Guidance on Noncorticosteroid Systemic Immunomodulatory Therapy in Noninfectious Uveitis : Fundamentals Of Care for UveitiS (FOCUS) Initiative

Supplemental material available at www.aaojournal.org. Supported by AbbVie, Inc., and the Fundamentals of Care for Uveitis Initiative National Faculty. This manuscript was developed subsequent to an AbbVie-sponsored literature review of noninfectious, nonanterior uveitis. The meeting was conducted to understand the available literature regarding the management of patients with noninfectious, nonanterior uveitis. The program involved a total of 139 experts from 28 countries, who were selected for participation by AbbVie. However, AbbVie was not involved in the development of the manuscript. The authors maintained complete control over the content and this manuscript reflects the opinions of the authors. AbbVie selected the discussion participants and reviewed the final manuscript draft for scientific accuracy, but the authors determined the final content. All authors made substantial contributions to the article or critically revised it for important intellectual content and approved the final manuscript. AbbVie provided funding to invited participants, including honoraria for their attendance at the meetings. Travel to and from the meetings was reimbursed. No payments were made to the authors for the development of this manuscript. Dhinakaran Sambandan, PhD, and Shula Sarner, PhD, of Lucid Partners, Burleighfield House, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom, provided medical writing and editorial support to the authors in the development of this manuscript; financial support for these services was provided by AbbVie. AbbVie reviewed the manuscript, but was not involved in the methodology, data collection and analysis, or completion of this manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Guidance on noncorticosteroid systemic immunomodulatory therapy in noninfectious uveitis: fundamentals of care for uveitis (focus) initiative

Topic: An international, expert-led consensus initiative to develop systematic, evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis in the era of biologics. Clinical Relevance: The availability of biologic agents for the treatment of human eye disease has altered practice patterns for the management of noninfectious uveitis. Current guidelines are insufficient to assure optimal use of noncorticosteroid systemic immunomodulatory agents. Methods: An international expert steering committee comprising 9 uveitis specialists (including both ophthalmologists and rheumatologists) identified clinical questions and, together with 6 bibliographic fellows trained in uveitis, conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol systematic reviewof the literature (English language studies from January 1996 through June 2016; Medline [OVID], the Central Cochrane library, EMBASE,CINAHL,SCOPUS,BIOSIS, andWeb of Science). Publications included randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies with sufficient follow-up, case series with 15 cases or more, peer-reviewed articles, and hand-searched conference abstracts from key conferences. The proposed statements were circulated among 130 international uveitis experts for review.Atotal of 44 globally representativegroupmembersmet in late 2016 to refine these guidelines using a modified Delphi technique and assigned Oxford levels of evidence. Results: In total, 10 questions were addressed resulting in 21 evidence-based guidance statements covering the following topics: when to start noncorticosteroid immunomodulatory therapy, including both biologic and nonbiologic agents; what data to collect before treatment; when to modify or withdraw treatment; how to select agents based on individual efficacy and safety profiles; and evidence in specific uveitic conditions. Shared decision-making, communication among providers and safety monitoring also were addressed as part of the recommendations. Pharmacoeconomic considerations were not addressed. Conclusions: Consensus guidelines were developed based on published literature, expert opinion, and practical experience to bridge the gap between clinical needs and medical evidence to support the treatment of patients with noninfectious uveitis with noncorticosteroid immunomodulatory agents

Guidance on Noncorticosteroid Systemic Immunomodulatory Therapy in Noninfectious Uveitis: Fundamentals Of Care for UveitiS (FOCUS) Initiative

Topic: An international, expert-led consensus initiative to develop systematic, evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis in the era of biologics. Clinical Relevance: The availability of biologic agents for the treatment of human eye disease has altered practice patterns for the management of noninfectious uveitis. Current guidelines are insufficient to assure optimal use of noncorticosteroid systemic immunomodulatory agents. Methods: An international expert steering committee comprising 9 uveitis specialists (including both ophthalmologists and rheumatologists) identified clinical questions and, together with 6 bibliographic fellows trained in uveitis, conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol systematic review of the literature (English language studies from January 1996 through June 2016; Medline [OVID], the Central Cochrane library, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, BIOSIS, and Web of Science). Publications included randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies with sufficient follow-up, case series with 15 cases or more, peer-reviewed articles, and hand-searched conference abstracts from key conferences. The proposed statements were circulated among 130 international uveitis experts for review. A total of 44 globally representative group members met in late 2016 to refine these guidelines using a modified Delphi technique and assigned Oxford levels of evidence. Results: In total, 10 questions were addressed resulting in 21 evidence-based guidance statements covering the following topics: when to start noncorticosteroid immunomodulatory therapy, including both biologic and nonbiologic agents; what data to collect before treatment; when to modify or withdraw treatment; how to select agents based on individual efficacy and safety profiles; and evidence in specific uveitic conditions. Shared decision-making, communication among providers and safety monitoring also were addressed as part of the recommendations. Pharmacoeconomic considerations were not addressed. Conclusions: Consensus guidelines were developed based on published literature, expert opinion, and practical experience to bridge the gap between clinical needs and medical evidence to support the treatment of patients with noninfectious uveitis with noncorticosteroid immunomodulatory agents

Vision-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema Treated with Intravitreal Aflibercept: The AQUA Study

Purpose: To examine vision-related quality of life in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) treated with intravitreal aflibercept (EYLEA, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Tarrytown, NY). Design: AQUA was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase 4 study. Participants: Adults 18 years of age or older with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus and DME. Methods: Patients received intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 8 weeks for 52 weeks, after 5 initial doses every 4 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the change in 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) total score from baseline to week 52. Secondary outcomes included the change in NEI VFQ-25 near and distant activities subscale scores, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA; Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study [ETDRS] letters), and central retinal thickness (CRT) from baseline to week 52. Change in NEI VFQ-25 score at week 52 for better-seeing eyes (BSEs) and worse-seeing eyes (WSEs) also was evaluated. Results: A total of 553 patients comprised the full analysis set, and 560 patients comprised the safety analysis set. At baseline, the mean NEI VFQ-25 total score was 70.12, mean BCVA was 61.5 ETDRS letters, and mean CRT was 464.81 \u3bcm. A mean of 8.8 injections were administered over 52 weeks. At week 52, the mean improvement from baseline in the NEI VFQ-25 total score was +6.11 (standard deviation [SD], 11.46); the corresponding improvements in near and distant activities were +11.37 (SD, 18.01) and +7.33 (SD, 17.32), respectively. Similarly, improvements in patients whose BSE and WSE were treated were 7.74 (SD, 13.59) and 5.48 (SD, 9.70), respectively. At week 52, mean change in BCVA was +10.0 ETDRS letters (SD, 8.0 ETDRS letters), and mean change in CRT was \u2013175.38 \u3bcm (SD, 132.62 \u3bcm). Overall, 53.6% of patients reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), of whom 26.8% experienced an ocular TEAE in the study eye. The most common serious ocular TEAE was endophthalmitis (0.5% [n = 3]). Five deaths (0.9%) were reported, but were not considered treatment related. Conclusions: Intravitreal aflibercept was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in NEI VFQ-25 total score over 52 weeks in patients with DME; these were even more pronounced for near than for distant activities. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of intravitreal aflibercept