A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

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

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to compare the non-inferiority of two ranibizumab treatment strategies—treat-and-extend (T&E) with or without laser versus pro re nata (PRN)—in improving best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) for patients with diabetic macular edema over 24 months.
  • Results indicated that both T&E methods performed similarly to PRN in terms of BCVA changes, with T&E+laser and T&E showing an average increase of +5.9 and +6.1 letters, respectively, compared to +6.2 letters for PRN over the initial 12 months. Additionally, T&E led to fewer clinic visits for patients.
  • The

Article Abstract

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 ≥2 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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4893084PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307249DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

baseline months
12
diabetic macular
8
macular oedema
8
months 1-12
8
bcva change
8
change baseline
8
bcva
6
t&e
5
prn
5
ranibizumab 05 mg
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!