Purchase this article with an account.
Sérgio Leal, João Figueira, Luísa Ribeiro, Maria Luz Cachulo, Rufino Silva, Sandrina Nunes, Ana Pedroso, Miguel Costa, Jose Cunha-Vaz; Combination of intravitreal injection of Pegaptanib plus progressive PRP versus full PRP alone in patients with High Risk Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):2439.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To evaluate safety and efficacy of intravitreal (ITV) injection of pegaptanib combined with progressive panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) versus full PRP alone in the regression of retinal neovascularization in eyes with high-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy (HR-PDR).
Twenty-two patients were included in a prospective, randomized, open label exploratory, phase II study to assess safety and efficacy of pegaptanib (0.3 mg ITV injections)+progressive PRP and full PRP alone in the treatment of patients with HR-PDR without previous laser treatment. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to one treatment arm: standard photocoagulation (PRP according the Diabetic Retinopathy Study; DRS), or combination treatment of pegaptanib ITV injections+progressive PRP (2 weeks±1 week after the first injection, starting with DRS third ring, extending from the ora serrata to the mid-periphery with coalescing spots followed, if needed, by the DRS second and first ring). One eye was selected and treated as the study eye. Patients underwent at baseline, months 3, 6 and 12: Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA), Color Fundus Photography (CFP), Fluorescein Angiography (FA), Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography (SD-OCT) and Visual Fields (VF). Retinal neovascularization (NV) was measured in disc area units based on CFP and/or FA.
20 patients completed the first 6 months of follow-up (16 males and 4 females). Age ranged from 38 to 76 (mean±SD: 54.8±9.9 years). Mean HbA1C was 7.9±1.5% and the systolic and diastolic blood pressure was respectively of 142.4±11.1 and 79.7±6.3 mmHg. From baseline to month-6, in the pegaptanib+ PRP group the BCVA decreased less (PRP: 77.8±8.4 to 71.6±15.7, P=0.075; pegaptanib+PRP: 69.0±15.6 to 68.1±20.9, P=0.651); RT showed a lower increase (PRP: 321.1±151.4 to 394.0±183.9, P=0.012; pegaptanib+PRP: 411.1±190.7 to 479.3±252.4, P=0.327); and VF was better maintained (PRP: 37.8±18.4 to 31.7±19.7, P=0.044; pegaptanib+PRP: 28.6±16.8 to 27.1±18.5, P=0.202). NV regression was similar in both groups (PRP: 3.1±4.9 to 2.6±3.5, P=0.678; pegaptanib+PRP: 3.2±2.7 to 2.5±2.7, P=0.213).
The association of ITV pegaptanib with progressive PRP showed at 6-months better preservation of BCVA, lower increase in RT and better maintained VF than full PRP alone, but without major differences in NV regression.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only