PURPOSE: To evaluate if off-label Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) supplementation prevents visual and anatomical deterioration in non-proliferative Idiopathic Macular Telangiectasia Type 2 (IMT2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective, comparative study of 82 IMT2 eyes treated with AREDS2 from January 1st, 2013 to January 1st, 2018. The study analysis consisted of a non-comparative arm, which included all AREDS2 eyes, and a comparative arm (27 AREDS2 and 42 untreated eyes) that only included eyes with complete follow-up data. Eyes were evaluated at baseline, 12 and 24 months. Better/worse eye sub-analysis was performed in the comparative study arm. Primary outcomes were best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) anatomical characteristics including largest cavitation diameter, central macular thickness (CMT), and length of ellipsoid zone (EZ) loss at 24 months. RESULTS: In the non-comparative arm, AREDS2 eyes showed stable BCVA (0.28 ± 0.18 logMAR at baseline vs 0.26 ± 0.19 logMAR at 24 months; p = 0.35) and OCT anatomical features after 24 months of supplementation. In the comparative arm, BCVA mean difference was greater for untreated eyes at 24 months (-0.09 ± 0.15 vs 0.03 ± 0.11 logMAR; p = <0.001). AREDS2 eyes had decreased cavitary diameter and EZ loss compared to untreated eyes at the study endpoint (p = 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively). CMT remained stable for both cohorts throughout the study. For better/worse eye analysis, untreated eyes had worse BCVA at 24 months in both better and worse eyes (both p = 0.01). For anatomical outcomes, increases in both EZ loss (p = 0.04) and cavitary diameter (p = 0.001) among untreated eyes were only significant for eyes with worse baseline BCVA. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that off-label AREDS2 supplementation in non-proliferative IMT2 may prevent anatomical and visual deterioration in a subset of eyes.
PURPOSE: To evaluate if off-label Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) supplementation prevents visual and anatomical deterioration in non-proliferative Idiopathic Macular Telangiectasia Type 2 (IMT2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective, comparative study of 82 IMT2 eyes treated with AREDS2 from January 1st, 2013 to January 1st, 2018. The study analysis consisted of a non-comparative arm, which included all AREDS2 eyes, and a comparative arm (27 AREDS2 and 42 untreated eyes) that only included eyes with complete follow-up data. Eyes were evaluated at baseline, 12 and 24 months. Better/worse eye sub-analysis was performed in the comparative study arm. Primary outcomes were best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) anatomical characteristics including largest cavitation diameter, central macular thickness (CMT), and length of ellipsoid zone (EZ) loss at 24 months. RESULTS: In the non-comparative arm, AREDS2 eyes showed stable BCVA (0.28 ± 0.18 logMAR at baseline vs 0.26 ± 0.19 logMAR at 24 months; p = 0.35) and OCT anatomical features after 24 months of supplementation. In the comparative arm, BCVA mean difference was greater for untreated eyes at 24 months (-0.09 ± 0.15 vs 0.03 ± 0.11 logMAR; p = <0.001). AREDS2 eyes had decreased cavitary diameter and EZ loss compared to untreated eyes at the study endpoint (p = 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively). CMT remained stable for both cohorts throughout the study. For better/worse eye analysis, untreated eyes had worse BCVA at 24 months in both better and worse eyes (both p = 0.01). For anatomical outcomes, increases in both EZ loss (p = 0.04) and cavitary diameter (p = 0.001) among untreated eyes were only significant for eyes with worse baseline BCVA. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that off-label AREDS2 supplementation in non-proliferative IMT2 may prevent anatomical and visual deterioration in a subset of eyes.
Authors: Emily Y Chew; Traci E Clemons; Tunde Peto; Ferenc B Sallo; Avner Ingerman; Weng Tao; Lawrence Singerman; Steven D Schwartz; Neal S Peachey; Alan C Bird Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2014-12-19 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Peter Charbel Issa; Mark C Gillies; Emily Y Chew; Alan C Bird; Tjebo F C Heeren; Tunde Peto; Frank G Holz; Hendrik P N Scholl Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2012-12-03 Impact factor: 21.198
Authors: Lihteh Wu; Teodoro Evans; J Fernando Arévalo; María H Berrocal; Francisco J Rodríguez; María Hsu; Juan G Sánchez Journal: Retina Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Marin L Gantner; Kevin Eade; Martina Wallace; Michal K Handzlik; Regis Fallon; Jennifer Trombley; Roberto Bonelli; Sarah Giles; Sarah Harkins-Perry; Tjebo F C Heeren; Lydia Sauer; Yoichiro Ideguchi; Michelle Baldini; Lea Scheppke; Michael I Dorrell; Maki Kitano; Barbara J Hart; Carolyn Cai; Takayuki Nagasaki; Mehmet G Badur; Mali Okada; Sasha M Woods; Catherine Egan; Mark Gillies; Robyn Guymer; Florian Eichler; Melanie Bahlo; Marcus Fruttiger; Rando Allikmets; Paul S Bernstein; Christian M Metallo; Martin Friedlander Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Emily Y Chew; Traci E Clemons; Glenn J Jaffe; Charles A Johnson; Sina Farsiu; Eleonora M Lad; Robyn Guymer; Philip Rosenfeld; Jean-Pierre Hubschman; Ian Constable; Henry Wiley; Lawrence J Singerman; Mark Gillies; Grant Comer; Barbara Blodi; Dean Eliott; Jiong Yan; Alan Bird; Martin Friedlander Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Eric J Sigler; John C Randolph; Jorge I Calzada; Steve Charles Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2012-09-06 Impact factor: 3.117