6 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Acceptability of intravitreal injections in geographic atrophy: protocol for a mixed-methods pilot study
INTRODUCTION: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a common cause of visual impairment, affecting central vision. Geographic atrophy (GA) is an advanced form of the non-neovascular (dry) type of AMD. Late-stage clinical trials suggest that intravitreal injections of novel therapeutics may slow down the rate of GA progression by up to 30% in 1 year, thus allowing people with GA to preserve central vision for a longer period. While intravitreal injections have become an established treatment modality for neovascular (wet) AMD, it is unknown whether patients with (more gradually progressing) GA would accept regular injections that slow down, but do not stop or reverse, vision loss. Therefore, this mixed-methods pilot study will aim to explore whether regular intravitreal injections will be acceptable as treatment for patients with GA, and the factors that may affect treatment acceptability.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-methods survey has been designed in collaboration with a GA patient advisory group. The survey comprises of structured questionnaires, semi-structured interview questions regarding patients' perceptions of intravitreal injections and the burden of treatment, and a task eliciting preferences between different potential treatments. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, this study will be conducted remotely by telephone. Thirty individuals will be recruited from NHS Medical Retina clinics at Central Middlesex Hospital, London. Half of the participants will be naïve to intravitreal injections, while half will have previous experience of intravitreal injections for neovascular (wet) AMD. Qualitative data analysis will be conducted using the Framework Method of analysis to identify key themes from participants' accounts.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study received Health Research Authority approval on 23 March 2021 (IRAS Project ID: 287824). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations to the medical retina community, as well as through dialogue with patients and macular disease charities
Recommended from our members
Towards a Therapy for Geographic Atrophy: A Patient's Experience.
PURPOSE: Geographic atrophy (GA) is the advanced form of the non-neovascular (dry) type of age-related macular degeneration. Presently, GA cannot be treated. However, new therapies administered by intravitreal injection are in late-stage development. These can slow down, but do not stop or reverse, GA progression. The acceptability of these emerging therapies to people with GA is currently unknown. The present case study explores the perspectives of a person living with GA who took part in the terminated Phase 3 clinical trial of Lampalizumab, a candidate intravitreal treatment for GA. We explored this patient's perspective on the retrospective acceptability of regular Lampalizumab injections, and the prospective acceptability of future intravitreal therapies for GA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 78-year-old woman living in the UK was recruited as part of a mixed-methods pilot study and interviewed by telephone, regarding: her experience of the Lampalizumab trial injections; and her thoughts regarding emerging intravitreal therapies for GA. The Framework Method was used for initial inductive analysis of the interview transcript. Subsequently, deductive analysis was undertaken, informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). RESULTS: For this participant, intravitreal injections in the Lampalizumab trial were acceptable, although streamlining processes within the clinic would have improved the patient experience. Regarding prospective acceptability of new intravitreal therapies, the participant considered a delay in progression of GA a valuable goal. Potential discomfort, anxiety and inconvenience associated with regular intravitreal injections would be acceptable in the context of preserving her vision for as long as possible. CONCLUSION: Analysis of one participant's experience demonstrates the value of exploring GA patients' unique views on the acceptability of new intravitreal treatments. Larger prospective studies will provide more insight that help to optimise treatment design and delivery, thereby maximising likelihood of adherence and persistence when these therapies eventually arrive in clinic
Recommended from our members
Patient acceptability of intravitreal complement inhibitors in geographic atrophy (GA): protocol for a UK-based cross-sectional study
Introduction
Geographic atrophy (GA) is the advanced form of the non-neovascular (‘dry’) type of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Previously untreatable, complement inhibitors delivered by regular intravitreal injections have recently been demonstrated to slow down the progression of GA lesions in phase 3 trials. One such treatment, Syfovre (pegcetacoplan), was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in February 2023. These therapies slow down, but do not stop or reverse, the progression of GA; they may also increase the risk of developing the neovascular (‘wet’) type of AMD. In light of these developments, this study aims to quantify the acceptability of these new intravitreal injection treatments to patients with GA in the UK and explore factors that may influence the acceptability of these treatments.
Methods and analysis
In this cross-sectional, non-interventional study, the primary objective is to determine the proportion of patients with GA that find regular intravitreal therapy acceptable for slowing the progression of GA. We will use a validated acceptability questionnaire in order to quantify the acceptability of new treatments among patients with GA. The correlation between acceptability and functional and structural biomarkers of GA will be established. We will also explore demographic, general health and ocular factors that may influence acceptability. 180 individuals with a diagnosis of GA will be recruited from 7 to 8 participating National Health Service trusts across the UK. Multiple regression analysis will be conducted to determine the simultaneous effects of multiple factors on patient acceptability.
Ethics and dissemination
The study received ethical approval from the Health Research Authority on 14 March 2023 (IRAS Project ID: 324854). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations to the medical retina community, as well as through dialogue with patients and macular disease charities
Clinical efficacy and safety of a light mask for prevention of dark adaptation in treating and preventing progression of early diabetic macular oedema at 24 months (CLEOPATRA): a multicentre, phase 3, randomised controlled trial
Background: We aimed to assess 24-month outcomes of wearing an organic light-emitting sleep mask as an intervention to treat and prevent progression of non-central diabetic macular oedema.
Methods: CLEOPATRA was a phase 3, single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial undertaken at 15 ophthalmic centres in the UK. Adults with non-centre-involving diabetic macular oedema were randomly assigned (1:1) to wearing either a light mask during sleep (Noctura 400 Sleep Mask, PolyPhotonix Medical, Sedgefield, UK) or a sham (non-light) mask, for 24 months. Randomisation was by minimisation generated by a central web-based computer system. Outcome assessors were masked technicians and optometrists. The primary outcome was the change in maximum retinal thickness on optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 24 months, analysed using a linear mixed-effects model incorporating 4-monthly measurements and baseline adjustment. Analysis was done using the intention-to-treat principle in all randomised patients with OCT data. Safety was assessed in all patients. This trial is registered with Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN85596558.
Findings: Between April 10, 2014, and June 15, 2015, 308 patients were randomly assigned to wearing the light mask (n=155) or a sham mask (n=153). 277 patients (144 assigned the light mask and 133 the sham mask) contributed to the mixed-effects model over time, including 246 patients with OCT data at 24 months. The change in maximum retinal thickness at 24 months did not differ between treatment groups (mean change −9·2 μm [SE 2·5] for the light mask vs −12·9 μm [SE 2·9] for the sham mask; adjusted mean difference −0·65 μm, 95% CI −6·90 to 5·59; p=0·84). Median compliance with wearing the light mask at 24 months was 19·5% (IQR 1·9–51·6). No serious adverse events were related to either mask. The most frequent adverse events related to the assigned treatment were discomfort on the eyes (14 with the light mask vs seven with the sham mask), painful, sticky, or watery eyes (14 vs six), and sleep disturbance (seven vs one).
Interpretation: The light mask as used in this study did not confer long-term therapeutic benefit on non-centre-involving diabetic macular oedema and the study does not support its use for this indication.
Funding: The Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership
Recommended from our members
Intravitreal treatment for geographic atrophy: coming soon to a patient near you?
Recommended from our members
Exploring patient acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for geographic atrophy: A mixed-methods study
Background/Objectives
The acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for patients with Geographic Atrophy (GA) is currently unknown. This study therefore aimed to investigate the extent to which regular intravitreal injections may be acceptable to GA patients.
Subjects/Methods
Thirty UK-based individuals with GA secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), recruited from two London-based hospitals, were interviewed in April-October 2021 regarding acceptability of new GA treatments. Participants responded to a structured questionnaire, as well as open-ended questions in a semi-structured interview. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) informed framework analysis of the qualitative data.
Results
Twenty participants (67%) were female, and median (interquartile range (IQR)) age was 83 (78, 87) years. 37% of participants had foveal centre-involving GA, and better eye median (IQR) logMAR visual acuity was 0.30 (0.17, 0.58). Data suggested that 18 participants (60% (95% CI: 41–79%)) would accept the treatment, despite awareness of potential drawbacks. Eight participants (27% (95% CI: 10–43%) were ambivalent or undecided about treatment, and four (13%) (95% CI: 0–26%) would be unlikely to accept treatment. Reducing the frequency of injections from monthly to every other month increased the proportion of participants who considered the treatments acceptable. Conversely, factors limiting acceptability clustered around: the limited magnitude of treatment efficacy; concerns about side effects or the increased risk of neovascular AMD; and the logistical burden of regular clinic visits for intravitreal injections. Misunderstandings of potential benefits indicate the need for appropriately-designed patient education tools to support decision-making.
Conclusions
Our study suggests a majority of participants would be positive about intravitreal treatment for GA, in spite of potential burdens