphy; Joanna Kelly; Jayashree Ramu; Abualbishr Alshreef; Laura Flight; Rebekah Pennington; Barry Hounsome; Ellen Lever; Andrew Metry; Edith Poku; Yit Yang; Simon P Harding; Andrew Lotery; Usha Chakravarthy; John Brazier Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2021-06 Impact factor: 4.014