RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW OF LUCENTIS "TREAT AND EXTEND" PATTERNS AND OUTCOMES IN AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION.

PURPOSE: To assess patterns and outcomes of a "Treat and Extend" dosing regimen of ranibizumab in patients with age-related macular degeneration. METHODS: Three hundred and thirty two treatment-naive age-related macular degeneration patients starting therapy with ranibizumab between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2012, at the Ivey Eye Institute were reviewed, and 79 met inclusion criteria. Patients on Treat and Extend dosing regimen underwent an induction phase with monthly injections and then moved onto an extension phase. Change in visual acuity and central retinal thickness during the induction and extension phases were recorded. RESULTS: During the induction phase, patients had a significant gain in vision and decrease in central retinal thickness (+8.4 letters, P < 0.001 and -81.3 µm, P < 0.001). During the extension phase, patients did not have significant change in vision (-0.5 letters, P = 0.81) and did not have significant change in central retinal thickness (-11.5 µm, P = 0.17). The average extension interval between treatments was 47.7 days, with patients receiving an average of 8.6 injections per year. Cost analysis showed it cost US $16,659 to treat 1 patient in the first year on Treat and Extend dosing regimen compared with US $20,614 on monthly dosing. CONCLUSION: Treat and Extend dosing regimen allows similar visual outcomes to monthly dosing, while reducing the total number of injections, visits, and overall cost.

Prospective evaluation of teleophthalmology in screening and recurrence monitoring of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Teleophthalmology has the potential to reduce costs and inconveniences associated with frequent patient visits. Evaluating teleophthalmology in the management of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) will allow for future implementation of this technology. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate teleophthalmology as a tool for the screening and monitoring of neovascular AMD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective, randomized clinical trial that included 106 referral eyes for suspected neovascular AMD and 63 eyes with stable neovascular AMD. New referrals for patients with suspected neovascular AMD and patients with stable neovascular AMD were randomized into either routine or teleophthalmologic groups. In the routine group, patients received clinical assessment and diagnostic imaging at a tertiary hospital-based retina clinic. In the teleophthalmologic group, patients received basic examination and diagnostic imaging at a stand-alone teleophthalmologic site, where patient information and imaging studies were acquired and electronically sent over to tertiary hospital-based retina specialists. Patients in the teleophthalmologic group were called back to the tertiary treatment center if the teleophthalmologic data set suggested pathology or was inconclusive for diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patient wait times for diagnosis and/or treatment, referral accuracy, and visual outcome. RESULTS: For neovascular AMD screening, the average referral-to-diagnostic imaging time was 22.5 days for the teleophthalmologic group and 18.0 days for the routine group, for a difference of 4.5 days (95% CI, 11.8 to -2.8 days; P = .23). The average diagnostic imaging to treatment time was 16.4 days for the teleophthalmologic group and 11.6 days for the routine group, for a difference of 4.8 days (95% CI, 10.7 to -1.1 days; P = .11). For neovascular AMD monitoring, the average recurrence to treatment time was shorter for the routine group (0.04 days) compared with 13.6 days for the teleophthalmologic group, for a difference of -13.5 days (95% CI, -18.2 to -9.0 days; P < .01). There was no difference identified between end-of-study visual acuities in the 2 groups (P = .99). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A delay of referral to treatment time could not be identified when comparing teleophthalmologic screening for suspected neovascular AMD with retinal specialist-based screening. Teleophthalmologic monitoring for neovascular AMD recurrence resulted in longer wait times for treatment reinitiation, but no adverse visual outcomes were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01581606.

Intravitreal ranibizumab for the treatment of fibrovascular pigment epithelial detachment in age-related macular degeneration.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the response of predominantly fibrovascular pigment epithelial detachments (PED)-type lesions (secondary to age-related macular degeneration [AMD]) to intravitreal ranibizumab. DESIGN: This was an open-label prospective study. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two patients with predominantly fibrovascular PED-type lesions secondary to AMD were included in this study. Three patients were excluded from the final analysis. METHODS: Patients received monthly intravitreal ranibizumab injections for 6 months (induction). At 6 months, patients not experiencing a visual improvement from baseline Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity or not showing a reduction in PED height (based on optical coherence tomography [OCT]) were deemed ranibizumab nonresponders and received no further injections but underwent re-evaluation at 12 months. Patients deemed responders continued with OCT-guided active treatment on an as-needed basis for an additional 6 months. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (82.8%) were ranibizumab responders and 5 were (17.2%) nonresponders. For ranibizumab responders, mean ETDRS visual acuity improved by 7.2 ± 9.8 letters at 6 months (p = 0.002) and 6.3 ± 8.6 letters at 12 months (p = 0.002). Ranibizumab nonresponders experienced a decline in mean visual acuity of 8.2 ± 4.6 letters at 6 months (p = 0.02) and 18.2 ± 10.11 letters at 12 months (p = 0.02). At baseline, responders had a mean PED height of 345.8 ± 96.0 µm, which decreased to 111.6 ± 133.2 µm at 6 months (p < 0.001) and had a slight increase at 12 months to 144.8 ± 146.3 µm (p < 0.001). Two responders (8.3%) and 2 nonresponders (40%) developed retinal pigment epithelium tears while on treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal ranibizumab appears to be a well-tolerated treatment option for patients with fibrovascular PED. Further large-scale, prospective studies may assist in delineating the best treatment protocol.

Comparison of outcomes after switching treatment from intravitreal bevacizumab to ranibizumab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

OBJECTIVE: To compare visual acuity and central retinal thickness in patients initially treated with bevacizumab (Avastin) and switched to ranibizumab (Lucentis) for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: A retrospective chart review. PARTICIPANTS: This study included 87 eyes from 80 patients over the age of 65 with neovascular AMD. METHODS: Patients were initially treated with bevacizumab injections every 6 weeks and then switched to ranibizumab every 4 weeks when it became publicly funded by the Ontario government. Outcomes include comparison of visual acuity and central retinal thickness after bevacizumab treatment, and after switching to ranibizumab. RESULTS: Visual acuity improved significantly versus initial baseline values following a treatment course of 3 or more injections of bevacizumab (0.58 logMar, SD = 0.30 vs 0.73 logMar, SD = 0.41; p = 0.0007). Patients then showed a further significant improvement in visual acuity after switching and receiving a course of ranibizumab (0.51 logMar, SD = 0.32) (p = 0.0122). Mean central retinal thickness as measured by optical coherence tomography significantly decreased after a course of bevacizumab (p = 0.0158), and a further decrease was noted after a subsequent course of ranibizumab (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant improvement in visual acuity and central retinal thickness in patients with neovascular AMD initially treated with bevacizumab. When these patients were uniformly switched to ranibizumab there was a further significant improvement in visual acuity and a reduction of retinal thickness. It appears that ranibizumab can maintain, or improve the effect achieved after an initial course of bevacizumab.