Explore the vast range of titles available.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229231.].

Purpose To assess 6-month outcomes of switching from aflibercept to faricimab in eyes with refractory neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) previously requiring monthly injections. Methods This multicenter retrospective study examined nAMD eyes receiving monthly aflibercept injections switched to faricimab administered monthly up to 4 injections followed by injections at a minimum of 2-month intervals as per drug labeling. Data regarding age, sex, number of previous injections, treatment intervals, and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were collected. Central retinal thickness (CRT), subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT), and maximal pigment epithelial detachment (PED) height were measured by optical coherence tomography. Results The study included 130 eyes of 124 patients. At 6 months, 53 eyes (40.8%) continued on faricimab treatment (Group 1), while 77 eyes (59.2%) discontinued faricimab for various reasons (Group 2) the most common being worse exudation. There were no significant differences between the two groups at baseline. In Group 1, CRT and SFCT significantly decreased at 1 month ( P = 0.013 and 0.008), although statistical significance was lost at 6 months ( P = 0.689 and 0.052). BCVA and maximal PED height showed no significant changes; however, mean treatment intervals were extended from 4.4 ± 0.5 weeks at baseline to 8.7 ± 1.7 weeks at 6 months ( P < 0.001) in Group 1. No clear predictors of response were identified. Conclusion Switching from aflibercept to faricimab allowed for extension of treatment intervals from monthly to bimonthly in roughly 40% of eyes, suggesting that faricimab may be considered in refractory nAMD cases.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) activates host’s anti-tumor immune response by blocking negative regulatory immune signals. A series of clinical trials showed that ICI could effectively induce tumor regression in a subset of advanced cancer patients. In clinical practice, a main concerning for choosing ICI is the low response rate. Even though multiple predictive biomarkers such as PD-L1 expression, mismatch-repair deficiency, and status of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes have been adopted for patient selection, frequent resistance to ICI monotherapy has not been completely resolved. However, some recent studies indicated that ICI resistance could be alleviated by combination therapy with anti-angiogenesis treatment. Actually, anti-angiogenesis therapy not only prunes blood vessel which is essential to cancer growth and metastasis, but also reprograms the tumor immune microenvironment. Preclinical studies demonstrated that the efficacy of combination therapy of ICI and anti-angiogenesis was superior to monotherapy. In mice model, combination therapy could effectively increase the ratio of anti-tumor/pro-tumor immune cell and decrease the expression of multiple immune checkpoints more than PD-1. Based on exciting results from preclinical studies, many clinical trials were deployed to investigate the synergistic effect of the combination therapy and acquired promising outcome. This review summarized the latest understanding of ICI combined anti-angiogenesis therapy and highlighted the advances of relevant clinical trials.

Background and Objectives: Faricimab is the first intravitreal injection of vascular endothelial growth factor-A and angiopoietin-2 bispecific monoclonal antibody. Here, we evaluate the functional and anatomical outcomes of faricimab treatment in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) that was refractory to ranibizumab or aflibercept. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective, observational, consecutive-case study of patients who had DME that was refractory to treatment with ranibizumab or aflibercept and were treated with faricimab between July 2022 and January 2023 under a pro re nata regimen. All the participants were followed for ≥4 months after the initiation of faricimab. The primary outcome was a recurrence interval of ≥12 weeks, and the secondary outcomes were the changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT). Results: We analyzed 18 eyes of 18 patients. The mean recurrence interval of previous anti-VEGF injection was 5.8 ± 2.5 weeks, which was significantly extended to 10.8 ± 4.9 weeks (p = 0.0005) by the switch to faricimab. Eight patients (44.4%) achieved a recurrence interval of ≥12 weeks. A history of subtenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide (p = 0.0034) and the presence of disorganization of the retinal inner layers (p = 0.0326) were found to be significantly associated with a recurrence interval of <12 weeks. The mean BCVAs were 0.23 ± 0.28 logMAR and 0.19 ± 0.23 logMAR, and the mean CMTs were 473.8 ± 222.0 µm and 381.3 ± 219.4 µm at baseline and 4 months, respectively, but these changes were not statistically significant. None of the patients experienced serious adverse events. Conclusions: Faricimab may extend the treatment interval for patients with DME that is refractory to ranibizumab or aflibercept. DME previously treated with the subtenon injection of triamcinolone acetonide or associated with disorganization of the retinal inner layers may be less likely to be associated with a longer recurrence interval after switching to faricimab.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) are common retinal vascular diseases responsible for most blindness in the working-age and older population in developed countries. Currently, anti-VEGF agents that block VEGF family ligands, including ranibizumab, bevacizumab (off-label use), brolucizumab, and aflibercept, are the first-line treatment for nAMD and DME. However, due to the complex pathophysiological background of nAMD and DME, non-response, resistance during anti-VEGF therapy, and relapses of the disease are still observed. Moreover, frequent injections are a psychological and economic burden for patients, leading to inadequate adhesion to therapy and a higher risk of complications. Therefore, therapeutic methods are strongly needed to develop and improve, allowing for more satisfactory disease management and lower treatment burden. Currently, the Ang/Tie-2 pathway is a promising therapeutic target for retinal vascular diseases. Faricimab is the first bispecific monoclonal antibody for intravitreal use that can neutralize VEGF and Ang-2. Due to the prolonged activity, faricimab allows extending the interval between successive injections up to three or four months in nAMD and DME patients, which can be a significant benefit for patients and an alternative to implanted drug delivery systems.

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is a major cause of visual impairment and blindness. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents, such as ranibizumab, bevacizumab, aflibercept, brolucizumab and faricimab have revolutionized the clinical management of nAMD. However, there remains an unmet clinical need for new and improved therapies for nAMD, since many patients do not respond optimally, may lose response over time or exhibit sub-optimal durability, impacting on real world effectiveness. Evidence is emerging that targeting VEGF-A alone, as most agents have done until recently, may be insufficient and agents that target multiple pathways (e.g., aflibercept, faricimab and others in development) may be more efficacious. This article reviews issues and limitations that have arisen from the use of existing anti-VEGF agents, and argues that the future may lie in multi-targeted therapies including alternative agents and modalities that target both the VEGF ligand/receptor system as well as other pathways.

PurposeTo compare treatment efficacy of anti-VEGF medications following pro re nata (PRN, “as needed”, monthly injections only in case of active disease) or treat and extend (T&E, progressive extension of treatment intervals up to 12 weeks depending on the clinical findings) treatment protocols in real-world conditions.MethodsRetrospective, observational study. Patients diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration and without pre-treatment undergoing routine anti-VEGF treatment in one eye clinic in Switzerland were included. Treatment was performed according to local practices, using ranibizumab or aflibercept, and following T&E or PRN regimens. Changes in logMAR and injection intervals (time between two injections) for specific treatment periods were evaluated descriptively and using mixed models.ResultsIn total, 1071 patients with 1332 treated eyes (ranibizumab/PRN 722, ranibizumab/T&E 191, aflibercept/T&E 419) were included in the analyses. At baseline, logMAR (mean ± SD) was similar in both ranibizumab treatment groups (PRN 0.63 ± 0.43, T&E 0.57 ± 0.42). In the ranibizumab/PRN group, logMAR was about 0.1 lower for all time intervals in the initial and maintenance phases in comparison with baseline, indicating an improvement in VA. By comparison, logMAR improved more strongly in the ranibizumab/T&E group (16 to < 22 months, − 0.19 [− 0.23–0.15]) in comparison with baseline. Comparing ranibizumab/T&E vs. aflibercept/T&E groups, improvements in logMAR were similar over time. In the maintenance phase, the rate of patients with a clinically relevant improvement in visual acuity (> 0.2 logMAR) was higher in both T&E groups compared with the ranibizumab/PRN group. Injection intervals in the maintenance phase in ranibizumab/T&E group gradually expanded over time; whereas in the aflibercept/T&E group, injection intervals remained relatively stable.ConclusionsRanibizumab used according to T&E protocol yielded a stronger improvement in logMAR, compared with PRN protocol with longer injection intervals than aflibercept/T&E. This large real-world data assessment supports previous data on the superiority of T&E treatment.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of switching from bevacizumab to ranibizumab or aflibercept in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) unresponsive to bevacizumab. Methods: Single-center retrospective comparative study of patients with DME unresponsive to intravitreal bevacizumab that was switched to ranibizumab or aflibercept. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central foveal thickness (CFT) were analysed prior to and 4 months after the switch. Ocular coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers were also analysed. Results: Fifty-six eyes from 40 patients were included in the study, 33 eyes switched to ranibizumab and 23 to aflibercept. A significant median CFT decrease was observed in both groups (p<0.001), with no between-group differences. BCVA gain was only significant in the ranibizumab group (p<0.001). None of the pre-baseline or baseline parameters were associated with the response to ranibizumab or aflibercept. Conclusion: In persistent DME unresponsive to bevacizumab, both anatomical and functional improvements were observed with ranibizumab whereas aflibercept only showed an anatomical improvement.

Intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents is increasingly used for the treatment of a wide variety of retinal diseases, including age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy and retinal vascular occlusions, and retinopathy of prematurity. Despite encouraging results in halting the disease and improving the vision, intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents may be associated with systemic adverse events and devastating ocular complications. In this review, we provide an overview of safety data for intravitreal injection of common anti-VEGF agents.

Background Intravitreal anti–vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy is now considered the gold standard for the treatment of various retinal disorders. As therapy has evolved, so too have the treatment regimens employed by physicians in clinical practice; however, visual outcomes observed in the real world have typically not reflected those reported in clinical trials. Possible reasons for this include a lack of consensus on treatment regimens and a lack of clarity about what the aims of treatment should be. Methods The Vision Academy Steering Committee met to discuss the principles of an ideal treatment regimen, using evidence from the literature to substantiate each point. Literature searches were performed using the MEDLINE/PubMed database (cut-off date: March 2016) and restricted to English-language publications. Studies with fewer than ten patients were excluded from this review. Results The Steering Committee identified the following four key principles for the ideal treatment regimen for anti-VEGF management of retinal diseases: Maximize and maintain visual acuity (VA) benefits for all patients Decide when to treat next, rather than whether to treat now Titrate the treatment intervals to match patients’ needs Treat at each monitoring visit. Conclusions It is proposed that the adoption of a proactive and more personalized approach in the clinic such as a treat-and-extend regimen will lead to benefits for both the patient and the physician, through a reduction in the associated treatment burden and better utilization of clinic resources. Implementation of the four principles should also lead to better VA outcomes for each patient, with a minimized risk of vision loss.