June 2021
Volume 62, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2021
Long-term efficacy and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus fixed or PRN regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Daniel Rosenberg
    Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Deven Deonarain
    McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Jonah Gould
    Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Amirthan Sothivannan
    Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Mark Phillips
    McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Varun Chaudhary
    McMaster University Department of Surgery, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Daniel Rosenberg, None; Deven Deonarain, None; Jonah Gould, None; Amirthan Sothivannan, None; Mark Phillips, None; Varun Chaudhary, Allergan (F), Bayer (C), Bayer (F), Novartis (C), Novartis (F)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2021, Vol.62, 3109. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Daniel Rosenberg, Deven Deonarain, Jonah Gould, Amirthan Sothivannan, Mark Phillips, Varun Chaudhary; Long-term efficacy and treatment burden of treat-and-extend versus fixed or PRN regimens for nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):3109.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To compare efficacy and treatment burden of a treat-and-extend (T&E) anti-VEGF treatment of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) against fixed and pro re nata (PRN) schedules.

Methods : MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched from 2004 to August 2020. Randomized-controlled trials and observational studies comparing T&E to PRN or fixed dosing for treatment-naïve AMD patients were included. Mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for visual acuity (VA) and injection frequency are presented. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. Methodology was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

Results : 6 RCTs and 5 observational studies were identified. VA improvement was similar for eyes receiving T&E and fixed dosing at one (743 eyes T&E, 725 eyes fixed; MD -0.08 letters, 95% CI -2.52-2.36, p = 0.95, I2 = 69%) and two years (260 eyes T&E, 249 eyes fixed; MD 0.58 letters, 95% CI -1.74-2.90, p = 0.62, I2 = 0%). In contrast, visual acuity improvements were significantly greater for T&E eyes when compared against a PRN regimen at one (525 eyes T&E, 748 eyes PRN; MD 3.95 letters, 95% CI 2.13-5.77, p < 0.0001, I2 = 40%) and two years (85 eyes T&E, 187 eyes PRN; MD 4.08 letters, 95% CI 1.67-6.49, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%). Significantly fewer ranibizumab injections were administered in the T&E arm at one (628 eyes T&E, 604 eyes fixed; MD –2.42 injections, 95% CI -2.71 to -2.14, p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%) and two years (267 eyes T&E, 249 eyes fixed; MD –6.06 injections, 95% CI -6.79 to -5.34, p < 0.00001, I2 = 17%) relative to fixed dosing. Fewer aflibercept injections were likewise administered to patients on a T&E regimen versus fixed dosing at one year (127 eyes T&E, 124 eyes fixed; MD –0.78 injections, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.42, p < 0.0001, I2 = 53%). No studies compared T&E to fixed aflibercept at two years. Significant heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis of injection frequency among studies comparing T&E to PRN dosing.

Conclusions : T&E preserves VA similar to fixed schedules with significantly fewer injections at one and two years. Patients on a PRN regimen receive fewer injections than those on T&E dosing, but with less favourable visual outcomes. Additional studies are required for more robust meta-analysis of anti-VEGF injection frequency at 1 year and beyond.

This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

×
×

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.

×