This article describes treatment patterns and visual outcomes for central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) era.
Methods:
A retrospective cohort study of eyes diagnosed with CRVO between 2009 and 2016 was conducted. Treatment history and visual acuity (VA) measurements were abstracted from medical records and analyzed.
Results:
A total of 476 eyes of 476 patients (median age 67 years, median follow-up 25.4 months) were included. Optical coherence tomography was obtained in 93.9% and fluorescein angiography in 80% of cases on presentation. Mean VA at presentation and final visit was 20/60 and 20/94, respectively, for eyes with nonischemic CRVO, whereas that of ischemic cases remained worse than 20/800 at final follow-up. Intravitreal bevacizumab was the most common first treatment (42.2%). Intravitreal steroid was the first treatment in 3.6% and ultimately administered in 11.3% of eyes. In the first year, an average of 5.2 ± 3.6 and 2.2 ± 3.4 anti-VEGF injections were given in treatment-naive and nontreatment-naive eyes, respectively.
Conclusions:
In our real-world cohort, anti-VEGF injection burden and frequency are lower than in published clinical trials. Visual outcomes in both ischemic and nonischemic eyes with CRVO are poorer than expected and worse than those recorded in controlled trial settings.
RogersSMcIntoshRLCheungN; et al.International Eye Disease Consortium. The prevalence of retinal vein occlusion: pooled data from population studies from the United States, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(2):313–319.e1. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.07.017
2.
PontoKAElbazHPetoT, et al.Prevalence and risk factors of retinal vein occlusion: the Gutenberg Health Study. J Thromb Haemost. 2015;13(7):1254–1263. doi:10.1111/jth.12982
3.
KleinRKleinBEMossSEMeuerSM. The epidemiology of retinal vein occlusion: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2000;98:133–141; discussion 141-143.
4.
HayrehSSZimmermanMBPodhajskyP. Incidence of various types of retinal vein occlusion and their recurrence and demographic characteristics. Am J Ophthalmol. 1994;117(4):429–441. doi:10.1016/s0002-9394(14)70001-7
5.
ThomasASThomasMKFinnAPFekratS. Use of the ischemic index on widefield fluorescein angiography to characterize a central retinal vein occlusion as ischemic or nonischemic. Retina. 2019;39(6):1033–1038. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000002126
6.
McIntoshRLRogersSLLimL, et al.Natural history of central retinal vein occlusion: an evidence-based systematic review. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(6):1113–1123.e15. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.01.060
7.
BrownDMCampochiaroPASinghRP; et al.CRUISE Investigators. Ranibizumab for macular edema following central retinal vein occlusion: six-month primary end point results of a phase III study. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(6):1124–1133.e1121. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.022
8.
OguraYRoiderJKorobelnikJF; et al.GALILEO Study Group. Intravitreal aflibercept for macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: 18-month results of the phase 3 GALILEO study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;158(5):1032–1038. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2014.07.027
9.
HeierJSClarkWLBoyerDS, et al.Intravitreal aflibercept injection for macular edema due to central retinal vein occlusion: two-year results from the COPERNICUS study. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(7):1414–1420.e1411. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.01.027
10.
ThachABYauLHoangCTuomiL.Time to clinically significant visual acuity gains after ranibizumab treatment for retinal vein occlusion: BRAVO and CRUISE trials. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(5):1059–1066. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.11.022
11.
KissSLiuYBrownJ, et al.Clinical utilization of anti-vascular endothelial growth-factor agents and patient monitoring in retinal vein occlusion and diabetic macular edema. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:1611–1621. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S60893
12.
LoteryAJRegnierS. Patterns of ranibizumab and aflibercept treatment of central retinal vein occlusion in routine clinical practice in the USA. Eye (Lond). 2015;29(3):380–387. doi:10.1038/eye.2014.308
13.
WeckerTEhlkenCBühlerA, et al.Five-year visual acuity outcomes and injection patterns in patients with pro-re-nata treatments for AMD, DME, RVO and myopic CNV. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;101(3):353–359. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-308668
14.
VorumHOlesenTKZinckJStørling HedegaardM. Real world evidence of use of anti-VEGF therapy in Denmark. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32(12):1943–1950. doi:10.1080/03007995.2016.1221803
15.
Vaz-PereiraSMarquesIPMatiasJMiraFRibeiroLFloresR. Real-world outcomes of anti-VEGF treatment for retinal vein occlusion in Portugal. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2017;27(6):756–761. doi:10.5301/ejo.5000943
16.
LipPLCikatricisPSarmadA, et al.Efficacy and timing of adjunctive therapy in the anti-VEGF treatment regimen for macular oedema in retinal vein occlusion: 12-month real-world result. Eye (Lond). 2018;32(3):537–545. doi:10.1038/eye.2017.230
17.
JumperJMDugelPUChenSBlinderKJWaltJG. Anti-VEGF treatment of macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion: patterns of use and effectiveness in clinical practice (ECHO study report 2). Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12:621–629. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S163859
18.
Natural history and clinical management of central retinal vein occlusion. The Central Vein Occlusion Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115(4):486–491. doi:10.1001/archopht.1997.01100150488006
19.
IpMSScottIUVanVeldhuisenPC; et al.SCORE Study Research Group. A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone with observation to treat vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: the Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Retinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) study report 5. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(9):1101–1114. doi:10.1001/archophthalmol.2009.234
20.
HallerJABandelloFBelfortRJr; et al.OZURDEX GENEVA Study Group. Randomized, sham-controlled trial of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(6):1134–1146.e3. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.03.032
21.
AdelmanRAParnesAJBoppSSaad OthmanIDucournauD. Strategy for the management of macular edema in retinal vein occlusion: the European VitreoRetinal Society macular edema study. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:870987. doi:10.1155/2015/870987
22.
ScottIUVanVeldhuisenPCIpMS; et al.SCORE2 Investigator Group. Effect of bevacizumab vs aflibercept on visual acuity among patients with macular edema due to central retinal vein occlusion: the SCORE2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317(20):2072–2087. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.4568
23.
Brown G, Yoo J, Brown M, Turpcu A, Rajput Y; Wills Eye Hospital Retina Service Vein Occlusion Study Group. The burden of retinal venous occlusion: an assessment of fellow eyes in 1000 cases. Ophthalmol Retina. 2017;1(5):404–412. doi:10.1016/j.oret.2017.01.018
24.
StoneT, ed. ASRS 2017 Preferences and Trends Membership Survey. Chicago, IL: American Society of Retinal Specialists; 2017.
25.
BoyerDHeierJBrownDM, et al.Vascular endothelial growth factor Trap-Eye for macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: six-month results of the phase 3 COPERNICUS study. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(5):1024–1032. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.01.042
26.
CampochiaroPABrownDMAwhCC, et al.Sustained benefits from ranibizumab for macular edema following central retinal vein occlusion: twelve-month outcomes of a phase III study. Ophthalmology. 2011;118(10):2041–2049. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.02.038
27.
ScottIUVanVeldhuisenPCIpMS; et al.SCORE2 Investigator Group. Comparison of monthly vs treat-and-extend regimens for individuals with macular edema who respond well to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor medications: secondary outcomes from the SCORE2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018;136(4):337–345. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.6843
28.
RahimyERayessNBradyCJRegilloCD. Treat-and-extend regimen for macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: 12-month results. Ophthalmol Retina. 2017;1(2):118–123. doi:10.1016/j.oret.2016.10.014
29.
GuichardMMXavierARTürkseverCPruenteCHatzK. Spectral-domain optical coherence tomography-driven treat-and-extend and pro re nata regimen in patients with macular oedema due to retinal vein occlusion: 24-month evaluation and outcome predictors. Ophthalmic Res. 2018;60(1):29–37. doi:10.1159/000487489
30.
StoneT, ed. ASRS 2015 Preferences and Trends Membership Survey. Chicago, IL: American Society of Retinal Specialists; 2015.
31.
Casselholm de SallesMAmrénUKvantaAEpsteinDL. Injection frequency of aflibercept versus ranibizumab in a treat-and-extend regimen for central retinal vein occlusion: a randomized clinical trial. Retina. 2018;39(7):1370–1376. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000002171
32.
GerdingH. Intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO): a meta-analysis of one year results. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2017;234(4):546–550. doi:10.1055/s-0042-123057
33.
KorobelnikJFHolzFGRoiderJ; et al.GALILEO Study Group. Intravitreal aflibercept injection for macular edema resulting from central retinal vein occlusion: one-year results of the phase 3 GALILEO study. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(1):202–208. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.08.012
34.
HolzFGRoiderJOguraY, et al.VEGF Trap-Eye for macular oedema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: 6-month results of the phase III GALILEO study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97(3):278–284. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-301504
35.
IftikharMMirTAHafizG, et al.Loss of peak vision in retinal vein occlusion patients treated for macular edema. Am J Ophthalmol. 2019;205:17–26. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2019.03.029
36.
AchTHoehAESchaalKBScheuerleAFDithmarS. Predictive factors for changes in macular edema in intravitreal bevacizumab therapy of retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010;248(2):155–159. doi:10.1007/s00417-009-1167-6
37.
HoehAEAchTSchaalKBScheuerleAFDithmarS. Long-term follow-up of OCT-guided bevacizumab treatment of macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009;247(12):1635–1641. doi:10.1007/s00417-009-1151-1
38.
GomolinJE. Efficacy of panretinal photocoagulation in central retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmologica. 1989;199(1):24–27. doi:10.1159/000310009
