Occupational cataracts and lens opacities in interventional cardiology (O'CLOC study): are X-Rays involved? Radiation-induced cataracts and lens opacities.

International audienceBACKGROUND: The eye is well known to be sensitive to clearly high doses (>2 Gy) of ionizing radiation. In recent years, however, cataracts have been observed in populations exposed to lower doses. Interventional cardiologists are repeatedly and acutely exposed to scattered ionizing radiation (X-rays) during the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures they perform. These "low" exposures may cause damage to the lens of the eye and induce early cataracts, known as radiation-induced cataracts. The O'CLOC study (Occupational Cataracts and Lens Opacities in interventional Cardiology) was designed to test the hypothesis that interventional cardiologists, compared with an unexposed reference group of non-interventional cardiologists, have an increased risk of cataracts. METHOD/DESIGN: The O'CLOC study is a cross-sectional study that will include a total of 300 cardiologists aged at least 40 years: one group of exposed interventional cardiologists and another of non-interventional cardiologists. The groups will be matched for age and sex. Individual information, including risk factors for cataracts (age, diabetes, myopia, etc.), will be collected during a telephone interview. A specific section of the questionnaire for the exposed group focuses on occupational history, including a description of the procedures (type, frequency, radiation protection tool) used. These data will be used to classify subjects into "exposure level" groups according to cumulative dose estimates. Eye examinations for all participants will be performed to detect cataracts, even in the early stages (lens opacities, according to LOCS III, the international standard classification). The analysis will provide an estimation of the cataract risk in interventional cardiology compared with the unexposed reference group, while taking other risk factors into account. An analysis comparing the risks according to level of exposure is also planned. DISCUSSION: This epidemiological study will provide further evidence about the potential risk of radiation-induced cataracts at low doses and contribute to cardiologists' awareness of the importance of radiation protection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01061463

Comparative Effectiveness of Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapies for Managing Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Meta-Analysis

International audienceIntravitreal injections (IVI) of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) have become the standard of care for age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Although most pivotal trials have used monthly injections, alternative strategies that enable the injections to be administered on a more flexible schedule, including pro re nata (PRN) and treat-and-extend (T&E) regimens, are being applied more frequently. This review sought to provide further scientific evidence about the visual outcomes and treatment burden among the currently available anti-VEGF agents and regimens, including aflibercept, ranibizumab, abicipar and brolucizumab. To this end, a systematic review of published randomized studies was conducted from the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and the Cochrane library, and a meta-analysis was applied to the obtained data using single-means modeling to compare the efficacy and maintenance among the different available treatments and regimens at Years 1 and 2. Quality analysis identified the best-informed data for modeling purposes. Overall, 47 relevant publications were retrieved for the analysis. Superior efficacy, meaning that there were observed improvements in visual acuity (VA) and central retinal thickness (CRT), occurred with monthly versus PRN regimens, yet a higher IVI number was also observed. Conversely, the T&E regimens displayed similar efficacy to the monthly regimens, but with a reduced IVI number. Aflibercept T&E exhibited similar efficacy to ranibizumab T&E, but with significantly lower IVI numbers at both Year 1 (p < 0.0001) and Year 2 (p = 0.0011). Though all of the regimens resulted in maintained efficacy between Years 1 and 2, the required IVI number varied. The retrieved data did not enable other regimens or newer anti-VEGF agents such as brolucizumab to be compared. In conclusion, the T&E regimens were shown to be the most efficient, optimizing durable effectiveness whilst minimizing the IVI number in newly diagnosed exudative AMD, with aflibercept requiring the lowest IVI number