June 2015
Volume 56, Issue 7
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2015
Evaluation of ranibizumab for macular ischemia in retinal vein occlusion: evidence from the BRIGHTER and CRYSTAL studies
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jordi Mones
    Institut de la Macula de la Retina, Barcelona, Spain
    Barcelona Macula Foundation, Barcelona, Spain
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Jordi Mones, Alcon (C), Alcon (F), Alcon (R), Allergan (C), Bayer (C), Bayer (F), Bayer (R), Genentech (C), Genentech (R), Notal Vision (C), Notal Vision (I), Novartis (C), Novartis (R), Ophthotech (C), Ophthotech (F), Ophthotech (I), Ophthotech (R), Roche (C), Roche (R)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2015, Vol.56, 5803. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jordi Mones, ; Evaluation of ranibizumab for macular ischemia in retinal vein occlusion: evidence from the BRIGHTER and CRYSTAL studies. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2015;56(7 ):5803.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract
 
Purpose
 

Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is commonly associated with retinal ischemia, which may have an impact on prognosis and disease management. Whilst interventional RVO studies have typically included assessments of retinal perfusion, the criteria frequently differ between studies. Here, we report the grading criteria for ischemia and the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) outcomes based on patient’s baseline ischemic status from the BRIGHTER and CRYSTAL studies.

 
Methods
 

BRIGHTER and CRYSTAL are two ongoing 24-month (M) studies assessing the long-term efficacy and safety of a stabilization criteria-driven pro re nata ranibizumab 0.5 mg (RBZ) dosing regimen in patients with branch and central RVO (BRVO and CRVO). In BRIGHTER, patients with BRVO (N=455) were randomized (2:2:1) to RBZ (n=183), RBZ+laser (n=180) or laser (n=92) alone. In CRYSTAL, all patients with CRVO (N=357) were assigned to RBZ treatment. In both studies, retinal ischemia (assessed by Central Reading Centre) was defined as capillary loss (mild, moderate, severe or completely destroyed) in at least one location of the center, inner or outer subfield based on Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) grading. The endpoint was mean BCVA from baseline to M6 (BRIGHTER) and M12 (CRYSTAL) based on baseline ischemic status.

 
Results
 

In BRIGHTER, at baseline for the RBZ, RBZ+laser and laser arms, the mean BCVA was 60.7, 58.7, and 56.8 letters (ischemic) and 60.6, 60.3, and 60.6 letters (non-ischemic), respectively. Ischemia was present in 40-48.1% of patients across treatment groups (Table 1). At M6, significant BCVA gains were observed with RBZ or RBZ+laser vs laser, regardless of ischemic status (ischemic: 74.9 or 73.1 vs 64.7; non-ischemic: 72.5 or 72.2 vs 63.3, Fig.1). In CRYSTAL, 30% of patients had ischemia at baseline and the mean baseline BCVA was 54.5 (ischemic) and 55.5 (non-ischemic) letters. The mean BCVA improved to 66.1 and 67.7 letters at M12 in ischemic and non-ischemic patients, respectively (Fig.1).

 
Conclusions
 

The BRIGHTER and CRYSTAL studies demonstrated that the flexible administration of RBZ is an effective therapy for BRVO and CRVO patients regardless of baseline ischemic status. Greater alignment on grading and reporting of retinal perfusion status in clinical studies should be considered.  

 
 
Figure 1: Mean BCVA over time based on baseline ischemia status
 
Figure 1: Mean BCVA over time based on baseline ischemia status

 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×