Ranibizumab 0.5 mg treat-and-extend regimen for diabetic macular oedema: the RETAIN study

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00179906%3A_____%2F16%3A10318459" target="_blank" >RIV/00179906:_____/16:10318459 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://bjo.bmj.com/content/early/2015/10/16/bjophthalmol-2015-307249" target="_blank" >http://bjo.bmj.com/content/early/2015/10/16/bjophthalmol-2015-307249</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307249" target="_blank" >10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307249</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Ranibizumab 0.5 mg treat-and-extend regimen for diabetic macular oedema: the RETAIN study

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

AIMS: To demonstrate non-inferiority of ranibizumab treat-and-extend (T&E) with/without laser to ranibizumab pro re nata (PRN) for best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO). METHODS: A 24-month single-masked study with patients randomised 1:1:1 to T&E+laser (n=121), T&E (n=128) or PRN (control; n=123). All patients received monthly injections until BCVA stabilisation. The investigator decided on re-treatment in the PRN and treatment-interval adaptations in the T&E groups based on loss of BCVA stability due to DMO activity. Likewise, laser treatment was at investigator's discretion. Collectively, these features reflect a real-life scenario. Endpoints included mean average change in BCVA from baseline to months 1-12 (primary), mean BCVA change from baseline to months 12 and 24, treatment exposure and safety profile. RESULTS: Both T&E regimens were non-inferior to PRN based on mean average BCVA change from baseline to months 1-12 (T&E+laser: +5.9 and T&E: +6.1 vs PRN: +6.2 letters; both p<0.0001). Mean BCVA change at month 24 was similar across groups (+8.3, +6.5 and +8.1 letters, respectively). The mean number of injections was 12.4 and 12.8 in the T&E+laser and T&E groups and 10.7 in the PRN group. The T&E regimens showed 46% reduction in the number of clinic visits. Over 70% of patients maintained their BCVA, with treatment intervals of GREATER-THAN OR EQUAL TO2 months over 24 months. Safety profile was consistent with that described in the product information. CONCLUSIONS: T&E is a feasible treatment option for patients with DMO, with a potential to reduce treatment burden. Slightly more injections were required versus PRN, likely due to the specifics of the T&E regimen applied here. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01171976.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Ranibizumab 0.5 mg treat-and-extend regimen for diabetic macular oedema: the RETAIN study

Popis výsledku anglicky

AIMS: To demonstrate non-inferiority of ranibizumab treat-and-extend (T&E) with/without laser to ranibizumab pro re nata (PRN) for best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO). METHODS: A 24-month single-masked study with patients randomised 1:1:1 to T&E+laser (n=121), T&E (n=128) or PRN (control; n=123). All patients received monthly injections until BCVA stabilisation. The investigator decided on re-treatment in the PRN and treatment-interval adaptations in the T&E groups based on loss of BCVA stability due to DMO activity. Likewise, laser treatment was at investigator's discretion. Collectively, these features reflect a real-life scenario. Endpoints included mean average change in BCVA from baseline to months 1-12 (primary), mean BCVA change from baseline to months 12 and 24, treatment exposure and safety profile. RESULTS: Both T&E regimens were non-inferior to PRN based on mean average BCVA change from baseline to months 1-12 (T&E+laser: +5.9 and T&E: +6.1 vs PRN: +6.2 letters; both p<0.0001). Mean BCVA change at month 24 was similar across groups (+8.3, +6.5 and +8.1 letters, respectively). The mean number of injections was 12.4 and 12.8 in the T&E+laser and T&E groups and 10.7 in the PRN group. The T&E regimens showed 46% reduction in the number of clinic visits. Over 70% of patients maintained their BCVA, with treatment intervals of GREATER-THAN OR EQUAL TO2 months over 24 months. Safety profile was consistent with that described in the product information. CONCLUSIONS: T&E is a feasible treatment option for patients with DMO, with a potential to reduce treatment burden. Slightly more injections were required versus PRN, likely due to the specifics of the T&E regimen applied here. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01171976.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

FF - ORL, oftalmologie, stomatologie

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

British Journal of Ophthalmology

ISSN

0007-1161

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

100

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

6

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

9

Strana od-do

787-795

Kód UT WoS článku

000376994700014

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-84971411336