Results of anti-VEGF treatment for neovascular AMD in eyes with different baseline visual acuity in Turkish population-based on real life data-Bosphorus retina study group


Ozturk M., Ozkaya A., Karabas L., Alagoz C., Alkın Z., Artunay O., ...Daha Fazla

Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy, cilt.42, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 42
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2023.103640
  • Dergi Adı: Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Age-related macular degeneration, Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, Baseline visual acuity, OCT, Real-life data
  • Kocaeli Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: To investigate the anatomical and visual outcomes of the patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF), according to the baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) based on the multicenter real-life data. Methods: Five-hundred-ninety patients who had taken the Pro Re Nata (PRN) treatment regimen with three loading doses and at least one year of follow-up were included. The patients were divided into three groups according to the baseline BCVA: Group 1 (BCVA ≥ 1.3 Logmar), Group 2 (1.3 Logmar > BCVA ≥ 0.3 Logmar), and Group 3 (BCVA ≤ 0.2 Logmar). BCVA, central macular thickness (CMT), and the number of injections and visits were evaluated. Results: There were 175, 322, and 93 patients in Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3, respectively. The number of visits and injections in the 1st year was not different between the groups (p = 0.58 and p = 0.08) and was 7.09 and 4.41 (Group 1), 6.59 and 5.58 (Group 2), 6.77 and 4.08 (Group 3). There was a significant difference in CMT between the baseline and 12th month in Group 1 and Group 2 (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively) but not in Group 3 (p = 0.84). BCVA was significantly better in the 12th month in Group 1 (p < 0.001), slightly worse in Group 2 (p = 0.79), and significantly worse in Group 3 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: This study provides evidence that an inadequate number of injections cannot protect vision. Moreover, it can cause vision loss, especially in the eyes with good vision.