View clinical trials related to Diabetic Macular Edema.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of enhancements to the myVisionTrack® in regards to patient compliance and test-retest variability. Additionally, the ability of myVisionTrack® to detect changes in vision function will be evaluated.
This study is undertaken to determine effect of sustained release dexamethasone implant,Ozurdex in improving outcome of taut posterior hyaloid removal in patients with diabetic macular edema Diabetic macular edema constitute important cause of visual impairment in patients with diabetes.Focal/ grid laser photocoagulation is the standard of care in the management . Several adjuncts including intravitreal corticosteroids, Pegaptanib Sodium , Ranibizumab , Bevacizumab are also been tried.In some patients inspite of multiple lasers or injections macular edema persists as a consequence overlying taut posterior hyaloid membrane which needs to be removed by vitrectomy. Visual improvement after vitrectomy is related to the duration of edema, as well as the extent of intraretinal lipid and vascular nonperfusion.Even after surgery some patients might need repeat intravitreal bevacizumab or triamcinolone injections to take care of residual macular edema.Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide (TA), a water insoluble steroid, has been shown to reduce the retinal thickness and improve the visual acuity. However, recurrence of macular edema in patients who receive intravitreal TA is a major concern because of its short half life . In search for the ideal corticosteroid preparation, a Dexamethasone Posterior Segment Drug Delivery System (Dexamethasone DDS - Ozurdex®, Allergan Inc, Irvine, California) was recently developed which has generated new interest in this molecule. It is a sustained release intravitreal implant containing 700µg dexamethasone has been approved by the US-FDA (Food and Drug Administration) for treatment of macular edema in retinal vein occlusions. The present study introduces a novel concept of using intraoperative Ozurdex ® implant during taut posterior hyaloid removal and its effect in improving the surgical outcome
This study is undertaken to determine the effect of intravitreal long acting dexamethasone implant,(Ozurdex®)in patients with diabetic macular edema.Diabetic macular edema is important cause of visual impairment in patients with diabetes mellitus. Focal/ grid laser photocoagulation is the standard of care in its management. Several adjuncts including intravitreal corticosteroids, Pegabtanib Sodium ,Ranibizumab, Bevacizumab, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, corticosteroids, laser photocoagulation have been tried. Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide (TA), a water insoluble steroid, has been shown to reduce the retinal thickness and improve the visual acuity. However, recurrence of macular edema in patients who receive intravitreal TA is a major concern as the patients need multiple repeat injections because of its short half life. A more potent steroid, dexamethasone has also been tried as an alternative to TA for macular edema; however, its short half life of only 3 hours prevents its clinical application. In search for the ideal corticosteroid preparation, a Dexamethasone Posterior Segment Drug Delivery System (Dexamethasone DDS - Ozurdex®, Allergan Inc, Irvine, California) was recently developed. Promising results have been shown in certain patients with retinal vein occlusions, uveitis receiving this intravitreal drug delivery system with improvement in visual acuity. The present study introduces a novel concept of using Ozurdex ® implant in patients with diabetic macular edema.
Currently, two similar medications are available for injection into the eye to treat a variety of eye diseases. These medications are called ranibizumab (Lucentis) and bevacizumab (Avastin). They both have a similar mechanism of action and work equally well, however only ranibizumab was designed for use in the eye. It is significantly more expensive per injection than bevacizumab (by a factor of roughly 40x). In published studies trends have been noted towards an increased rate of systemic side effects such as heart attacks and strokes. This is presumably due to absorption of the drug(s) from the eye into the bloodstream, however this has never been shown before. The purpose of the investigators study was to compare the bloodstream levels of bevacizumab and ranibizumab at various time points after injection into the eye. This required the creation of a sophisticated assay to measure blood levels of the drugs.
Since 2004, intravitreal injection of Avastin, Lucentis, and Macugen for wet age-related macular degeneration, retinal vein occlusion, and diabetic macular edema are being administered in the United States at increasing rates. A 2010 study showed that in Canada and the incidence of injections grew 8 fold from 2005 to 2007 to 25.9 injections per 100,000 citizens. (Campbell 2010) In 2009, in the United States, over 1 million intravitreal injections were administered to Medicare beneficiaries. (Wykoff 2011) In the year 2011, the four doctors in my retina group administered a total of 6,494 intravitreal injections; in 2010, we administered 5021 intravitreal injections. Even though intravitreal injections are commonly administered, the optimal method of anesthetizing the eye prior to injection has yet to be determined. Some physicians use an anesthetic drop, some a soaked cotton pledget, some use an anesthetic gel and some use subconjunctival injected anesthetic. In 2009, the last time the Procedures and Trends Survey (PAT) (Mittra 2009) conducted by the American Society of Retina Specialists (the largest retina society in the world) asked about anesthetic methods for administering intravitreal injections, the following response was given by the 433 respondents: - Topical anesthetic drop: 21.48% - Topical viscous anesthetic: 23.33% - Topical anesthetic & soaked cotton-tip or pledget: 29.79% - Subconjunctival injection of anesthetic: 24.02% - Other: 1.39% An editorial in 2011 in the journal Retina, discusses the lack of good studies assessing optimal anesthetic prior to intravitreal injections. (Prenner 2011).
Although multiple studies have suggested that treatment with ranibizumab is safe and efficacious and superior to focal/grid laser alone for patients with center-involved diabetic macular edema (DME), there may be barriers in place to widespread adoption of ranibizumab use given its high cost per dose and the need for multiple treatments over time. Prioritizing resources from a public health policy perspective could be easier if more precise estimates regarding the risks and benefits of other anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies were available, especially when the difference in costs could be billions of dollars over just a few years. Thus, there is a clear rationale at this time to explore potential anti-VEGF alternatives to ranibizumab that might prove to be as or more efficacious, might deliver equally lasting or longer-lasting treatment effects, and cost substantially less. Of the potentially available alternative anti-VEGF agents for this trial, bevacizumab and aflibercept are the best candidates for a direct comparison study. Bevacizumab shares the most similar molecular structure, costs far less, and is widely available. Furthermore, there is already preliminary evidence to suggest that it may be efficacious in the treatment of DME and it is already being widely used for this indication. Although aflibercept has a similar cost per unit dose to ranibizumab, it has the potential to decrease treatment burden and associated cost. If results from a comparative trial demonstrate improved efficacy or suggest similar efficacy of bevacizumab or aflibercept over ranibizumab, this information might give clinicians scientific rationale to substitute either one of these drugs for ranibizumab in the treatment of DME, and might thereby have substantial implications for public policy in terms of future estimates of health care dollars and possibly number of treatments necessary for anti-VEGF treatment of diabetic macular disease. Because of its availability and lower cost, bevacizumab is already currently in widespread clinical use for treatment of DME despite the lack of FDA approval for this indication. Thus, a clinical trial that suggested whether bevacizumab could be used as a safe and efficacious alternative to ranibizumab could substantially impact nationwide practice patterns for treatment of DME by either validating the current use of bevacizumab or by demonstrating improved outcomes with ranibizumab or aflibercept treatment for DME. Study Objective The primary objective of the proposed research is to compare the efficacy and safety of (1) intravitreal aflibercept, (2) intravitreal bevacizumab, and (3) intravitreal ranibizumab when given to treat central-involved DME in eyes with visual acuity of 20/32 to 20/320.
This study will examine the use of the dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex) in patients with macular edema associated with an epiretinal or preretinal membrane requiring surgical intervention. After the surgery is performed (pars plana vitrectomy), an Ozurdex implant will be placed in the eye. Patients will be followed for 1 year.
Background: - Diabetic macular edema is a common eye complication of diabetes. It causes the blood vessels in the retina at the back of the eye to leak, causing swelling. The macula is the center part of the retina that is important for seeing fine details and for tasks such as reading, driving, or sewing. Swelling of the macula leads to vision loss and possible blindness. Inflammation may play a role in diabetic macular edema. It is also possible that there is a problem with the blood vessels and the blood supply to cells of the retina. - A chemical in the body called vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is important in the formation of blood vessels in the body. Lowering VEGF levels may help treat diabetic macular edema by reducing abnormal leaking blood vessels in the eye. Drugs that can lower or block VEGF include ranibizumab and bevacizumab. Both drugs have been shown to help treat diabetic macular edema. Researchers want to see if one of the drugs works better than the other. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of ranibizumab and bevacizumab injections for diabetic macular edema. Eligibility: Individuals at least 18 years of age who have diabetic macular edema in at least one eye. Design: - Participants will be screened with a physical exam and medical history. A full eye exam will be performed. Blood and urine samples will be collected. - One eye will be selected as the study eye to receive treatment. If both eyes are affected, both eyes may be enrolled in the study and receive different drug treatments. - The main part of the study will last for 9 months. At each study visit, participants will have physical exams and eye exams. They will answer questions about their health and any side effects from the drugs. - Participants will be assigned to one of four groups. Two groups will have two series of ranibizumab and one series of bevacizumab shots. The other two groups will have two series of bevacizumab and one series of ranibizumab shots. A series is three eye injections of the same drug every 4 weeks. The injections will be given at these study visits. The series order will vary for the different groups. - After 9 months, participants will continue to have additional study visits. If the treatment seems to be successful, the study doctor may increase the time between visits. Study injections may be given as needed every 4 weeks for up to 3 years. - Participants may have laser treatments in a study eye if needed. After being in the study for 1 year, they may also have steroid injections or other treatments as directed for the macular edema.
This study was conducted because the FDA requested clinical information on potential effects of intravitreal injections of Macugen (pegaptanib sodium injection) on the corneal endothelium from a 1-year (minimum) post-approval clinical study to support that there are no adverse effects on the corneal endothelium following intravitreal injections of Macugen.
This clinical trial is designed to investigate differences in terms of efficacy (mean change in best corrected visual acuity obtained after 12 months of treatment) and safety, of 3 therapeutic estrategies for non-tractional macular edema in diabetic patients: a) laser alone; b) laser plus tiramcinolon; and c) laser plus bevacizumab.