Explore the vast range of titles available.

AimsTo demonstrate non-inferiority of ranibizumab treat-and-extend (T&E) with/without laser to ranibizumab pro re nata (PRN) for best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DMO).MethodsA 24-month single-masked study with patients randomised 1:1:1 to T&E+laser (n=121), T&E (n=128) or PRN (control; n=123). All patients received monthly injections until BCVA stabilisation. The investigator decided on re-treatment in the PRN and treatment-interval adaptations in the T&E groups based on loss of BCVA stability due to DMO activity. Likewise, laser treatment was at investigator's discretion. Collectively, these features reflect a real-life scenario. Endpoints included mean average change in BCVA from baseline to months 1–12 (primary), mean BCVA change from baseline to months 12 and 24, treatment exposure and safety profile.ResultsBoth T&E regimens were non-inferior to PRN based on mean average BCVA change from baseline to months 1–12 (T&E+laser: +5.9 and T&E: +6.1 vs PRN: +6.2 letters; both p<0.0001). Mean BCVA change at month 24 was similar across groups (+8.3, +6.5 and +8.1 letters, respectively). The mean number of injections was 12.4 and 12.8 in the T&E+laser and T&E groups and 10.7 in the PRN group. The T&E regimens showed 46% reduction in the number of clinic visits. Over 70% of patients maintained their BCVA, with treatment intervals of ≥2 months over 24 months. Safety profile was consistent with that described in the product information.ConclusionsT&E is a feasible treatment option for patients with DMO, with a potential to reduce treatment burden. Slightly more injections were required versus PRN, likely due to the specifics of the T&E regimen applied here.Trial registration numberNCT01171976.

Purpose To describe treatment patterns in patients diagnosed with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), or diabetic macular edema (DME), newly-treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents as recorded in the Japanese Medical Data Center (JMDC) database. Study design This non-interventional, descriptive, retrospective, observational cohort study included insured Japanese patients aged ≥ 21 and ≤ 75 years at index date (anti-VEGF treatment initiation). Methods Patients with minimum one claim in JMDC database with a diagnosis code for nAMD, RVO, or DME between October 2007–May 2015 and with minimum of one claim for anti-VEGF agents on or after the date of diagnosis were included. Frequency and proportion of claims submitted for anti-VEGF injections were assessed during 12 months post-index date. Results The median (interquartile range) number of claims for anti-VEGF injections during 12 months post-index date were 3 (1, 4) for nAMD (n = 255), 2 (1, 3) for RVO (n = 223) and 2 (1, 4) for DME (n = 125) patients. Frequencies of nAMD, RVO and DME patients with one or more claims for a retinal disease treatment other than an anti-VEGF agent were 4 (1.57%), 59 (26.46%) and 68 (54.40%) during the 12 months pre-index date and 21 (8.24%), 85 (38.12%) and 62 (49.60%) in the 12 months post-index date, respectively. Conclusions The median number of anti-VEGF injections per patient was lower than those reported in clinical trials. Although various pre- and concomitant treatments were used in RVO and DME, anti-VEGF monotherapy was the first-line treatment in > 90% of nAMD patients.

There are few therapeutic options for the prevention of gastrointestinal mucosal damage caused by low-dose aspirin. We therefore investigated the efficacy of famotidine, a well-tolerated histamine H 2-receptor antagonist, in the prevention of peptic ulcers and erosive oesophagitis in patients receiving low-dose aspirin for vascular protection. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) from the cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and diabetes clinics at Crosshouse Hospital, Kilmarnock, UK, were eligible for enrolment in this phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial if they were taking aspirin 75–325 mg per day with or without other cardioprotective drugs. Patients without ulcers or erosive oesophagitis on endoscopy at baseline were randomly assigned by computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive famotidine 20 mg twice daily (n=204) or placebo twice daily (n=200). Patients had a final endoscopic examination at 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the development of new ulcers in the stomach or duodenum or erosive oesophagitis at 12 weeks after randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat, including all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug (famotidine or placebo). This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Clinical Trial, number ISRCTN96975557. All randomised patients received at least one dose and were included in the ITT population. 82 patients (famotidine, n=33; placebo, n=49) did not have the final endoscopic examination and were assumed to have had normal findings; the main reason for participant withdrawal was refusal to continue. At 12 weeks, comparing patients assigned to famotidine with patients assigned to placebo, gastric ulcers had developed in seven (3·4%) of 204 patients compared with 30 (15·0%) of 200 patients (odds ratio [OR] 0·20, 95% CI 0·09–0·47; p=0·0002); duodenal ulcers had developed in one (0·5%) patient compared with 17 (8·5%; OR 0·05, 0·01–0·40; p=0·0045); and erosive oesophagitis in nine (4·4%) compared with 38 (19·0%; OR 0·20, 0·09–0·42; p<0·0001), respectively. There were fewer adverse events in the famotidine group than in the placebo group (nine vs 15); four patients in the placebo group were admitted to hospital with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. The other most common adverse event was angina (famotidine, n=2; placebo, n=4). Famotidine is effective in the prevention of gastric and duodenal ulcers, and erosive oesophagitis in patients taking low-dose aspirin. These findings widen the therapeutic options for the prevention of gastrointestinal damage in patients needing vascular protection. Merck Laboratories and Astellas Pharma.

Compare the efficacy of ranibizumab, aflibercept, laser, and sham in the first-line treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) to inform technology assessments such as those conducted by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, congress abstracts, ClinicalTrials.gov registry and Novartis data on file. Studies reporting 6- or 12-month results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating at least two of ranibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata, aflibercept 2.0 mg bi-monthly, laser photocoagulation or sham. Study quality was assessed based on likelihood of bias in selection, attrition, detection and performance. Improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) measured as the proportion of patients gaining ≥10 letters on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study scale. The outcome was chosen following acceptance by NICE of a Markov model with 10-letter health states in the assessment of ranibizumab for DME. Bayesian network meta-analyses with fixed and random effects adjusted for differences in baseline BCVA or central retinal thickness. The analysis included 1,978 patients from eight RCTs. The random effects model adjusting for baseline BCVA was the best model based on total residual. The efficacy of ranibizumab was numerically, but not statistically, superior to aflibercept (odds ratio [OR] 1.59; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.61-5.37). Ranibizumab and aflibercept were statistically superior to laser monotherapy with ORs of 5.50 (2.73-13.16) and 3.45 (1.62-6.84) respectively. The probability that ranibizumab is the most efficacious treatment was 73% compared with 14% for aflibercept, 12% for ranibizumab plus laser, and 0% for laser. Three of the eight RCTs included are not yet published. The models did not adjust for all potential effect modifiers. Ranibizumab was non-significantly superior to aflibercept and both anti-VEGF therapies had statistically superior efficacy to laser.

Background In EXPAND (NCT01665144), a phase 3 randomized clinical trial, siponimod reduced disability progression versus placebo in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). Aim To understand how a real-world population with SPMS relates to that in EXPAND, we conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study using the German NeuroTransData (NTD) multiple sclerosis (MS) registry. Methods The NTD MS registry is run by a Germany-wide network of physicians. Two cross-sectional analyses were performed using the NTD MS registry. The first included patients with SPMS, as recorded in the registry, and compared their characteristics between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2018 with patients in EXPAND. The second described the characteristics of patients in the registry at the time of diagnosis of SPMS between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2018. Results The first analysis included 773 patients: patients were older in the NTD MS registry than in EXPAND (mean age, 57.9 vs 48.0 years) and had a longer duration of SPMS (mean, 6.2 vs 3.8 years). In the NTD MS registry, median Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores were comparable to EXPAND (6.0 versus 6.0), although fewer patients had relapses in the previous 24 months (16% vs 36% [siponimod] and 37% [placebo]). Data on gadolinium-enhancing lesions were only available for 5.8% of patients in the NTD MS registry. The second analysis included 916 patients: at the time of SPMS diagnosis, the mean age was 53.2 years and the median EDSS score was 5.0. Conclusion The population in the NTD MS registry was older to that in EXPAND, but were similar in terms of disability. Differences likely reflect the inclusion criteria of EXPAND but also highlight that real-world populations encompass a wider range of patient characteristics.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the contribution of MRI activity and relapses in defining disease activity in Secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) patients by analysing real-world data from Adelphi real-world MS Disease Specific Programme (Adelphi-MS-DSP) and to understand whether active SPMS (aSPMS) and non-active SPMC (naSPMS) are mutually exclusive groups in EXPAND.MethodsAdelphi-MS-DSP was a non-interventional, multinational real-world study (N=37,318). Patients were categorised into aSPMS (⩾1 new lesion on the most recent MRI and/or ⩾1 relapse in the last 12-months) and naSPMS groups. In EXPAND, disease activity was defined as relapses in the 2-years before screening and with/without ⩾1 gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) T1 lesion at baseline. Demographics, MRI and relapse status were analysed descriptively.ResultsSPMS from the Adelphi-MS-DSP were categorised as aSPMS (n=1889) and naSPMS (n=665). Disease activity for aSPMS was based on MRI lesions (59.1%), relapses (12.6%), and both (28.3%). In EXPAND, 52.6% of patients (n/N=866/1645) who had no relapse in the 2-years prior to screening and no Gd+ T1 lesions at baseline were categorised under naSPMS; of these who were on placebo, 52.7% experienced on-study relapse and/or MRI activity.ConclusionsIn both real-world and clinical studies, MRI activity appears to be a more sensitive measure of disease activity versus relapses. Funding: Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of approved treatments for macular oedema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO).DesignRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of approved treatments for macular oedema secondary to BRVO were identified from an updated systematic review.SettingA Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs of treatments for macular oedema secondary to BRVO.InterventionsRanibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata, aflibercept 2 mg monthly (2q4), dexamethasone 0.7 mg implant, laser photocoagulation, ranibizumab+laser, or sham intervention. Bevacizumab and triamcinolone were excluded.Outcome measuresEfficacy outcomes were mean change in best corrected visual acuity (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study scale) and the percentage of patients gaining ≥15 letters. Safety outcome was the percentage of patients with increased intraocular pressure (IOP)/ocular hypertension (OH).Results8 RCTs were identified for inclusion with 1743 adult patients. The probability of being the most efficacious treatment at month 6 or 12 based on letters gained was 54% for ranibizumab monotherapy, 30% for aflibercept, 16% for ranibizumab plus laser (adjunctive or prompt), and 0% for dexamethasone implant, laser or sham. The probability of being the most efficacious treatment for patients gaining ≥15 letters was 39% for aflibercept, 35% for ranibizumab monotherapy, 24% for ranibizumab plus laser, 2% for dexamethasone implant, and less than 1% for laser or sham. There was no statistical difference between ranibizumab monotherapy and aflibercept for letters gained (+1.4 letters for ranibizumab vs aflibercept with 95% credible interval (CrI) of −5.2 to +8.5 letters) or the OR for gaining ≥15 letters: 1.06 (95% CrI 0.16 to 8.94)). Dexamethasone implant was associated with significantly higher IOP/OH than antivascular endothelial growth factor agents (OR 13.1 (95% CrI 1.7 to 116.9)).ConclusionsThere was no statistically significant difference between ranibizumab and aflibercept.

Introduction: Prescribing guidance for disease-modifying treatment (DMT) in multiple sclerosis (MS) is centred on a clinical diagnosis of relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS). DMT prescription guidelines and monitoring vary across countries. Standardising the approach to diagnosis of disease course, for example, assigning RRMS or secondary progressive MS (SPMS) diagnoses, allows examination of the impact of health system characteristics on the stated clinical diagnosis and treatment access. Methods: We analysed registry data from six cohorts in five countries (Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Sweden and United Kingdom) on patients with an initial diagnosis of RRMS. We standardised our approach utilising a pre-existing algorithm (DecisionTree, DT) to determine patient diagnoses of RRMS or secondary progressive MS (SPMS). We identified five global drivers of DMT prescribing: Provision, Availability, Funding, Monitoring and Audit, data were analysed against these concepts using meta-analysis and univariate meta-regression. Results: In 64,235 patients, we found variations in DMT use between countries, with higher usage in RRMS and lower usage in SPMS, with correspondingly lower usage in the UK compared to other registers. Factors such as female gender (p = 0.041), increasing disability via Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score (p = 0.004), and the presence of monitoring (p = 0.029) in SPMS influenced the likelihood of receiving DMTs. Standardising the diagnosis revealed differences in reclassification rates from clinical RRMS to DT-SPMS, with Sweden having the lowest rate Sweden (Sweden 0.009, range: Denmark 0.103 – UK portal 0.311). Those with higher EDSS at index (p < 0.03) and female gender (p < 0.049) were more likely to be reclassified from RRMS to DT-SPMS. The study also explored the impact of diagnosis on DMT usage in clinical SPMS, finding that the prescribing environment and auditing practices affected access to treatment. Discussion: This highlights the importance of a healthcare system’s approach to verifying the clinical label of MS course in facilitating appropriate prescribing, with some flexibility allowed in uncertain cases to ensure continued access to treatment.

Background Socioeconomic gradients in health persist despite public health campaigns and improvements in healthcare. The Psychosocial and Biological Determinants of Ill-health (pSoBid) study was designed to uncover novel biomarkers of chronic disease that may help explain pathways between socioeconomic adversity and poorer physical and mental health. Methods We examined links between indicators of early life adversity, possible intermediary phenotypes, and markers of ill health in adult subjects (n = 666) recruited from affluent and deprived areas. Classical and novel risk factors for chronic disease (lung function and atherosclerosis) and for cognitive performance were assessed, and associations sought with early life variables including conditions in the parental home, family size and leg length. Results Associations were observed between father's occupation, childhood home status (owner-occupier; overcrowding) and biomarkers of chronic inflammation and endothelial activation in adults (C reactive protein, interleukin 6, intercellular adhesion molecule; P < 0.0001) but not number of siblings and leg length. Lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) and cognition (Choice Reaction Time, the Stroop test, Auditory Verbal Learning Test) were likewise related to early life conditions ( P < 0.001). In multivariate models inclusion of inflammatory variables reduced the impact and independence of early life conditions on lung function and measures of cognitive ability. Including variables of adult socioeconomic status attenuated the early life associations with disease biomarkers. Conclusions Adverse levels of biomarkers of ill health in adults appear to be influenced by father's occupation and childhood home conditions. Chronic inflammation and endothelial activation may in part act as intermediary phenotypes in this complex relationship. Reducing the 'health divide' requires that these life course determinants are taken into account.

Treat and extend (T&E) is a standard treatment regimen for treating neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) with anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGFs), but the treatment intervals attained are not well documented. This retrospective, non-comparative, non-randomised study of eyes with nAMD classified treatment interval sequences in a T&E cohort in Australia using Electronic Medical Records (EMR) data. We analysed data from 632 treatment-naïve eyes from 555 patients injected with ranibizumab, aflibercept or unlicensed bevacizumab between January 2012 and June 2016 (mean baseline age 78.0). Eyes were categorised into non-overlapping clusters of interval sequences based on the first 12 months of follow-up. We identified 523 different treatment interval sequences. The largest cluster of 197 (31.5%) eyes attained an 8-week treatment interval before dropping to a shorter frequency, followed by 168 (26.8%) eyes that did not reach or attained a single 8-week interval at the end of the study period. A total of 65 (10.4%) and 83 (13.3%) eyes reached and sustained (≥2 consecutive injection intervals of the same length) an 8 and 12 weekly interval, respectively. This study demonstrates highly individualised treatment patterns in the first year of anti-VEGF therapy in Australia using T&E regimens, with the majority of patients requiring more frequent injections than once every 8 weeks.