Comparing the Efficacy of Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema (BRDME):The BRDME Study, a Randomized Trial

Purpose: To generate conclusive evidence regarding the noninferiority of intravitreal bevacizumab compared with ranibizumab in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). Design: Comparative, randomized, double-masked, multicenter, noninferiority clinical trial. Participants: Eligible patients were older than 18 years, diagnosed with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus, with glycosylated hemoglobin of less than 12%, central area thickness of more than 325 μm, and visual impairment from DME with a best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between 24 letters and 78 letters. Methods: From June 2012 through February 2018, a total of 170 participants were randomized to receive 6 monthly injections of either 1.25 mg bevacizumab (n = 86) or 0.5 mg ranibizumab (n = 84). Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was change in BCVA from baseline to month 6 compared between the 2 treatment arms. The noninferiority margin was 3.5 letters. Results: The difference in mean BCVA between treatment arms was 1.8 letters in favor of ranibizumab after 6 months of follow-up; BCVA improved by 4.9±6.7 letters in the bevacizumab group and 6.7±8.7 letters in the ranibizumab group. The lower bound of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) was –3.626 letters, exceeding the noninferiority margin of 3.5 letters. Central area thickness decreased more with ranibizumab (138.2±114.3 μm) compared with bevacizumab (64.2±104.2 μm). In a post hoc subgroup analysis, participants with a worse BCVA at baseline (≤69 letters) improved by 6.7±7.0 letters with bevacizumab and 10.4±10.0 letters with ranibizumab, and central area thickness decreased significantly more in the ranibizumab arm of this subgroup compared with the bevacizumab arm. Participants with an initially better BCVA at baseline (≥70 letters) did not demonstrate differences in BCVA or OCT outcomes between treatment arms. Conclusions: Based on change in BCVA from baseline to month 6, the noninferiority of 1.25 mg bevacizumab to 0.5 mg ranibizumab was not confirmed. Only the subgroup of patients with a lower BCVA at baseline showed better visual acuity and anatomic outcomes with ranibizumab. Our study confirmed the potential differential efficacy of anti–vascular endothelial growth factor agents in the treatment of DME as well as the difference in response between patient groups with different baseline visual acuities

Comparing the Efficacy of Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab in Patients with Retinal Vein Occlusion:The Bevacizumab to Ranibizumab in Retinal Vein Occlusions (BRVO) study, a Randomized Trial

PURPOSE: Comparing the efficacy of intravitreal injections of bevacizumab to ranibizumab in the treatment of macular edema (ME) resulting from retinal vein occlusion (RVO). DESIGN: Comparative, randomized, double-masked, multicenter, noninferiority clinical trial. The noninferiority margin was 4 letters. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with vision loss resulting from ME secondary to a branch or (hemi) central RVO who might benefit from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment were eligible for participation. METHODS: From June 2012 through February 2018, 277 participants were randomized to receive injections of 1.25 mg bevacizumab (n = 139) or 0.5 mg ranibizumab (n = 138). The follow-up was 6 months with a monthly dosing interval. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a change in visual acuity from baseline at 6 months. Changes in the central area thickness and safety were studied as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The mean visual acuity (±standard deviation) improved, with 15.3±13.0 letters for bevacizumab and 15.5±13.3 letters for ranibizumab after 6 months of monthly treatment. The lower limit of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval was -1.724 letters, which is within the noninferiority margin of 4 letters. Even in the branch and (hemi-)central RVO subgroups, minimal differences were found in visual acuity outcomes between treatment arms. Changes in central area thickness on OCT at 6 months did not differ significantly between treatment groups, with a decrease of 287.0±231.3 μm in the bevacizumab group and 300.8±224.8 μm in the ranibizumab group. Severe adverse events (SAEs) were also distributed equally over both treatment groups: 10 participants (7.1%) in the bevacizumab group and 13 participants (9.2%) in the ranibizumab group experienced SAEs. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed, based on the change in visual acuity, that bevacizumab is noninferior to ranibizumab for patients with ME resulting from RVO of either subtype when receiving monthly injections for a period of 6 months. In addition, anatomic and safety outcomes did not differ between treatment groups. Based on our findings, bevacizumab may be an effective alternative to ranibizumab

Mutations in the peripherin/RDS gene are an important cause of multifocal pattern dystrophy simulating STGD1/fundus flavimaculatus

Contains fulltext : 53457.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)AIM: To describe the phenotype and to analyse the peripherin/RDS gene in 10 unrelated families with multifocal pattern dystrophy simulating Stargardt disease (STGD1). METHODS: The probands of 10 families and 20 affected family members underwent an ophthalmic examination including dilated fundus examination, fundus autofluorescence imaging and optical coherence tomography (OCT). In all probands and in selected family members, fluorescein angiography, electrophysiological testing and visual field analysis were performed. Blood samples were obtained from affected and unaffected family members for analysis of the peripherin/RDS gene. RESULTS: All 10 probands carried mutations in the peripherin/RDS gene. Nine different mutations were identified, including six mutations that were not described previously. All probands showed a pattern dystrophy with yellow-white flecks in the posterior pole that strongly resembled the flecks seen in STGD1, on ophthalmoscopy as well as on autofluorescence and OCT. Clinical findings in the family members carrying the same mutation as the proband were highly variable, ranging from no visible abnormalities to retinitis pigmentosa. CONCLUSIONS: Mutations in the peripherin/RDS gene are the major cause of multifocal pattern dystrophy simulating STGD1/fundus flavimaculatus. This autosomal dominant disorder should be distinguished from autosomal recessive STGD1, in view of the different inheritance pattern and the overall better visual prognosis

Genetic etiology and clinical consequences of complete and incomplete achromatopsia

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the genetic causes of complete and incomplete achromatopsia (ACHM) and assess the association between disease-causing mutations, phenotype at diagnosis, and visual prognosis. DESIGN: Clinic-based, longitudinal, multicenter study. PARTICIPANTS: Probands with complete ACHM (n = 35), incomplete ACHM (n = 26), or nonspecific ACHM (n = 2) and their affected relatives (n = 18) from various ophthalmogenetic clinics in The Netherlands. METHODS: Ophthalmologic clinical data were assessed over a life time and were registered from medical charts and updated by ophthalmologic examination. Mutations in the CNGB3, CNGA3, and GNAT2 genes were analyzed by direct sequencing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Genetic mutations and clinical course of ACHM. RESULTS: CNGB3 mutations were identified in 55 of 63 (87%) of probands and all caused premature truncation of the protein. The most common mutation was p.T383IfsX13 (80%); among the 4 other mutations was the novel frameshift mutation p.G548VfsX35. CNGA3 mutations were detected in 3 of 63 (5%) probands; all caused an amino acid change of the protein. No mutations were found in the GNAT2 gene. The ACHM subtype, visual acuity, color vision, and macular appearance were equally distributed among the CNGB3 genotypes, but were more severely affected among CNGA3 genotypes. Visual acuity deteriorated from infancy to adulthood in 12% of patients, leading to 0.10 in 61%, and even lower than 0.10 in 20% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this well-defined cohort of ACHM patients, the disease seemed much more genetically homogeneous than previously described. The CNGB3 gene was by far the most important causal gene, and T383IfsX13 the most frequent mutation. The ACHM subtype did not associate with a distinct genetic etiology, nor were any other genotype-phenotype correlations apparent. The distinction between complete and incomplete subtypes of ACHM has no clinical value, and the assumption of a stationary nature is misleadin

Homozygosity mapping reveals PDE6C mutations in patients with early-onset cone photoreceptor disorders

Cone photoreceptor disorders form a clinical spectrum of diseases that include progressive cone dystrophy (CD) and complete and incomplete achromatopsia (ACHM). The underlying disease mechanisms of autosomal recessive (ar)CD are largely unknown. Our aim was to identify causative genes for these disorders by genome-wide homozygosity mapping. We investigated 75 ACHM, 97 arCD, and 20 early-onset arCD probands and excluded the involvement of known genes for ACHM and arCD. Subsequently, we performed high-resolution SNP analysis and identified large homozygous regions spanning the PDE6C gene in one sibling pair with early-onset arCD and one sibling pair with incomplete ACHM. The PDE6C gene encodes the cone alpha subunit of cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) phosphodiesterase, which converts cGMP to 5'-GMP, and thereby plays an essential role in cone phototransduction. Sequence analysis of the coding region of PDE6C revealed homozygous missense mutations (p.R29W, p.Y323N) in both sibling pairs. Sequence analysis of 104 probands with arCD and 10 probands with ACHM revealed compound heterozygous PDE6C mutations in three complete ACHM patients from two families. One patient had a frameshift mutation and a splice defect; the other two had a splice defect and a missense variant (p.M455V). Cross-sectional retinal imaging via optical coherence tomography revealed a more pronounced absence of cone photoreceptors in patients with ACHM compared to patients with early-onset arCD. Our findings identify PDE6C as a gene for cone photoreceptor disorders and show that arCD and ACHM constitute genetically and clinically overlapping phenotypes

Comparing the Efficacy of Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab in Patients with Retinal Vein Occlusion: The Bevacizumab to Ranibizumab in Retinal Vein Occlusions (BRVO) study, a Randomized Trial

Purpose: Comparing the efficacy of intravitreal injections of bevacizumab to ranibizumab in the treatment of macular edema (ME) resulting from retinal vein occlusion (RVO). Design: Comparative, randomized, double-masked, multicenter, noninferiority clinical trial. The noninferiority margin was 4 letters. Participants: Patients with vision loss resulting from ME secondary to a branch or (hemi) central RVO who might benefit from anti–vascular endothelial growth factor treatment were eligible for participation. Methods: From June 2012 through February 2018, 277 participants were randomized to receive injections of 1.25 mg bevacizumab (n = 139) or 0.5 mg ranibizumab (n = 138). The follow-up was 6 months with a monthly dosing interval. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was a change in visual acuity from baseline at 6 months. Changes in the central area thickness and safety were studied as secondary outcomes. Results: The mean visual acuity (±standard deviation) improved, with 15.3±13.0 letters for bevacizumab and 15.5±13.3 letters for ranibizumab after 6 months of monthly treatment. The lower limit of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval was –1.724 letters, which is within the noninferiority margin of 4 letters. Even in the branch and (hemi-)central RVO subgroups, minimal differences were found in visual acuity outcomes between treatment arms. Changes in central area thickness on OCT at 6 months did not differ significantly between treatment groups, with a decrease of 287.0±231.3 μm in the bevacizumab group and 300.8±224.8 μm in the ranibizumab group. Severe adverse events (SAEs) were also distributed equally over both treatment groups: 10 participants (7.1%) in the bevacizumab group and 13 participants (9.2%) in the ranibizumab group experienced SAEs. Conclusions: This study showed, based on the change in visual acuity, that bevacizumab is noninferior to ranibizumab for patients with ME resulting from RVO of either subtype when receiving monthly injections for a period of 6 months. In addition, anatomic and safety outcomes did not differ between treatment groups. Based on our findings, bevacizumab may be an effective alternative to ranibizumab