Purchase this article with an account.
Lingkun Kong, Amit R Bhatt, Ann B Demny, Paul G Steinkuller; Comparison of Serum Concentrations of Bevacizumab and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Levels in Laser and Bevacizumab Treated ROP Patients. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):5926.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To measure serum levels of Bevacizumab and VEGF in infants who were treated with intravitreal injection of Bevacizumab (IVB) or laser for type 1 ROP, and to observe the effects on systemic development.
Fourteen infants with type 1 ROP were treated with either 0.625 mg intravitreal injection of Bevacizumab or laser (7 infants in each group). Blood samples were collected before treatment and on post-treatment days 2, 14, 42, 60 and 80. Serum levels of Bevacizumab and VEGF were measured on each sample with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and were correlated with systemic and ocular clinical conditions. Body weight gains were documented weekly until 50 weeks post natal age.
1) The serum level of Bevacizumab was detected at 2 days after intravitreal injection, peaked at 14 days, and persisted as long as 2 months. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis showed that about 3.0% injected Bevacizumab was exposed to infants. 2) Serum VEGF level decreased in both groups after the treatment and most significantly in the IVB group 2 days after treatment, p=0.02. There was no significant difference 14 days later, p=0.8.3) There were no significant differences in the systemic complications. There were no significant negative impacts of VEGF level changes on the body weight gain, 119.1 ± 5.0 gram/week in the IVB-treated group and 118.6 ± 4.2 gram/week in the laser-treated group (mean ± SD).
Bevacizumab escapes into systemic circulation after intravitreal injection and persists for 2 months. Serum VEGF level decreased after both laser and Bevacizumab treatment, but the decrease was more significant in the Bevacizumab treated group. There were no significant developmental differences between these two groups.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only