May 2007
Volume 48, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2007
First Year Experience With Pegaptanib: Monotherapy versus Combined Therapy
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • L. Akduman
    Saint Louis University Eye Institute, St Louis, Missouri
  • B. Kaderli
    Department of Ophthalmology, Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey
  • M. Kim
    Saint Louis University Eye Institute, St Louis, Missouri
  • R. Brusatti
    O’Donnell Eye Institute, St Louis, Missouri
  • M. Jones
    Saint Louis University Eye Institute, St Louis, Missouri
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships L. Akduman, $1000 honorari from iTech and Genentech., R; B. Kaderli, None; M. Kim, None; R. Brusatti, None; M. Jones, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support Supported by the Research to Prevent Blindness (RPB) and Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK).
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2007, Vol.48, 1784. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      L. Akduman, B. Kaderli, M. Kim, R. Brusatti, M. Jones; First Year Experience With Pegaptanib: Monotherapy versus Combined Therapy. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007;48(13):1784. doi:

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose:: To review our experience with Pegaptanib in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) to determine whether outcomes would be improved by combining Pegaptanib with photodynamic therapy (PDT).

Methods:: The charts of 20 patients who presented with neovascular AMD to our university clinic and received Pegaptanib monotherapy or combined therapy with Verteporfin were retrospectively reviewed. Main outcome measures consisted of number of treatments applied, Snellen best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), angiographic lesion characteristics, and center field thickness (CFT) in optical coherence tomography.

Results:: Follow-up time was 7.7±2.7 months (range, 3 to 11 months). Ten patients (50%) were given Pegaptanib monotherapy (Group M) and 10 were given combination therapy with PDT (Group C).Patients received 2 to 9 (mean, 5.2) Pegaptanib injections. Group C received 1 to 4 (mean, 1.8) PDT treatments. Initial BCVA ranged from 20/50 to 20/3200 (mean, 20/509), final BCVA ranged from 20/70 to 20/3200 (mean, 20/759). Change in the BCVA at the last visit ranged from 2 lines of gain to 5 lines of loss (mean, 0.9 line loss). Four of the 10 eyes (40%) in Group C lost 3 lines or more. None of the eyes in Group M lost 3 lines or more vision (p=0.087). There was no significant change in the lesion size, but CFT decreased from 315±97 µm to 268±67 µm.

Conclusions:: Until prospective controlled multicenter randomized trials show significant benefit from the combination of Pegaptanib and PDT, this combination therapy should be used with caution in patients with neovascular AMD.

Keywords: age-related macular degeneration • macula/fovea • photodynamic therapy 

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.