Lupine Publishers | Trends in Ophthalmology Open Access Journal
Abstract
Purpose: To give practical guide lines for
the management of neovascular AMD
Methods: To evaluate the above-mentioned
item based on recently published data.
Results: Although many therapeutic modalities
have been employed for neovascular AMD treatment, yet anti-VEGFs are still the
best line of treatment.
Conclusion: Although anti-VEGFs are up till now
the best line of treatment for nAMD yet a knowledge of how to use them with or
without other modalities is very important to get the best therapeutic results.
Keywords: nAMD; Anti-VEGFs
Introduction
Many
therapeutic modalities have been employed for neovascular AMD which includes:
I.
Macular laser photocoagulation [Macular Photocoagulation Study (MPS) can result
in preventing severe loss of vision in about 50 percent of treated patients
with extra/ juxta foveal CNV, with about 50 percent of patients developing
recurrent choroidal neovascular membrane (CNVM).
II.
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) with verteporfin acts via activating a
photosensitizing dye within the pathologic vessels by infrared laser leading to
occlusion of choroidal new vessels with minimal damage to the retina. PDT can
prevent 3-line vision loss in about 49 to 77 percent of treated patients but
seldom improves vision [1].
III.
With the establishment of VEGF as the main cause for the development and
progression of neovascularization, novel agents to block them and thereby
preventing further progression was sought for. With the advent of anti-VEGF
agents, the treatment for neovascular AMD has completely changed, with dramatic
outcomes.
Anti-VEGFs
The
inclusion of ranibizumab, a nonspecific VEGF inhibitor further refined the
results of anti-VEGF therapy for neovascular AMD [2]. The MARINA study
evaluated the effect of ranibizumab injection in patients with minimally
classic or occult CNV. The conclusion of Marina study was that monthly IVL
injection for 2 years prevented vision loss and improved mean VA in patients
with minimally classic / occult CNV secondary to AMD. The conclusion of the
ANCHOR trial was that Lucentis was superior to PDT as treatment of
predominantly classic NAMD [3- 9]. The Comparison of AMD Treatments Trial Study
(CATT study) trial was primarily designed to determine if bevacizumab works as
well as ranibizumab in terms of visual outcomes (a difference of <5
letters), and also to identify any safety differences between the two drugs.
Visual outcome results:
When
comparing ranibizumab monthly to bevacizumab monthly, the CATT study
demonstrated no difference between the two drugs, with patients in both groups
gaining more than 8 letters on the eye chart on average over the course of a
year and the results were maintained over 2 years.
Safety Outcomes
The
rate of ocular infection following injection of medication was similar with the
two drugs [10].
A
similar head to head comparison trial between the two drugs was the alternative
treatments to Inhibit VEGF in Age-related choroidal Neovascularization [IVAN]:
1year results concluded similar efficacy of both drugs [11].
Treatment Protocols: Primarily Designed for AMD
Ranibizumab: As-needed Regimen The Prospective
OCT Imaging of Patients with Neovascular AMD Treated with Intraocular
Ranibizumab [PrONTO] Study: In this study patients received 3 consecutive
monthly injections of 0.5 mg ranibizumab and were then followed monthly and
retreated if there was an increase in OCT central retinal thickness [CRT] of at
least 100 microns or a loss of best-corrected ETDRS VA of 5 letters or more. In
the PrONTO study, VA outcomes were comparable with those reported in ranibizumab
phase III clinical studies, but with fewer intravitreal injections [12]. The
Sailor [13], Sustain [14] and Horizon [15] trials are other as needed regime
studies. Overall, these studies support frequent follow-up and individualized
retreatment to achieve the best visual acuity gains with the as-needed
treatment regimen.
Ranibizumab: Treat-and-Extend Regimen:
Treat-and-extend
dosing regimen involves increasing intervals between treatment up to 10 weeks
as long as no fluid is present on OCT. If fluid is present, the interval
between treatments is shortened. Oubraham found that at one-year, mean gain in
VA was greater in the treat and-extend group than in the as-needed group [+10.8
versus+2.3 letters, resp.]. Eyes in the treat-and-extend group received
significantly more mean injections [7.8 versus 5.2] [16]. Similar trials were
also done with Bevcizumab with similar results [17-25].
Aflibercept as Compared to Other Anti-VEGFs
A.
Aflibercept is a soluble decoy receptor produced by fusing all-human DNA sequences
of the second immunoglobulin domain of human VEGFR1 and the third
immunoglobulin domain of human VEGFR2, which then fused to the Fc region of
human IgG1.2. The intravitreal half-life of aflibercept is 4.7 days in rabbit
eyes, which is longer than ranibizumab [2.9 days] and comparable with
bevacizumab [4.3 days].
B.
The combined high affinity and longer half-life has led to a calculated
duration of effect of a single intravitreal injection of 2 mg aflibercept of
48-83 days. Monthly treatment with aflibercept has been shown to improve the
vision in exudative AMD in 2 clinical trials. VIEW [VEGF Trap-Eye:
Investigation of Efficacy and Safety in wet AMD] 1 and View 2 showed that, at 1
year, aflibercept treatment [0.5, 2 mg monthly, or 2 mg every 2 months after
three initial monthly doses] was non-inferior and clinically equivalent to
ranibizumab [0.5 mg] given monthly [26].
C.
Aflibercept therapy appears to be beneficial in a subset of patients with
neovascular age-related macular degeneration who exhibit recurrent or resistant
intra-retinal or subretinal fluid following multiple injections with either
bevacizumab or ranibizumab [27].
Anatomical Measures as Predictors of Visual
Outcomes in Ranibizumab-Treated Eyes with Neovascular Age- Related Macular Degeneration:
a)
First and foremost, an initial anatomical [according to FFA and/or OCT
analyses] or visual improvement after three monthly ranibizumab injections does
not guarantee longterm success. For eyes with FFA lesion activity at Month 3,
CFT>/=200mm at Month 3, and qualitative OCT activity at Months 2 and Month 3
the average BCVA gain from 3 monthly loading doses of ranibizumab was lost
after switching to quarterly dosing [every 3 months], and eyes lost vision
compared with baseline at Months 12 and 24.
b)
Second, it appears that the longer anatomical improvements were maintained
[according to FFA or OCT], the more likely it was that the BCVA benefits of
ranibizumab persisted on a quarterly dosing regimen. Eyes with inactive FFA
lesions at Month 5 or inactive OCT lesions at Month 5 or Month 8 were much more
likely to maintain their BCVA gains.
c)
While a surprisingly low number of eyes demonstrated inactive FFA lesions after
3 loading doses of ranibizumab (i.e., 10% at Month 3), eyes with a dry FFA showed
the strongest association with BCVA outcomes at Months 12 and 24. At the same
3-month time point, 60% of evaluated eyes were dry on qualitative OCT grading.
This disparity may result from the sampling error introduced by having only two
scans available for grading (rather than all 6 radial line scans available from
a Stratus macular thickness map or the greatly increased sample size of
currently available spectral-domain OCT devices). It is also known that an
effective RPE pump sometimes keeps the retina dry and gives a “dry” OCT
reading, despite active CNV leakage [28].
Comparison of Spectral-Domain and Time-Domain
Optical Coherence Tomography in the Detection of Neovascular Age- Related
Macular Degeneration Activity:
a.
With high-resolution volumetric SD-OCT imaging, physicians are capable of
detecting signs of exudative AMD activity more precisely. Time domain platforms
are less likely to identify active exudative disease activity; this could
potentially lead to undertreatment of active neovascular AMD.
b.
Both volumetric and raster scans collect data in the same way, via parallel
B-scans. The important difference being that volumetric scanning includes more
parallel B-scans, in a denser array, providing higher resolution and the
ability to render a three-dimensional image. For example, with the Cirrus
platform, the 5-line raster algorithm uses only 5 B-scans compared with 128
B-scans used with the volumetric scan [29-30] (Figure 1).
c.
Some areas of exudative activity that oriented more vertically were better
visualized with radially oriented SD imaging compared with the more traditional
horizontal raster scanning patterns [30] (Figure 2).
If
after 3 loading doses of Ranibizumab the CNV activity disappeared but the
visual acuity did not improve as expected, this might be either due to a
disrupted IS/OS line or a thick CNV membrane. In conclusion Visual acuity was
most improved when the disrupted IS/OS line was better restored, and CNV
thickness was more decreased [31] (Figure 3).
Correlation
of Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography Characteristics with Visual
Acuity in Eyes with Sub-foveal Scarring After Treatment for Wet Age-Related
Macular Degeneration
In
a case series, visual acuity in cases of sub foveal scarring was affected
mainly by the integrity of the IS/OS and external limiting membrane lines [32]
(Figure 4).
Spectral domain OCT scans of patients with sub
foveal scarring:
A.
Thin fovea with subfoveal scarring, VA: Counting fingers.
B.
Intact IS/OS junction (arrowhead) and ELM (arrow) in fovea, VA: 20/32.
C.
Normal foveal thickness with no IS/OS or ELM seen, VA: Counting fingers.
D.
Intact ELM at fovea, with intact IS/OS near fovea, VA: 20/40.
E.
Foveal cystoid degeneration, VA: 20/800.
F.
Cystoid degeneration with disrupted IS/OS within central 1,000 mm, but intact
near fovea, VA: 20/80 [32].
Response 0f Pigment Epithelial Detachments to
Intravitreal Aflibercept among Patients with Treatment-Resistant Neovascular
Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Three
PED types were identified on OCT; hollow, solid and mixed. The hollow type
showed the best response to aflibercept treatment while the solid type was the
worst in response (Figure 5).
a)
Hollow: are hypo reflective and contain fluid exudate
b)
Solid: hyper reflective and represents fibrinous leakage or fibrovascular
proliferation, suggesting active neovascularization.
c) Mixed:
i)
Vision loss associated with PEDs seems to be largely nonreversible , even with
structural reduction of the lesion.
ii)
Retinal pigment epithelium tears may complicate treatment of PEDs during
treatment with intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy. Larger vascularized PEDs that
have a higher intraluminal pressure are at a significantly greater risk of
producing RPE tears after anti- VEGF therapy (especially in the early stages of
ttt), with acute vision loss [33].
Unfavorable Anatomical Response to Anti VEGFs
I.
Some patients, however, have a good initial response to Avastin & Lucentis
with resolution of fluid, but then later become resistant to further treatment
and develop recurrent exudation with vision loss. The mechanism of this
resistance to treatment with these drugs is not known, but one possibility is
tolerance or tachyphylaxis, manifested by a decreased response over time to
repeated treatment with a medication. Tachyphylaxis sometimes can be reversed
by increasing the dose or halting therapy for a period of time before
reinstating the same treatment.
II.
Aflibercept therapy as mentioned above, appears to be beneficial in a subset of
patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration who exhibit
recurrent or resistant intraretinal or subretinal fluid following multiple
injections with either bevacizumab or ranibizumab [27].
Response of Type 3 Neovascularization to
Anti-VEGF Treatment
a)
The CME and sub-RPE fluid associated with Type 3 neovascularization resolve
briskly with intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy, typically after only one or two
injections.
b)
A recent, longitudinal prospective study examining the response of Type 3
lesions to anti-VEGF therapy demonstrated that all eyes had stable or improved
vision at 3 years of follow-up after a mean of 9.4 injections during that time.
The visual prognosis was excellent [34].
Combination Therapies for Wet AMD
Role of Additional Dexamethasone for the Management of Persistent
or Recurrent Neovascular Age Related Macular Degeneration Under Ranibizumab Treatment
a)
The efficacy of a combination therapy of intravitreal ranibizumab together with
a dexamethasone implant in comparison with ranibizumab monotherapy in
persistent or recurrent neovascular age-related macular degeneration was
studied and it was found that combined therapy delays retreatment in patients
with persistent/recurrent neovascular age-related macular degeneration and an
overall reduction in required ranibizumab retreatments compared with
ranibizumab monotherapy with consistent functional outcomes. [35].
b)
The expectations on the improved effect of a combination therapy lie on the
multifactorial pathogenesis of nAMD involving angiogenesis and inflammation. As
CNV persist under monotherapy, a combined approach seems to be reasonable to
decelerate disease progression. Corticosteroids act because of their
anti-inflammatory, antiangiogenic, and antiedematous effects [36-38]. Hence,
additional corticosteroids seem to have the ability to target chronic
inflammation when combined with anti-VEGF. In addition, a decrease in effect
during an anti- VEGF monotherapy has been reported, and desensitization of
tachyphylaxis by adding corticosteroids in chronic CNV was suggested [39].
Anti- VEGF Combined with Photodynamic Therapy
The
combination has an additive or synergistic effect; PDT targets the vascular
component Anti-VEGF targets the mediators of the angiogenic cascade and
counteracts up-regulation of angiogenic factors that occur after PDT treatment.
The combination causes reduction of re-treatment rate BUT may not achieve
equivalent visual acuity outcomes [40-42].
Avastin Triple Therapy
a.
The aim of this treatment is to combine Avastin with PDT and Dexamethasone.
First PDT Light dose 42j/cm is delivered in 70 sec then after 16h. Intravitreal
injection of 800mcg dexamethasone plus 1.5mg Avastin are given.
b.
Triple therapy in one study was found to result in a good VA outcome with lower
cost compared to repeated injections. Other studies, however, failed to show
any benefit of the triple therapy as compared to anti-VEGF monotherapy [43-44].
https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/pdf/TOOAJ.MS.ID.000121.pdf
https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/fulltext/guide-lines-for-wet-amd-treatment.ID.000121.php
For more Lupine Publishers Open Access Journals Please visit our website: https://lupinepublishersgroup.com/
For more Trends in Ophthalmology Please Click
Here: https://lupinepublishers.com/ophthalmology-journal/
To Know more Open Access Publishers Click on Lupine Publishers
Follow on Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/company/lupinepublishers
Follow on Twitter : https://twitter.com/lupine_online