Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor biosimilars for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

RATIONALE: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a progressive eye disease characterized by choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and is a leading cause of vision loss and disability worldwide. Although intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy is an effective treatment option that helps to prevent vision loss or to improve visual acuity in people with neovascular AMD, treatment imposes a significant financial burden on patients and healthcare systems. A biosimilar is a biological product that has been developed to be nearly identical to a previously approved biological product. The use of biosimilars may help reduce costs and so may increase patient access to effective biologic medicines with similar levels of safety to the drugs on which they are based. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of anti-VEGF biosimilar agents compared with their corresponding anti-VEGF agents (i.e. the reference products) that have obtained regulatory approval for intravitreal injections in people with neovascular AMD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and two trials registries together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify studies that are included in the review. The latest search date was 2 June 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared approved anti-VEGF biosimilars with their reference products for treating the eyes of adult participants (≥ 50 years) who had an active primary or recurrent choroidal neovascularization lesion secondary to neovascular AMD. OUTCOMES: Our outcomes were: best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), vision-related quality of life, serious ocular and non-ocular adverse events (AE), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), and serum concentrations of biosimilars and reference drugs. RISK OF BIAS: We assessed the risk of bias (RoB) for seven outcomes reported in a summary of findings table by using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. SYNTHESIS METHODS: We synthesized results for each outcome using meta-analysis, where possible, by calculating risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and continuous outcomes, respectively. Where this was not possible due to the nature of the data, we summarized the results narratively. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for prespecified outcomes. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included nine parallel-group multi-center RCTs that enrolled a total of 3814 participants (3814 participating eyes), with sample sizes that ranged from 160 to 705 participants per study. The mean age of the participants in these studies ranged from 67 to 76 years, and the proportion of women ranged from 26.5% to 58.7%. Ranibizumab (Lucentis) was the reference product in seven studies, and aflibercept (Eyelea) was the reference product in two others. All the included studies had been supported by industry. The follow-up periods ranged from 12 to 52 weeks (median 48 weeks). Five studies (56%) were conducted in multi-country settings across Europe, North America and Asia, two studies in India, and one each in Japan and the Republic of Korea. We judged all the included studies to have met high methodological standards. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: With regard to efficacy, our meta-analyses demonstrated that anti-VEGF biosimilars for neovascular AMD resulted in little to no difference compared with the reference products for BCVA change at 8 to 12 weeks (MD -0.55 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters, 95% CI -1.17 to 0.07; 8 studies, 3603 participants; high-certainty evidence) and the proportion of participants who lost fewer than 15 letters in BCVA at 24 to 48 weeks (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01; 7 studies, 2658 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Almost all participants (96.6% in the biosimilar group and 97.0% in the reference product group) lost fewer than 15 letters in BCVA. The evidence from two studies suggested that there was no evidence of difference between biosimilars and reference products in vision-related quality of life measured by the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25) summary scores at 24 to 48 weeks (MD 0.82, 95% CI -0.70 to 2.35; 2 studies, 894 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). With regard to the safety profile, meta-analyses also revealed little to no difference between anti-VEGF biosimilars and the reference products for the proportion of participants who experienced serious ocular AEs (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.26; 7 studies, 3292 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and for TEAEs leading to investigational product discontinuation or death (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.46; 8 studies, 3497 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Overall, 1.4% of participants in the biosimilar group and 1.2% in the reference product group experienced serious ocular adverse events. The most frequently documented serious ocular AEs were retinal hemorrhage and endophthalmitis. Although the evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision, meta-analysis suggested that anti-VEGF biosimilars led to no difference compared with the reference products for cumulative incidence of ADAs (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.22; 8 studies, 3066 participants; low-certainty evidence) or mean maximum serum concentrations (MD 0.42 ng/mL, 95% CI -0.22 to 1.05; subgroup of 3 studies, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence). We judged the overall risk of bias to be low for all studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In our review, low to high certainty evidence suggests that there is little to no difference, to date, between the anti-VEGF biosimilars approved for treating neovascular AMD and their reference products in terms of benefits and harms. While anti-VEGF biosimilars may be a viable alternative to reference products, current evidence for their use is based on a limited number of studies - particularly for comparison with aflibercept - with sparse long-term safety data, and infrequent assessment of quality of life outcomes. Our effect estimates and conclusions may be modified once findings have been reported from studies that are currently ongoing, and studies of biosimilar agents that are currently in development. FUNDING: Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Project is supported by grant UG1EY020522, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health. Takeshi Hasegawa and Hisashi Noma were supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Grant numbers: 22H03554, 19K03092, 24K06239). REGISTRATION: Protocol available via doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015804.

Basiliximab Treatment for Patients With Steroid-Refractory Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease Following Matched Sibling Donor Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Basiliximab is an important treatment for steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease (SR-aGVHD). We performed this retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of basiliximab treatment in SR-aGVHD patients following matched sibling donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (MSD-HSCT) (n = 63). Overall response rate (ORR) was 63.5% and 54% at any time and at day 28 after basiliximab treatment. Grade III-IV aGVHD before basiliximab treatment predicted a poor ORR after basiliximab treatment. The rates of virus, bacteria, and fungi infections were 54%, 23.8%, and 3.1%, respectively. With a median follow-up of 730 (range, 67-3,042) days, the 1-year probability of overall survival and disease-free survival after basiliximab treatment were 58.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 47.6%-72.2%) and 55.4% (95% CI = 44.3%-69.2%), respectively. The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse and non-relapse mortality after basiliximab treatment were 18.9% (95% CI = 8.3%-29.5%) and 33.8% (95% CI = 21.8%-45.7%), respectively. Comorbidities burden before allo-HSCT, severity of aGVHD and liver aGVHD before basiliximab treatment showed negative influences on survival. Thus, basiliximab was safe and effective treatment for SR-aGVHD following MSD-HSCT.

Tebentafusp in the treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma - the first patient treated in the Czech Republic.

BACKGROUND: Uveal melanoma is a rare cancer, in which metastases occur in approximately one half of cases. In metastatic disease, the prognosis is unfavorable and the median of survival does not exceed 6 months. Effective treatment options were very limited up to date. Tebentafusp is a bispecific fusion protein, which as the first drug proved efficacy in uveal melanoma. CASE: The patient was referred for suspected uveal melanoma of the left eye. She was treated for Hodgkin's disease in the past. Primarily, the tumor was treated by radiosurgery with radiotherapy of a small lesion of the vertebral body. However, later the patient had to undergo bulbus enucleation with confirmation of a large tumor category pT4b. PET/CT revealed metastases of the bones and the liver; simultaneously, haplotype A*02: 01 was confirmed. The patient underwent radiotherapy of the sternum and later, after confirmation of payment from the health insurance company, she started treatment with tebentafusp. The first three doses were administered during admission to the hospital, with a need to treat cytokine release syndrome by corticosteroids. Later, the administration was performed in an out-patient regimen, without complications, except for a transient elevation of transaminases. The first CT restaging confirmed stable disease; however, the second restaging confirmed a new osteolytic lesion in the processus of Th11. Because of progression, the treatment with tebentafusp was withdrawn after 6 months. Unfortunately, the lesion could not be treated by radiotherapy. Two months later, the patient was urgently admitted to the hospital because of right-sided hemiplegia; MRI revealed bleeding metastatic lesion in the brain stem. CONCLUSION: In this case report, we present the case of the first patient treated with this drug in the Czech Republic.

Effects of Antithymocyte Globulin, Basiliximab, and Induction-Free Treatment in Living Donor Kidney Transplant Recipients on Tacrolimus-Based Immunosuppression.

OBJECTIVES: Induction treatment in renal transplant is associated with better graft survival. However, intensified immunosuppression is known to cause unwanted side effects such as infection and malignancy. Furthermore, the effects of the routine use of immunosuppressants in low-risk kidney transplant recipients are still not clear. In this study, we assessed the first-year safety and efficacy of induction treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined first living donor kidney transplant patients who were on tacrolimus based immunosuppression therapy. We formed 3 groups according to the induction status: antithymocyte globulin induction, basiliximab induction, and no induction. We collected outcome data on delayed graft function, graft loss, creatinine levels, estimated glomerular filtration rates, acute rejection episodes, hospitalization episodes, and infection episodes, including cytomegalovirus infection and bacterial infections. RESULTS: We examined a total of 126 patients (age 35 ± 12 years; 65% male). Of them, 25 received antithymocyte globulin, 52 received basiliximab, and 49 did notreceive any induction treatment. We did not observe any statistically significant difference among the 3 groups in terms of acute rejection episodes, delayed graft function, and first-year graft loss. The estimated glomerular filtration rates were similar among the groups. Overall bacterial infectious complications and cytomegalovirus infection showed similar prevalence among all groups. Hospitalization was less common in the induction-free group. CONCLUSIONS: In low-risk patients, induction-free regimens could be associated with a better safety profile without compromising graft survival. Therefore, induction treatment may be disregarded in first living donor transplant patients who receive tacrolimusbased triple immunosuppression treatment.

Comparative study on the efficacy of Conbercept and Aflibercept in the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

This study compares the effectiveness of Conbercept and Aflibercept in treating neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University's Ophthalmology Department (May 2020-May 2023), this prospective study enrolled 159 nAMD patients. Participants were randomly divided into two groups: one receiving 0.5 mg Conbercept and the other 2 mg Aflibercept intravitreal injections. Over 12 months, the study, employing a Treat-and-Extend (T&E) regimen, assessed Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Central Retinal Thickness (CRT) changes and injection frequency. Of the 159 patients, 137 (149 eyes) completed the study. No significant age difference was found between the groups (P = 0.331). After 12 months, BCVA improved similarly in both groups (Conbercept: 52.8 ± 18.9, Aflibercept: 52.0 ± 19.7 letters; P = 0.820). CRT reduction was also comparable (Conbercept: 246.3 ± 82.8 µm, Aflibercept: 275.9 ± 114.3 µm; P = 0.079). Injection frequencies averaged 6.9 ± 0.7 (Conbercept) and 6.7 ± 0.7 (Aflibercept; P = 0.255). Subtype analysis revealed Type 1 MNV had higher baseline BCVA and lower CRT, with more frequent injections compared to other types. Both Conbercept and Aflibercept are clinically similar in efficacy for nAMD, with the T&E regimen proving therapeutically effective and potentially reducing patient costs. Anti-VEGF treatment efficacy varies across nAMD subtypes, indicating a potential benefit in tailored treatments for specific subtypes.Clinical trial registration number NCT05539235 (Protocol Registration and Results System).

Treatment Effects of Switching to Faricimab in Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema Refractory to Aflibercept.

Background and Objectives: Faricimab is a vascular endothelial growth factor A and angiopoietin-2 bispecific antibody. It is a novel therapeutic approach distinct from previous anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of switching from aflibercept to faricimab in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) refractory to aflibercept, with a specific focus on the resolution of macular edema. Materials and Methods: The medical records of 29 eyes of 21 patients with DME that were refractory to intravitreal injections of aflibercept (IVAs) and who had completed the clinical follow-up of at least four intravitreal injections of faricimab (IVFs) were reviewed. The central retinal thickness (CRT), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and the mean period (weeks) until the next injection were measured after the second-to-last IVA, first-to-last IVA, last IVA, and first to fourth IVFs following the transition to IVF. Results: The mean time from the first IVF to the assessment of effectiveness was significantly shorter than the time to the last IVA; however, no significant difference was found in the time from the second, third, and fourth IVFs to the assessment. The mean CRTs after the first and second IVFs were not significantly different from the CRT after the last IVA, but the mean CRT after the third and fourth IVFs was significantly thinner than that after the last IVA (p = 0.0025 and p = 0.0076, respectively). The mean BCVAs after the third and fourth IVFs significantly improved compared with that after the last IVA (p = 0.0050 and p = 0.0052, respectively). Conclusions: When switching the treatment to IVF for eyes with IVA-resistant DME, better treatment outcomes are achieved if IVF is performed three or more times.

Assessment of immunosuppression induction with basiliximab compared to antithymocyte-globulin in adult heart transplant patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing heart transplants are at risk of rejection which can have significant morbidity and mortality. Induction immunosuppression at the time of transplant reduces the early risk and has additional benefits. The induction agent of choice within our program was changed from rabbit antithymocyte-globulin (rATG) to basiliximab, so it was necessary to evaluate whether this had any impact on patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to describe rejection, infection, and other outcomes in adult heart transplant patients at the University of Alberta Hospital in Edmonton, Canada. METHODS: This study was a nonrandomized, retrospective cohort study. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were included with median ages 50 years versus 54 years. More female patients received rATG (20% vs. 42.4%). The most common indication for transplant in both cohorts was ICM (63.3% vs. 57.6%). Patients who received rATG had significantly higher PRA (0% vs. 43%, p < .001). Acute rejection episodes were similar between basiliximab and rATG at 3 months (16.7% vs. 15.1%; p = 1.0) and 6-months (30.0% vs. 18.1%; p = .376). Infections were not statistically different with basiliximab compared to rATG at 3-months, 43.3% vs. 63.6% and at 6-months 60.0% vs. 66.7%). There were no fatalities in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not demonstrate differences in rejection with basiliximab compared to rATG. Mortality did not differ, but basiliximab-treated patients had fewer infections and infection-related hospitalizations than those treated with rATG. Larger studies with longer durations are needed to more completely describe the differences in rejection and infectious outcomes.

Comparative Analysis of the Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Liraglutide and Dulaglutide.

Inflammation plays a pathophysiological role in atherosclerosis and its clinical consequences. In addition to glycemic control, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are of wide concern for cardioprotective effects. The structure, half-life, homology, and clinical efficacy of GLP-1RAs exhibit remarkable disparity. Several studies have compared the disparities in anti-inflammatory effects between daily and weekly GLP-1RAs. This study aimed to compare the similarities and differences between liraglutide and dulaglutide in terms of inhibiting atherosclerotic inflammation and improving co-cultured endothelial cell function. The expression of inflammation markers was examined by immunofluorescence, Western blotting, and real-time PCR. The tube-forming ability of endothelial cells was tested on Matrigel. The results verify that 10/50/100 nmol/L liraglutide and 100 nmol/L dulaglutide markedly suppressed the expression of inflammatory factors in LPS-induced atherosclerosis after 24 and 72 hours, respectively. Moreover, they promoted the polarization of M1 macrophages toward the M2 phenotype and improved the function of co-cultured endothelial cells. Both liraglutide and dulaglutide ameliorate atherosclerosis development. The difference between the two resided in the extended intervention duration required to observe the effect of dulaglutide, and liraglutide demonstrated a superior dose-dependent manner. We provide a potential strategy to understand the dynamics of drug action and possible timing administration.

Double-dose investigation of aflibercept in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (DIANA): a real-world study.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the clinical effects of double-dose (4 mg) aflibercept treatment in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), compared with the standard-dose (2 mg) treatment. METHODS: A total of 108 eyes from 97 patients with nAMD and received intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg and/or 4 mg treatment were retrospectively reviewed. The changes of central macular thickness (CMT)/ pigmental epithelium detachment height and the recurrence rate of exudation during the 12-month follow-up were compared between the 2 mg group and the 4 mg group. Self-control comparisons (2 mg switch to 4 mg) were also made between two regimens. RESULTS: Compared with the 2 mg group, tendencies of lower intraretinal fluid incidence and more CMT reduction were observed in the 4 mg group. The later one was also observed when eyes switching from 2 mg to 4 mg regimen. The median remission interval was 5 months in the 4 mg group, 2 months longer than the 3 months in the 2 mg group (P = 0.452). Injections needed in the 4 mg group were 3.644 ± 1.670, less than the 4.286 ± 2.334 injections in the 2 mg group within 12 months as well (P = 0.151). However, no associated vision benefits were gained from the double-douse regimen. No markedly increased-intraocular pressure events, or other adverse events were found in two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the aflibercept 2 mg treatment in nAMD, tendencies of anatomic gains and relieving treatment burden were brought by the aflibercept 4 mg treatment. This study may have additional importance, given the further application of high-dose aflibercept in real-world settings.

Case report: Recombinant human type II tumour necrosis factor receptor-antibody fusion protein induced occult hepatitis B virus reactivation leading to liver failure.

Recombinant human type II tumour necrosis factor receptor-antibody fusion protein (rh TNFR:Fc) is an immunosuppressant approved for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This case report describes a case of hepatitis B reactivation in a patient with drug-induced acute-on-chronic liver failure. A 58-year-old woman with a history of RA was treated with rh TNFR:Fc; and then subsequently received 25 mg rh TNFR:Fc, twice a week, as maintenance therapy. No anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) preventive treatment was administered. Six months later, she was hospitalized with acute jaundice. HBV reactivation was observed, leading to acute-on-chronic liver failure. After active treatment, the patient's condition improved and she recovered well. Following careful diagnosis and treatment protocols are essential when treating RA with rh TNFR:Fc, especially in anti-hepatitis B core antigen antibody-positive patients, even when the HBV surface antigen and the HBV DNA are negative. In the case of HBV reactivation, liver function parameters, HBV surface antigen and HBV DNA should be closely monitored during treatment, and antiviral drugs should be used prophylactically when necessary, as fatal hepatitis B reactivation may occur in rare cases. A comprehensive evaluation and medication should be administered in a timely manner after evaluating the patient's physical condition and closely monitoring the patient.

Phase 1 first-in-human dose-escalation study of ANV419 in patients with relapsed/refractory advanced solid tumors.

Patients with advanced cancer, previously treated with immune checkpoint blockade therapy, may retain residual treatment when undergoing the initial infusion of experimental monotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials. ANV419, an antibody-cytokine fusion protein, combines interleukin-2 (IL-2) with an anti-IL-2 monoclonal antibody, aiming to stimulate the expansion of CD8 T and natural killer lymphocytes while restricting regulatory T lymphocytes. In the recent publication of the phase 1 dose escalation study of ANV419, a notable gap exists in detailed information regarding patients' prior antitumoral treatments, specifically programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) targeted monoclonal antibodies. Some patients likely retained residual anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies, potentially influencing the outcomes of ANV419. In a separate clinical cohort, we retrospectively measured the residual concentration of nivolumab and pembrolizumab, revealing persistent serum concentrations of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies even months after treatment cessation. This underscores the importance of comprehensively documenting prior immunotherapy details in clinical trials. Such information is crucial for understanding potential interactions that may impact both immunological and clinical effects.

Significant elevation of serum CA19-9 and CA242 levels induced by dulaglutide.

The use of dulaglutide, a common medication for managing type 2 diabetes, rarely causes elevated pancreatic tumour markers. Here, we report the case of a woman in her mid-60s with diabetes for over 10 years. The patient presented with markedly elevated serum CA19-9 and CA242 levels revealed during a routine health examination despite being asymptomatic. She had been receiving dulaglutide injections for 16 months. Imaging and interventional assessments did not reveal any hepatobiliary, gastrointestinal or pancreatic neoplasm. After excluding alternate diagnoses, the patient was determined to exhibit an adverse reaction to dulaglutide use. Management involved the discontinuation of dulaglutide, which resulted in normalisation of serum CA19-9 and CA242 levels within 6 weeks. This case underscores the importance of discontinuing dulaglutide and monitoring changes in the biomarker levels in asymptomatic patients receiving dulaglutide, rather than immediately resorting to imaging and endoscopic examinations.

Switching to the aflibercept (3 mg) therapy for treatment-resistant wet age-related macular degeneration: 1-year outcomes.

This study aimed to elucidate 1-year outcomes following switching to the aflibercept (3 mg) therapy for treatment-resistant wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD). In this prospective, open-label, non-controlled clinical trial, 18 patients with wAMD who had multiple recurrences or persistent exudation despite intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents (except aflibercept) received a 3-mg intravitreal aflibercept injection every 4 weeks. Each patient received 3 to 8 injections. The central retinal thickness and fibrovascular pigment epithelial detachment height decreased significantly at 1 month after initiation of the aflibercept injection, and the values were 146 and 163.2 µm, respectively, at the final visit. The morphological improvement was sustained. The intraretinal and subretinal fluid was completely absorbed at the end of the follow-up. The logMAR vision increased from baseline 0.68 to 0.59 (P < .05). No ocular or systemic adverse events occurred. The intravitreal injection of 3-mg aflibercept seems to be feasible in the treatment of wAMD unresponsive to other anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents.

Comparison of ranibizumab, aflibercept, and dexamethasone implant monotherapy in treatment-naive eyes with diabetic macular edema: A 12-month real-life experience.

PURPOSE: To compare the functional and anatomical outcomes of ranibizumab, aflibercept, and dexamethasone implant monotherapy in treatment-naive eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) in real-life conditions. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, data were obtained from the hospital database of treatment-naive patients diagnosed with DME with at least 12 months of follow-up. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) at baseline, third month, sixth month, ninth month, and 12th month were recorded. In addition, a subgroup analysis was performed based on having good (below 0.4 log of minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) or poor (0.4 logMAR and above) vision. RESULTS: A total of 219 eyes of 142 patients were included in the study. The change in the mean BCVA from baseline to 12th month was from 0.62 logMAR to 0.42 logMAR (P < 0.001) in the ranibizumab group, from 0.56 logMAR to 0.39 logMAR (P < 0.001) in the aflibercept group, and from 0.46 logMAR to 0.5 logMAR (P = 0.653) in the dexamethasone group. There was no significant difference between the treatment groups at any time point (P > 0.05). The mean amount of CRT change was statistically significant at 12 months in all groups (ranibizumab: -175.4 µm, aflibercept: -153.3 µm, dexamethasone: -71.4 µm) (P < 0.05). In eyes with initially good vision, the final BCVA at 12 months was significantly better in the ranibizumab group compared to the dexamethasone group (P = 0.008). The aflibercept group had better visual acuity than the dexamethasone group, but there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.059). There was no significant difference in final BCVA in eyes with initially poor vision. No serious ocular/systemic complications were noted. CONCLUSION: At the 12th month, a significant decrease in CRT was achieved in all treatment groups, whereas only ranibizumab and aflibercept groups had a significant BCVA increase. In eyes with initially good vision, the final BCVA at 12 months was better in the ranibizumab group compared to the dexamethasone group, whereas it was similar in all groups having initially poor vision.

Retinal and choroidal efficacy of switching treatment to faricimab in recalcitrant neovascular age related macular degeneration.

Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of switching treatment to faricimab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) from other anti-VEGF agents. Fifty-eight eyes of fifty-one patients with nAMD and a full upload series of four faricimab injections were included. Demographic data, multimodal imaging and treatment parameters were recorded. The primary outcome measures were changes in central subfield thickness (CST) and subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT). A subgroup analysis was performed for eyes with prior ranibizumab (R) or aflibercept (A) treatment. Mean injection intervals before and after switching were comparable (33.8 ± 11.2 vs. 29.3 ± 2.6 days; p = 0.08). Mean CST of 361.4 ± 108.1 µm prior to switching decreased significantly to 318.3 ± 97.7 µm (p < 0.01) after the third faricimab injection, regardless of prior anti-VEGF treatment (p < 0.01). Although SFCT slightly improved for the whole cohort from 165.8 ± 76.8 µm to 161.0 ± 82,8 µm (p = 0.029), subgroup analysis did not confirm this positive effect (subgroup R: p = 0.604; subgroup A: p = 0.306). In patients with a suboptimal response to aflibercept or ranibizumab in nAMD, farcimab can improve CST and slightly improve or maintain SFCT. Further prospective randomized trials are warranted.

Intravitreal Aflibercept vs Laser Therapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity: Two-Year Efficacy and Safety Outcomes in the Nonrandomized Controlled Trial FIREFLEYE next.

Importance: Prospective long-term data after retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections vs laser therapy are scarce. The FIREFLEYE (Aflibercept for ROP IVT Injection vs Laser Therapy) next trial is prospectively evaluating the long-term efficacy and safety outcomes following ROP treatment with intravitreal aflibercept vs laser therapy. Objective: To evaluate 2-year ophthalmic and safety outcomes after 0.4-mg aflibercept injection or laser therapy in the 24-week randomized (2:1) FIREFLEYE trial (FIREFLEYE outcomes previously reported). Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective nonrandomized controlled trial performed in 24 countries in Asia, Europe, and South America (2020-2025) follows up participants treated in the FIREFLEYE randomized clinical trial (2019-2021) through 5 years of age. Participants included children born very or extremely preterm (gestational age ≤32 weeks) or with very or extremely low birth weight (≤1500 g) who were previously treated with a 0.4-mg injection of aflibercept compared with laser therapy for severe acute-phase ROP. Data for the present interim analysis were acquired from March 18, 2020, to July 25, 2022. Interventions: Complications of ROP treated at investigator discretion (no study treatment). Main Outcomes and Measures: Efficacy end points included ROP status, unfavorable structural outcomes, ROP recurrence, treatment for ROP complications, completion of vascularization, and visual function. Safety end points included adverse events and growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Results: Overall, 100 children were enrolled (median gestational age, 26 [range, 23-31] weeks; 53 boys and 47 girls). Of these, 21 were Asian, 2 were Black, 75 were White, and 2 were of more than 1 race. At 2 years of age, 61 of 63 children (96.8%) in the aflibercept group vs 30 of 32 (93.8%) in the laser group had no ROP. Through 2 years of age, 62 of 66 (93.9%) in the aflibercept group and 32 of 34 (94.1%) in the laser group had no unfavorable structural outcomes. No new retinal detachment occurred during the study. Four children in the aflibercept group (6.1%) were treated for ROP complications before 1 year of age (2 had preexisting end-stage disease and total retinal detachment; 1 had reactivated plus disease; and 1 had recurrent retinal neovascularization not further specified). Most children were able to fix and follow a 5-cm toy (aflibercept group, 118 of 122 eyes [96.7%] among 63 children; laser group, 62 of 63 eyes [98.4%] among 33 children). High myopia was present in 9 of 115 eyes (7.8%) among 5 children in the aflibercept group and 13 of 60 eyes (21.7%) among 9 children in the laser group. No relevant differences in growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: In this nonrandomized follow-up of a randomized clinical trial comparing treatment of severe acute-phase ROP with 0.4-mg injection of aflibercept and laser, disease control was stable and visual function was appropriate in children through 2 years of age. No adverse effects on safety, including growth and neurodevelopment, were identified. These findings provide clinically relevant long-term information on intravitreal aflibercept injection therapy for ROP. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04015180.

Cost-Effectiveness of Recombinant Factor IX Fc Prophylaxis and Recombinant Factor IX On-Demand Treatment in Patients with Haemophilia B Without Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Recombinant factor IX (rFIX) and recombinant FIX Fc fusion protein (rFIXFc) are standard half-life and extended half-life FIX replacement therapies, respectively, and represent established treatment options indicated for adults and children with haemophilia B. These FIX replacement therapies can be administered as prophylaxis (to prevent bleeding) or 'on-demand' (to stop bleeding). This analysis aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of once-weekly prophylaxis with rFIXFc versus on-demand treatment with rFIX in patients with haemophilia B without inhibitors in the Italian healthcare setting. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to assess a hypothetical cohort of adolescent or adult male patients (≥ 12 years) with haemophilia B (FIX level of ≤ 2 IU/dL) without inhibitors. Model inputs were derived from the pivotal phase 3 clinical studies for rFIXFc and rFIX, published literature and assumptions when published data were unavailable. The model employed a lifelong time horizon with 6-monthly transitions between health states, and it estimated total costs, total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), number of bleeds, number of surgeries and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: rFIXFc prophylaxis was associated with lower total costs per patient (€5,308,625 versus €6,564,510) and greater total QALYs per patient (15.936 versus 11.943) compared with rFIX on-demand; rFIXFc prophylaxis was therefore the dominant treatment strategy. The model also demonstrated that rFIXFc prophylaxis was associated with fewer incremental bleeds (- 682.29) and surgeries (- 0.39) compared with rFIX on-demand. CONCLUSIONS: rFIXFc prophylaxis provides improved health outcomes and lower costs, and represents a cost-effective treatment option compared with rFIX on-demand for adolescent and adult male patients with haemophilia B. This comparative assessment of cost-effectiveness should help to inform both clinicians and healthcare policy makers when making treatment decisions for patients with haemophilia B.

Long-term dynamic changes and influencing factors of corneal morphology after multiple intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF drugs.

To observe alterations in corneal morphology caused by repeated intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Prospective cohort study. Seventy-seven eyes were treated with intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF from June 2021 to March 2023. There were 25 eyes of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), 24 eyes of diabetic macular edema (DME), and 28 eyes of retinal vein occlusion (RVO). Aflibercept was used in 37 eyes and Ranibizumab was used in 40 eyes. 3 + PRN was used. Corneal endothelium and corneal thickness were measured using a corneal endothelial microscope. The data related to central corneal thickness, corneal endothelial cell density (ECD), average cell size, coefficient of variation (CV), proportion of hexagonal cells (Hex%) was collected. A comparison was also made between baseline and the dynamic changes of all indexes 1 year following the last injection. It was observed that in comparison to baseline, ECD and Hex% decreased significantly after the 3rd injection of Aflibercept and Ranibizumab. However, ECD did not decrease further and remained at the same level as after the last injection. Hex% and average cell size increased to a certain extent in comparison to the last injection. All the changes were found to be statistically significant (P < .01). After 3 injections, ECD in DME group was markedly lower than that in nAMD and RVO group, but the CV in DME group was higher than that in nAMD as well as RVO groups, and all the differences were statistically significant (P < .05). Following intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy, DME is more likely than other disorders to result in a decrease in ECD. Repeated intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF drugs can reduce the Hex% and ECD to a certain extent. After the last injection, Hex% can progressively recover, and ECD can remain stable without further declining. After injections, ECD in DME group was found to be significantly lower than that in nAMD and RVO groups, but CV in DME group was significantly higher in comparison to the other 2 groups. In patients with macular edema, repeated intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF may have certain effects on corneal morphology. Patients with diabetes mellitus in particular should pay special attention to corneal safety following repeated intravitreal injections if they have significantly reduced ECD at baseline.

A heart transplant center experience with basiliximab induction strategies: A double edged sword?

BACKGROUND: The use of induction immunosuppression for heart transplantation (HT) is debated given the uncertain benefit and potential risks of infection and malignancy. METHODS: This is a retrospective single-center analysis of 475 consecutive HT recipients from 2003 to 2020 grouped by use of induction with basiliximab group (BG) and the no basiliximab group (NBG). Subgroup analysis by era compared pre-2016 standard-basiliximab (BX) induction and 2016-2020 with selective-BX use as part of a calcineurin-inhibitor-sparing regimen. RESULTS: When adjusted for confounders (sex, age, PRA, eGFR), the BG was less likely to have acute cellular rejection (ACR) (OR.42, p < .001), but had more antibody mediated rejection (AMR) (OR 11.7, p < .001) and more cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) (OR 3.8, p = .04). There was no difference between BG and NBG in the incidence of malignancies or infections. When stratified by era (pre-2016 vs. 2016-2020), ACR remained less common in the BG than the NBG (36% vs. 50%, p = .045) groups, while AMR remained more common (9.7 vs. 0% p = .005). There was no significant difference in conditional survival comparing pre-and post-2016 NBG (HR 2.20 (95% CI.75-6.43); however, both pre-2016 BG and post-2016 BG have significantly higher mortality (HR 2.37 [95% CI 1.02-5.50) and HR 2.69 (95% CI 1.08-6.71), p = .045 and.03, respectively]. CONCLUSION: Basiliximab reduces the incidence of ACR but increases the risk of AMR, CAV, and may be associated with increased mortality. Mechanistic studies are needed to describe a potential T-cell-escape mechanism with enhanced humoral immunity.