Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for neovascular glaucoma.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Simha A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7003996 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for neovascular glaucoma.
Simha Arathi A Aziz Kanza K Braganza Andrew A Abraham Lekha L Samuel Prasanna P Lindsley Kristina B KB
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20200206
<h4>Background</h4>Neovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a potentially blinding, secondary glaucoma. It is caused by the formation of abnormal new blood vessels, which prevent normal drainage of aqueous from the anterior segment of the eye. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medications are specific inhibitors of the primary mediators of neovascularization. Studies have reported the effectiveness of anti-VEGF medications for the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) in NVG.<h4>Objective ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10069372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNeovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a potentially blinding secondary glaucoma. It is caused by the formation of abnormal new blood vessels which prevent normal drainage of aqueous from the anterior segment of the eye. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents are specific inhibitors of the primary mediators of neovascularization. Studies have reported the effectiveness of anti-VEGFs for the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) in NVG.ObjectivesTo compare the IOP lowering effects of intraocular anti-VEGF agents to no anti-VEGF treatment, as an adjunct to existing modalities for the treatment of NVG.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE, (January 1950 to January 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to January 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov/) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 11 January 2013.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of people treated with anti-VEGF agents for NVG.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently assessed the search results for trials to be included in the review. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion with a third author. Since no trial met our inclusion criteria, no assessment of risk of bias or meta-analysis was undertaken.Main resultsNo RCTs were found that met the inclusion criteria for this review. Two RCTs of anti-VEGF agents for treating NVG were not included in the review due to the heterogeneity and uncontrolled assignment of adjunct treatments received by the study participants.Authors' conclusionsCurrently available evidence is insufficient to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-VEGF treatments, such as intravitreal ranibizumab or bevacizumab, as an adjunct to conventional treatment in lowering IOP in NVG. Well designed RCTs are needed to address this issue, particularly trials that evaluate long-term (at least six months) benefits and risks since the effects of anti-VEGF agents may be short-term only. An RCT comparing anti-VEGF agents with no anti-VEGF agents taking into account the need for co-interventions, such as panretinal photocoagulation (PRP), glaucoma shunt procedures, cyclodestructive procedures, cataract surgery, and deep vitrectomy, could be of use to investigate the additional beneficial effect of anti-VEGF agents in treating NVG. Since decisions for when and which co-interventions should be used are based on clinical criteria, they would not be appropriate for randomization. However, the design of a study on this topic should aim to balance groups by stratification of co-intervention at time of randomization or by enrolling a sufficient number of participants to conduct subgroup analysis by co-interventions (ideally 15 participants per treatment group for each subgroup). Alternatively, the inclusion criteria for a trial could limit participants to those who receive the same co-intervention.
| S-EPMC4261636 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6419319 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4270425 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAge-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a common cause of severe vision loss in people 55 years and older.ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to investigate the effects of anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) modalities for treating neovascular AMD.Search strategyWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS. We handsearched ARVO abstracts for 2006, 2007 for ongoing trials.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data. We contacted trial authors for additional data. We summarized outcomes as relative risks (RR), number needed to treat (NNT) and weighted mean differences.Main resultsWe included five RCTs of good methodological quality. All five trials were conducted by pharmaceutical companies. An intention-to-treat analysis using the last observation carried forward method was done in most trials. Two trials compared pegaptanib versus sham. One trial compared ranibizumab versus sham, another compared ranibizumab/sham verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT/sham ranibizumab, and the final trial compared ranibizumab plus verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT alone. Fewer patients treated with pegaptanib lost 15 or more letters of visual acuity at one year follow-up compared to sham (pooled relative risk (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 0.84). The NNT was 6.67 (95% CI 4.35 to 14.28) for 0.3 mg pegaptanib, 6.25 (95% CI 4.17 to 12.5) for 1 mg pegaptanib and 14.28 (95% CI 6.67 to 100) for 3 mg pegaptanib. In a trial of ranibizumab versus sham, RR for loss of 15 or more letters visual acuity at one year was 0.14 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.22) in favour of ranibizumab. The NNT was 3.13 (95% CI 2.56 to 3.84) for 0.3 mg ranibizumab and 3.13 (95% CI 2.56 to 3.84) for 0.5 mg ranibizumab. In a trial of ranibizumab versus verteporfin PDT, RR for loss of 15 or more letters at one year was 0.13 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.23) favouring ranibizumab. The NNT was 3.33 (95% CI 2.56 to 4.76) for 0.3 mg ranibizumab and 3.12 (95% CI 2.43 to 4.17) for 0.5 mg ranibizumab. In another trial of combined ranibizumab plus verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT, RR for loss of 15 or more letters at one year favoured combined therapy (RR 0.3 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.60). The NNT was 4.35 (95% CI 2.78 to 11.11). Pooled RR for gain of 15 or more letters visual acuity at one year was 5.81 (95% CI 3.29 to 10.26) for ranibizumab versus sham, 6.79 (95% CI 3.41 to 13.54) for ranibizumab/sham verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT/sham ranibizumab, and 4.44 (95% CI 1.40 to 14.08) for ranibizumab plus verteporfin PDT versus verteporfin PDT. Frequency of endophthalmitis in included studies was between 0.7% to 4.7% with ranibizumab and 1.3% with pegaptanib. Improvement in vision-specific quality of life was reported for both treatments.Authors' conclusionsPegaptanib and ranibizumab reduce the risk of visual acuity loss in patients with neovascular AMD. Ranibizumab causes gains in visual acuity in many eyes. Quality of life and cost will be important for treatment decisions. Other agents blocking VEGF are being tested in ongoing trials.
| S-EPMC4267250 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceNeovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), the largest single cause of irreversible severe vision loss in high-income countries, can now be treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, but to our knowledge, no data on lifetime outcomes are available.ObjectiveTo determine visual acuity (VA) outcomes of anti-VEGF treatment for nAMD in both eyes for patients' remaining lifetime.Design, setting, and participantsMultistate modeling using real-world cohort data of 3192 patients with nAMD (>67 000 visits) treated in routine eye clinics in Australia, New Zealand, and Switzerland. Data were analyzed between 2007 and 2015.ExposuresIntravitreal anti-VEGF treatment at the treating physician's discretion and prospective data collection in standardized registry.Main outcomes and measuresVisual acuity in both eyes over the remaining lifetime.ResultsFor the mean remaining lifetime of 11 years, an estimated 12% (n = 371; 95% CI, 345-400) of the sample retained driving VA and an estimated 15% (n = 463; 95% CI, 434-495) reading VA in at least 1 eye. At that time, an estimated 82% of the sample (n = 2629; 95% CI, 2590-2660) had dropped out. Younger age at baseline and more injections during the first year of treatment were associated with better long-term outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceAnti-VEGF treatment was associated with preserved useful visual acuity in almost 20% of patients over their average remaining lifetime. More than 80% of patients will cease treatment over that time, having likely experienced a deterioration of vision beforehand. This is a remarkable outcome compared with outcomes without intervention, which lead to legal blindness within 3 years of disease onset in 80% of those affected. These findings underline the public health necessity of providing anti-VEGF treatment to persons in need.
| S-EPMC7563682 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe intraocular injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) demonstrates significant efficacy in inhibiting the formation of ocular neovascularization in neovascular glaucoma (NVG). Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation (AGVI) is extensively employed for the management of diverse glaucoma types.ObjectiveTo further evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF combined with AGVI in the treatment of neovascular glaucoma.MethodsA thorough search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted across eight databases: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, SinoMed, and VIP. The search period was set from the inception of each database until March 2, 2024, to identify RCTs investigating the effectiveness and safety of combining AGVI with anti-VEGF therapy for NVG. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool to evaluate the quality of the literature and performed statistical analysis using Stata 15.0 software.ResultsFourteen RCTs were included in this study. Compared with AGVI alone, the combination of anti-VEGF drugs and AGVI can reduce postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) at 1 week [WMD = -4.03, 95% CI (-5.73, -2.34), p < 0.001], 1 month [WMD = -5.39, 95% CI (-7.05, -3.74), p < 0.001], 3 months [WMD = -6.59, 95% CI (-7.85, -5.32), p < 0.001], 6 months [WMD = -4.99, 95% CI (-9.56, -0.43), p = 0.032], and more than 12 months [WMD = -3.86, 95% CI (-6.82, -0.90), p = 0.011], with a higher Effective rate [RR = 1.27, 95% CI (1.18, 1.37), p < 0.001], decreased incidence of postoperative hyphema [RR = 0.24, 95% CI (0.15, 0.39), p < 0.001], reduced use of postoperative antiglaucoma medications [WMD = -0.48, 95% CI (-0.61, -0.35), p < 0.001], and decreased aqueous humor VEGF levels [SMD = -2.84, 95% CI (-4.37, -1.31), p < 0.001].ConclusionIn comparison to AGVI alone, the combination of AGVI with anti-VEGF therapy has better effects in reducing IOP at various time intervals, diminishing postoperative antiglaucoma medication requirements and reducing aqueous humor VEGF levels. Furthermore, it effectively minimizes the incidence of postoperative hyphema. Nevertheless, due to the variability in the quality of the trials included, further high-quality experiments will be required in the future to substantiate this conclusion.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, identifier CRD42024519862, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024519862.
| S-EPMC11323747 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is the primary disastrous retinal disease that leads to blindness in the elderly population. In the early 2000s, nAMD resulted in irreversible vision loss and blindness with no available treatment options. However, there have been breakthrough advances in the drug development of anti-angiogenic biological agents over the last two decades. The primary target molecule for treating nAMD is the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and there are currently several anti-VEGF drugs such as bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept, which have made nAMD more manageable than before, thus preventing vision loss. Nevertheless, it should be noted that these anti-VEGF drugs for nAMD treatment are not effective in more than half of the patients, and even those who initially gain visual improvements lose their vision over time, along with potential deterioration in the geography of atrophy. As a result, there have been continuous endeavors to improve anti-VEGF agents through better efficacy, fewer doses, expanded intervals, and additional targets. This review describes past and current anti-VEGF therapeutics used to treat nAMD and outlines future directions to improve the effectiveness and safety of anti-VEGF agents.
| S-EPMC10454953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multi-center study evaluating the efficacy of pegfilgrastim to reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with newly diagnosed, locally-advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first-line treatment with bevacizumab and either 5-fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, Leucovorin (FOLFOX) or 5-fluorouracil, Irinotecan, Leucovorin (FOLFIRI).
This study will also investigate the effect of adding pegfilgrastim to bevacizumab and either FOLFOX or FOLFIRI by evaluating overall survival, progression-free survival, and overall response rate in each arm at regular intervals over a maximum of 60 months follow-up.
| 2073020 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:PurposeTo assess the impact of COVID-19-related delay in intravitreal injection timing on macular structure and visual acuity (VA) among patients treated for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nvAMD).MethodsWe reviewed demographic and clinical data and macular ocular computerized tomographic images of 34 patients (48 eyes, group A) who did not follow their injection schedule during the first wave of COVID-19 and compared them to 46 patients (71 eyes, group B) who did. Functional worsening was defined as a loss of at least 0.1 in decimal VA. Anatomic worsening was defined as new or increased subretinal/intraretinal fluids or new hemorrhage.ResultsThe planned mean ± standard deviation intervals between the intravitreal injections were 5.7 ± 2.7 weeks for group A and 5.5 ± 2.4 weeks for group B (P = 0.60). The actual intervals were 13.6 ± 6.8 (7.9 ± 5.2 weeks' delay) and 5.3 ± 2.4 weeks (no delay), respectively (P < 0.001). The best corrected visual acuity worsened in 23 group A eyes (47.9%) and in 6 group B eyes (8.5%) (odds ratio [OR] 9.97, P < 0.001). Anatomic features indicative of nvAMD worsening were detected in 31 group A eyes (64.6%) and in 16 group B eyes (22.5%) (OR 5.73, P < 0.001). A new macular hemorrhage was observed in 4 group A eyes (8.3%) and in no group B eyes (P = 0.09).ConclusionDelay in timely retinal care during the COVID-19 restrictions period resulted in short-term negative outcomes, including macular bleeding, in nvAMD patients.
| S-EPMC8747863 | biostudies-literature