As a progressive chronic disease, age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of irreversible vision impairment worldwide. Experimental and clinical evidence has demonstrated that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays a vital role in the formation of choroidal neovascularization. Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents have been recommended as a first-line treatment for neovascular AMD. However, persistent fluid or recurrent exudation still occurs despite standardized anti-VEGF therapy. Patients suffering from refractory or recurrent neovascular AMD may develop mechanisms of resistance to anti-VEGF therapy, which results in a diminished therapeutic effect. Until now, there has been no consensus on the definitions of refractory neovascular AMD and recurrent neovascular AMD. This article aims at clarifying these concepts to evaluate the efficacy of switching drugs, which contributes to making clinical decision more scientifically. Furthermore, insight into the causes of resistance to anti-VEGF therapy would be helpful for developing possible therapeutic approaches, such as combination therapy and multi-target treatment that can overcome this resistance.

/pdf/resistance-to-anti-vegf-therapy-in-neovascular-age-related-2uvq9mwe7a.pdf

Resistance to anti-VEGF therapy in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a comprehensive review

Nonadherence or Nonpersistence to Intravitreal Injection Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review.

Background Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is one of the leading causes of permanent blindness worldwide. The current mainstay of treatment for neovascular AMD (nAMD) is intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents: aflibercept, ranibizumab, and off-label bevacizumab. Injections can be given monthly, every two or three months ('extended-fixed'), or as needed (pro re nata (PRN)). A variant of PRN is 'treat-and-extend' whereby injections are resumed if recurrence is detected and then delivered with increasing intervals. Currently, injection frequency varies among practitioners, which underscores the need to characterize an optimized approach to nAMD management. Objectives To investigate the effects of monthly versus non-monthly intravitreous injection of an anti-VEGF agent in people with newly diagnosed nAMD. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and three trials registers from 2004 to October 2019; checked references; handsearched conference abstracts; and contacted pharmaceutical companies to identify additional studies. Selection criteria We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different treatment regimens for anti-VEGF agents in people with newly diagnosed nAMD. We considered standard doses only (ranibizumab 0.5 mg, bevacizumab 1.25 mg, aflibercept 2.0 mg, or a combination of these). Data collection and analysis We used standard Cochrane methods for trial selection, data extraction, and analysis. Main results We included 15 RCTs. The total number of participants was 7732, ranging from 37 to 2457 in each trial. The trials were conducted worldwide. Of these, six trials exclusively took place in the US, and three included centers from more than one country. Eight trials were at high risk of bias for at least one domain and all trials had at least one domain at unclear risk of bias. Seven trials (3525 participants) compared a PRN regimen with a monthly injection regimen, of which five trials delivered four to eight injections using standard PRN and three delivered nine or 10 injections using a treat-and-extend regimen in the first year. The overall mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at one year was +8.8 letters in the monthly injection group. Compared to the monthly injection, there was moderate-certainty evidence that the mean difference (MD) in BCVA change at one year for the standard PRN subgroup was -1.7 letters (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.8 to -0.6; 4 trials, 2299 participants), favoring monthly injections. There was low-certainty evidence of a similar BCVA change with the treat-and-extend subgroup (0.5 letters, 95% CI -3.1 to 4.2; 3 trials, 1226 participants). Compared to monthly injection, there was low-certainty evidence that fewer participants gained 15 or more lines of vision with standard PRN treatment at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.99; 4 trials, 2299 participants) and low-certainty evidence of a similar gain with treat-and-extend versus monthly regimens (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.36; 3 trials, 1169 participants). The mean change in central retinal thickness was a decrease of -166 μm in the monthly injection group; the MD compared with standard PRN was 21 μm (95% CI 6 to 32; 4 trials, 2215 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and with treat-and extend was 22 μm (95% CI 37 to -81 μm; 2 trials, 635 participants; low-certainty evidence), in favor of monthly injection. Only one trial (498 participants) measured quality of life and reported no evidence of a difference between regimens, but data could not be extracted (low-certainty evidence). Both PRN regimens (standard and 'treat-and-extend') used fewer injections than monthly regimens (standard PRN: MD -4.6 injections, 95% CI -5.4 to -3.8; 4 trials, 2336 participants; treat-and-extend: -2.4 injections, 95% CI -2.7 to -2.1 injections; moderate-certainty evidence for both comparisons). Two trials provided cost data (1105 participants, trials conducted in the US and the UK). They found that cost differences between regimens were reduced if bevacizumab rather than aflibercept or ranibizumab were used, since bevacizumab was less costly (low-certainty evidence). PRN regimens were associated with a reduced risk of endophthalmitis compared with monthly injections (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.46; 6 RCTs, 3175 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Using data from all trials included in this review, we estimated the risk of endophthalmitis with monthly injections to be 8 in every 1000 people per year. The corresponding risk for people receiving PRN regimens was 1 in every 1000 people per year (95% CI 0 to 4). Three trials (1439 participants) compared an extended-fixed regimen (number of injections reported in only one large trial: 7.5 in one year) with monthly injections. There was moderate-certainty evidence that BCVA at one year was similar for extended-fixed and monthly injections (MD in BCVA change compared to extended-fixed group: -1.3 letters, 95% CI -3.9 to 1.3; RR of gaining 15 letters or more: 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.10). The change in central retinal thickness was a decrease of 137 μm in the monthly group; the MD with the extended-fixed group was 8 μm (95% CI -11 to 27; low-certainty evidence). The frequency of endophthalmitis was lower in the extended-fixed regimen compared to the monthly group, but this estimate was imprecise (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.11; low-certainty evidence). If we assumed a risk of 8 cases of endophthalmitis in 1000 people receiving monthly injections over one year, then the corresponding risk with extended-fixed regimen was 2 in 1000 people (95% CI 0 to 9). Other evidence comparing different extended-fixed or PRN regimens yielded inconclusive results. Authors' conclusions We found that, at one year, monthly regimens are probably more effective than PRN regimens using seven or eight injections in the first year, but the difference is small and clinically insignificant. Endophthalmitis is probably more common with monthly injections and differences in costs between regimens are higher if aflibercept or ranibizumab are used compared to bevacizumab. This evidence only applies to settings in which regimens are implemented as described in the trials, whereas undertreatment is likely to be common in real-world settings. There are no data from RCTs on long-term effects of different treatment regimens.

Treatment regimens for administration of anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor agents for neovascular age‐related macular degeneration

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) have become the most common treatment modality for many retinal diseases. These include neovascular age-related macular degeneration (n-AMD), proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and retinal vein occlusions (RVO). However, these drugs are administered via intravitreal injections that are associated with sight-threatening complications. The most feared of these complications is endophthalmitis, a severe infection of the eye with extremely poor visual outcomes. Patients with retinal diseases typically have to undergo multiple injections before achieving the desired therapeutic effect. Each injection incurs the risk of the sight-threatening complications. As such, there has been great interest in developing sustained delivery platforms for anti-VEGF agents to the posterior segment of the eye. In recent years, there have been various strategies that have been conceptualised. These include non-biodegradable implants, nano-formulations and hydrogels. In this review, the barriers of drug delivery to the posterior segment of the eye will be explained. The characteristics of an ideal sustained delivery platform will then be discussed. Finally, the current available strategies will be analysed with the above-mentioned characteristics in mind to determine the advantages and disadvantages of each sustained drug delivery modality. Through the above, this review attempts to provide an overview of the sustained delivery platforms in their various phases of development.

/pdf/use-of-biomaterials-for-sustained-delivery-of-anti-vegf-to-3j2cnb6qay.pdf

Use of biomaterials for sustained delivery of anti-VEGF to treat retinal diseases.

http://www.thelancet.com/article/S2589537022000840/pdf

The economics of vision impairment and its leading causes: A systematic review

Bietti crystalline retinal dystrophy is a rare, inherited disorder whose hallmark is the presence of retinal crystal deposits associated with later chorioretinal degeneration. This condition may rarely be complicated by the development of cystoid macular oedema leading to rapid visual decline. Currently, treatment options for this complication of Bietti dystrophy are limited and the visual prognosis is poor. Here, we present a case of cystoid macular oedema associated with Bietti dystrophy that was successfully diagnosed using multimodal imaging techniques including optical coherence tomography and fluorescein angiography. These modalities confirmed the diagnosis of macular oedema and excluded other possible causes of oedema such as choroidal neovascularisation. In this patient, cystoid macular oedema was resolved with oral acetazolamide therapy, a treatment that has not been previously reported in this context. Acetazolamide treatment resulted in oedema resolution and improvement in visual function, and can be considered a therapeutic option for other patients with Bietti dystrophy who develop cystoid macular oedema.

/pdf/acetazolamide-for-cystoid-macular-oedema-in-bietti-49z6dh9p60.pdf

Acetazolamide for cystoid macular oedema in Bietti crystalline retinal dystrophy.

Comparison of aflibercept treatment regimes for treatment-resistant neovascular age-related macular degeneration: 8 weekly versus an ‘as-needed’ regime

Purpose: To prospectively assess the safety and efficacy of intravitreal aflibercept for treatment-resistant neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Methods: This prospective, non-randomized clinical trial included 49 patients with treatment-resistant nAMD who received 2 mg intravitreal aflibercept as 3 monthly loading doses, followed by injections every 2 months over 12 months. Inclusion criteria included active nAMD on fluorescein angiography at baseline and persistent intra- or subretinal fluid on optical coherence tomography (OCT) for ≥6 months prior to baseline with a minimum of 4 injections of bevacizumab and/or ranibizumab. Patients were assessed monthly for best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness (CRT) measured with OCT and occurrence of adverse events. Retinal pigment epithelium atrophy (RPEA) was assessed at baseline and at 12 months. Results: Mean BCVA improved by 4.7 letters (95% CI: 2.1-7.3, p 2 (range = -0.1 to 19.9, p Conclusion: In this cohort of treatment-resistant nAMD patients, intravitreal aflibercept was effective in improving vision and reducing exudation. Early visual and anatomic outcomes may predict longer-term response to treatment, but further assessment is required.

Intravitreal Aflibercept for Treatment-Resistant Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: 12-Month Safety and Efficacy Outcomes

Purpose To quantify the burden and quality of life of patients and their caregivers in a cohort of patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in an Australian clinical setting. Methods A total of 103 patients undergoing anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy for nAMD were asked to complete questionnaires relating to the financial and time burdens of nAMD. Results All patients completed the questionnaires. Loss in productivity due to attendance of appointments was 4.4±1.7 hours per month, with additional time lost by caregivers. Financial strain was incurred by direct medical costs associated with intravitreal assessment and injections at an average of AU$199.2±$83.1 per month. Indirect costs incurred averaged $64.8±$79.7 per month. Qualitative indirect costs due to loss of productivity for the patient, unpaid caregivers, and loss of productivity due to premature mortality were also a considerable burden. Overall mean Visual Function Questionnaire and EuroQol 5D-3L scores were correlated with visual acuity and demonstrated patients' subjective decline in quality of vision. Conclusion Management of nAMD carries a substantial burden on patients and caregivers. These results provide important information in understanding the effect of anti-VEGF therapy among patients with nAMD. Together with the quality-of-life burden on the patients, the management of nAMD has a significant societal impact.

https://www.dovepress.com/getfile.php?fileID=46701

The burden of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a patient’s perspective

Intravitreal Aflibercept for Treatment-Resistant Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration Patients: 3-Year Outcomes

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Geoffrey Broadhead

Author Tools

Chat about Author