A key question for consideration is the apparent discrepancy between the relatively good clinical safety profile of verteporfin PDT and the various morphologic and functional toxic side effects documented in our study. Several factors may play a role. First, the accumulation of subretinal fluid accompanying CNV and the presence of CNV itself may have a protective role in sparing the normal choroidal vasculature from the occlusive effect of PDT. Subretinal fluid accumulates because of the leakiness of the CNV vessels in a substantial number of patients with ARMD
38 50 51 and may act as a filter absorbing some of the long-wavelength light used for photoactivation of the drug. Second, it can also act as a singlet oxygen “trap,” allowing a sizable portion of the singlet oxygen molecules to be released in the fluid with less direct cytotoxic effects to the surrounding tissue.
52 This might explain to some extent why the treatment of larger lesions was less effective through PDT.
53 Theoretically, a third factor could be the use of repetitive flashes for fundus photography and FA at the day 1 and day 3 follow-up visits. They might have caused reactivation of the drug and contributed to the severity of the observed effects. To avoid delayed photosensitization, it is generally recommended that patients stay away from bright light and direct sun exposure up to 5 days after treatment. However, it has been shown that photosensitization is rare in humans (no difference has been observed in the frequency of dermatologic adverse effects from treatment with verteporfin and placebo
12 ), and we did not observe skin photosensitization in our animals. Even more, the half-life of the drug in the retina is 5 to 6 hours in humans
54 and shorter in other species.
55 Additionally, it has been confirmed that verteporfin is cleared from the outer retina approximately 2 hours after injection.
56 Therefore, it seems unlikely that enough drug remained at the 24-hour or the 72-hour follow-up examinations to be photoactivated and exert additional damage. A fourth factor could be the difference in melanin content. The amount of melanin in the monkey choroid is higher than in the human choroid (Oyejide A, Tzekov R, unpublished results, 2005). Melanin is usually protective from light damage, but once it is oxidized it loses this capability
57 58 and may instead become cytotoxic.
59 Our histopathologic data confirmed localized melanin pigment dispersion and clumping at 9 months, possibly explaining the substantial discoloration of the fundus after PDT. However, it is unclear to what extent the oxidation of choroidal melanin may contribute to functional and morphologic changes in the neural retina. A fifth factor could be the difference in tissue reactivity between an aged human eye, which is usually the subject of PDT treatment in a clinical setting, and a relatively younger monkey eye as used in this experiment. An indication of such difference might be the reported occurrence of RPE changes after PDT in mostly younger patients without ARMD (discussed earlier). Finally, a sixth factor may be the recently popularized practice of combining triamcinolone acetonide with PDT to attenuate some of this toxicity.
41