April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
Impact of Concomitant Aqueous Suppressants on PRN Treatment with Ranibizumab in the 24 Month HARBOR Study
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Mathew MacCumber
    Ophthalmology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
  • Howard Shapiro
    Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA
  • Lisa Tuomi
    Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Mathew MacCumber, Allergan (C), ArcticDx (C), Genentech (C), Regeneron (C), Thrombogenics (C); Howard Shapiro, Genentech (E); Lisa Tuomi, Genentech (E)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 3967. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Mathew MacCumber, Howard Shapiro, Lisa Tuomi; Impact of Concomitant Aqueous Suppressants on PRN Treatment with Ranibizumab in the 24 Month HARBOR Study. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):3967.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose: Aqueous suppressants may prolong the clinical effect of intraocular water-soluble drugs such as ranibizumab (RBZ) and reduce the need for as-needed (PRN) retreatment in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (wet AMD). This subanalysis of the phase III HARBOR study evaluated whether the use of select aqueous suppressants (ie, beta blockers [BB] and/or carbonic anhydrase inhibitors [CAI]) reduced the number of RBZ injections required over 24 months in patients with wet AMD.

Methods: Patients in the 0.5 mg and 2.0 mg PRN arms of HARBOR (n=475) who received 3 monthly loading doses followed by PRN treatment were categorized based on concomitant therapy for any use vs non-use of a BB, CAI, or a combined BB with CAI (timolol/dorzolamide). Non-use may include other aqueous suppressants. Concomitant medication was classified as oral (O; ie, systemic) or topical (T); topical treatment was stratified by study or fellow eye, but only the study eye was evaluated. No restrictions based on start date or duration of the concomitant therapy were considered for this analysis. Injection frequency outcomes were calculated as the total number of RBZ injections administered through month 24 and the average number of injections received per year over 2 years.

Results: In total, 207 patients in the RBZ PRN groups received concomitant therapy with aqueous suppressants: BBO (n=176), CAIO (n=2), BBT (n=22), CAIT (n=6), and BB with CAI (n=1). The total number of RBZ injections through month 24 was not significantly different between use and non-use of BBO (12.6 vs 13.3), BBO/CAIO (12.5 vs 13.4), BBT (13.7 vs 13.0), CAIT (13.8 vs 13.0), or BBT/CAIT (13.5 vs 13.0). Similarly, the average number of RBZ injections per year over 2 years was not significantly different between use and non-use of BBO (6.3 vs 6.7), BBO/CAIO (6.3 vs 6.7), BBT (6.9 vs 6.5), BBT/CAIT (6.7 vs 6.5), or CAIT (6.9 vs 6.5).

Conclusions: Through 24 months of HARBOR, BBO usage resulted in slightly fewer injections compared with non-use, while BBT or CAIT usage resulted in slightly more injections compared with non-use; however, neither finding was significant. Small patient sample sizes for topical treatment limit the strength of inference. Future analyses may examine whether a minimum duration of concomitant therapy with aqueous suppressants is required to significantly impact injection frequency.

Keywords: 412 age-related macular degeneration • 466 clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: treatment/prevention assessment/controlled clinical trials • 748 vascular endothelial growth factor  

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.