Although multiple studies have suggested that treatment with ranibizumab is safe and efficacious and superior to focal/grid laser alone for patients with center-involved diabetic macular edema (DME), there may be barriers in place to widespread adoption of ranibizumab use given its high cost per dose and the need for multiple treatments over time. Prioritizing resources from a public health policy perspective could be easier if more precise estimates regarding the risks and benefits of other anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies were available, especially when the difference in costs could be billions of dollars over just a few years. Thus, there is a clear rationale at this time to explore potential anti-VEGF alternatives to ranibizumab that might prove to be as or more efficacious, might deliver equally lasting or longer-lasting treatment effects, and cost substantially less. Of the potentially available alternative anti-VEGF agents for this trial, bevacizumab and aflibercept are the best candidates for a direct comparison study. Bevacizumab shares the most similar molecular structure, costs far less, and is widely available. Furthermore, there is already preliminary evidence to suggest that it may be efficacious in the treatment of DME and it is already being widely used for this indication. Although aflibercept has a similar cost per unit dose to ranibizumab, it has the potential to decrease treatment burden and associated cost. If results from a comparative trial demonstrate improved efficacy or suggest similar efficacy of bevacizumab or aflibercept over ranibizumab, this information might give clinicians scientific rationale to substitute either one of these drugs for ranibizumab in the treatment of DME, and might thereby have substantial implications for public policy in terms of future estimates of health care dollars and possibly number of treatments necessary for anti-VEGF treatment of diabetic macular disease. Because of its availability and lower cost, bevacizumab is already currently in widespread clinical use for treatment of DME despite the lack of FDA approval for this indication. Thus, a clinical trial that suggested whether bevacizumab could be used as a safe and efficacious alternative to ranibizumab could substantially impact nationwide practice patterns for treatment of DME by either validating the current use of bevacizumab or by demonstrating improved outcomes with ranibizumab or aflibercept treatment for DME. Study Objective The primary objective of the proposed research is to compare the efficacy and safety of (1) intravitreal aflibercept, (2) intravitreal bevacizumab, and (3) intravitreal ranibizumab when given to treat central-involved DME in eyes with visual acuity of 20/32 to 20/320.
A five year follow-up visit is being conducted to gather information on long term outcomes
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
660
Intravitreal injection of 2.0 mg aflibercept at baseline and up to every 4 weeks using defined retreatment criteria.
Intravitreal injection of 1.25 mg bevacizumab at baseline and up to every 4 weeks using defined retreatment criteria.
Intravitreal injection of 0.3 mg ranibizumab (Lucentis™) at baseline and up to every 4 weeks using defined retreatment criteria.
Retina Associates
Tucson, Arizona, United States
Retina-Vitreous Associates Medical Group
Beverly Hills, California, United States
Loma Linda University Health Care, Dept. of Ophthalmology
Loma Linda, California, United States
Southern California Desert Retina Consultants, MC
Palm Desert, California, United States
California Retina Consultants
Santa Barbara, California, United States
Overall Change in Electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Visual Acuity Letter Score From Baseline to 1-year
Visual Acuity was measured with the Electronic Early Treatment Study (E-ETDRS) visual acuity test. Unit of measure is based on the E-ETDRS letter score scale, 0-97, where 0 = worst and 97 = best.
Time frame: Baseline to 1-year
Change in Electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Visual Acuity Letter Score From Baseline to 1-year: Baseline Visual Acuity Letter Score <69
Visual Acuity was measured with the Electronic Early Treatment Study (E-ETDRS) visual acuity test. Unit of measure is based on the E-ETDRS letter score scale, 0-97, where 0 = worst and 97 = best.
Time frame: Baseline to 1-year
Change in Electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Visual Acuity Letter Score From Baseline to 1-year: Baseline Visual Acuity Letter Score 78-69
Visual Acuity was measured with the Electronic Early Treatment Study (E-ETDRS) visual acuity test. Unit of measure is based on the E-ETDRS letter score scale, 0-97, where 0 = worst and 97 = best.
Time frame: Baseline to 1-year
Overall Change in Optical Coherence Tomography Central Subfield Thickness
All baseline and 1-year optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans were graded by Duke Reading Center. In addition, a random sample of OCT images from other visits and images for which the investigator believed central grading was needed also were graded by Duke Reading Center. Baseline CSF values were converted from the thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 583 scans. One-year CSF values were converted from a thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 604 scans. When calculating change in CSF thickness, measurements taken on the same machine at both visits were not converted, since the conversion equation slope is nearly 1 and the constant difference does not affect the change calculation. Therefore, change in CSF thickness was calculated after converting either the baseline and/or follow-up thickness value from Spectralis or Cirrus to a Stratus equivalent value in 26 eyes.
Time frame: baseline to 1-year
Change in Optical Coherence Tomography Central Subfield Thickness: Baseline Visual Acuity Letter Score <69
All baseline and 1-year optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans were graded by Duke Reading Center. In addition, a random sample of OCT images from other visits and images for which the investigator believed central grading was needed also were graded by Duke Reading Center. Baseline CSF values were converted from the thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 583 scans. One-year CSF values were converted from a thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 604 scans. When calculating change in CSF thickness, measurements taken on the same machine at both visits were not converted, since the conversion equation slope is nearly 1 and the constant difference does not affect the change calculation. Therefore, change in CSF thickness was calculated after converting either the baseline and/or follow-up thickness value from Spectralis or Cirrus to a Stratus equivalent value in 26 eyes.
Time frame: baseline to 1-year
Change in Optical Coherence Tomography Central Subfield Thickness: Baseline Visual Acuity Letter Score 78-69
All baseline and 1-year optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans were graded by Duke Reading Center. In addition, a random sample of OCT images from other visits and images for which the investigator believed central grading was needed also were graded by Duke Reading Center. Baseline CSF values were converted from the thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 583 scans. One-year CSF values were converted from a thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 604 scans. When calculating change in CSF thickness, measurements taken on the same machine at both visits were not converted, since the conversion equation slope is nearly 1 and the constant difference does not affect the change calculation. Therefore, change in CSF thickness was calculated after converting either the baseline and/or follow-up thickness value from Spectralis or Cirrus to a Stratus equivalent value in 26 eyes.
Time frame: baseline to 1-year
Overall Change in Retinal Volume
Baseline volume values were converted from the thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 459 scans. One-year volume values were converted from a thickness value measured on a Spectralis or Cirrus OCT machine to a Stratus equivalent value for 472 scans. When calculating change in volume, measurements taken on the same machine at both visits were not converted, because the conversion equation slope is nearly 1 and the constant difference does not affect the change calculation. Therefore, change in volume was calculated after converting either the baseline and/or follow-up value from Spectralis or Cirrus to a Stratus equivalent value in 17 eyes.
Time frame: Baseline to 1-year
Total Number of Injections Prior to 1 Year
Only includes participants that completed the 1 year visit
Time frame: Baseline to 1-year
Total Number of Laser Treatments
Only includes participants that completed the 1 year visit.
Time frame: between 24 weeks and 1 year
Eyes Receiving 1 or More Alternative Treatments for DME Other Than Laser
Time frame: Baseline to 1-year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Bay Area Retina Associates
Walnut Creek, California, United States
Retinal Consultants of Southern California Medical Group, Inc.
Westlake Village, California, United States
New England Retina Associates
Norwich, Connecticut, United States
Gulf Coast Retina Center
Clearwater, Florida, United States
Retina Group of Florida
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, United States
...and 80 more locations