Ranibizumab in Diabetic Macular Oedema - A Benefit-risk Analysis of Ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN Versus Laser Treatment.

Q2 Medicine
European Endocrinology Pub Date : 2017-08-01 Epub Date: 2017-08-22 DOI:10.17925/EE.2017.13.02.91
Focke Ziemssen, Alan Cruess, Cornelia Dunger-Baldauf, Philippe Margaron, Howard Snow, William David Strain
{"title":"Ranibizumab in Diabetic Macular Oedema - A Benefit-risk Analysis of Ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN Versus Laser Treatment.","authors":"Focke Ziemssen,&nbsp;Alan Cruess,&nbsp;Cornelia Dunger-Baldauf,&nbsp;Philippe Margaron,&nbsp;Howard Snow,&nbsp;William David Strain","doi":"10.17925/EE.2017.13.02.91","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The structured Benefit-risk Action Team (BRAT) approach aims to assist healthcare decision makers in treatment assessments. We applied BRAT to compare the benefit-risk profile of ranibizumab 0.5 mg versus laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One-year data for the ranibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata (PRN) and laser arms of the phase III trials RESPOND (NCT01135914; n=220), RESTORE (NCT00687804; n=345), and REVEAL (NCT00989989; n=396) were included in the analysis. The benefit measures included ≥10 letters gain/avoidance of loss in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), achieving central retinal thickness (CRT) <275 μm, and 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) outcomes. The risks measures included endophthalmitis, intraocular pressure increase, hypertension, proteinuria, arterial/venous thromboembolic events and deaths.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ranibizumab treatment provided significant benefits compared with laser for ≥10 letter BCVA gain at month 12 (387/1,000 versus 152/1,000 patients), CRT <275 μm at 12 months (474/1,000 versus 348/1,000 patients), and improvement of ≥6.06 on the VFQ-25 near activities subscale (325/1,000 versus 245/1,000 patients). Results for the risk measures were similar for both treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Superior clinically relevant outcomes were observed with ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN compared with laser without compromising on safety. This analysis further supports the positive benefit-risk profile of ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN.</p>","PeriodicalId":38860,"journal":{"name":"European Endocrinology","volume":"13 2","pages":"91-98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3c/93/euendo-13-91.PMC5813472.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Endocrinology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17925/EE.2017.13.02.91","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/8/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Introduction: The structured Benefit-risk Action Team (BRAT) approach aims to assist healthcare decision makers in treatment assessments. We applied BRAT to compare the benefit-risk profile of ranibizumab 0.5 mg versus laser photocoagulation for the treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DMO).

Methods: One-year data for the ranibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata (PRN) and laser arms of the phase III trials RESPOND (NCT01135914; n=220), RESTORE (NCT00687804; n=345), and REVEAL (NCT00989989; n=396) were included in the analysis. The benefit measures included ≥10 letters gain/avoidance of loss in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), achieving central retinal thickness (CRT) <275 μm, and 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) outcomes. The risks measures included endophthalmitis, intraocular pressure increase, hypertension, proteinuria, arterial/venous thromboembolic events and deaths.

Results: Ranibizumab treatment provided significant benefits compared with laser for ≥10 letter BCVA gain at month 12 (387/1,000 versus 152/1,000 patients), CRT <275 μm at 12 months (474/1,000 versus 348/1,000 patients), and improvement of ≥6.06 on the VFQ-25 near activities subscale (325/1,000 versus 245/1,000 patients). Results for the risk measures were similar for both treatments.

Conclusions: Superior clinically relevant outcomes were observed with ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN compared with laser without compromising on safety. This analysis further supports the positive benefit-risk profile of ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

雷尼单抗治疗糖尿病黄斑水肿-雷尼单抗0.5 mg PRN与激光治疗的获益-风险分析
结构化的利益-风险行动小组(BRAT)方法旨在帮助医疗保健决策者进行治疗评估。我们应用BRAT比较了0.5 mg雷尼珠单抗与激光光凝治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DMO)的获益-风险。方法:雷尼珠单抗0.5 mg prore nata (PRN)和III期临床试验response (NCT01135914;n=220), RESTORE (NCT00687804;n=345), REVEAL (NCT00989989;N =396)纳入分析。获益指标包括最佳矫正视力(BCVA)增加≥10个字母/避免损失,达到视网膜中央厚度(CRT)结果:与激光相比,雷尼单抗治疗在第12个月的最佳矫正视力(BCVA)增加≥10个字母提供了显著的益处(387/ 1000 vs 152/ 1000), CRT结论:与激光相比,雷尼单抗0.5 mg PRN治疗的临床相关结果优于雷尼单抗,且不影响安全性。该分析进一步支持了雷尼单抗0.5 mg PRN的正获益-风险概况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Endocrinology
European Endocrinology Medicine-Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信