College of Pharmacy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Ann Pharmacother. 2013 Jun;47(6):811-8. doi: 10.1345/aph.1S013. Epub 2013 May 8.
To review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety data available for ranibizumab and compare the drug to other therapeutic options for diabetic macular edema (DME) to determine its likely role in therapy.
A PubMed search was initially used to identify all trials pertaining to the use of ranibizumab for DME. This search was conducted in February 2013 without a time frame for exclusion of older trials (all references included were published between January 1987 and February 2013). Following a review of the references of these articles, additional sources were obtained from PubMed, the manufacturer's website, and clinicaltrials.gov.
Trials conducted in animals and those written in a language other than English were excluded. Abstracts of remaining trials were reviewed for determination of relevance to this review. Preference was given to randomized controlled trials. Additional information sources were obtained from a review of references as deemed necessary by the authors.
Six Phase 2 or 3 randomized controlled trials studying the effects of ranibizumab in patients with DME were identified. Within these trials, ranibizumab consistently produced significantly greater gains in mean best corrected visual acuity than focal/grid laser photocoagulation or sham (7.4-12.5 letter improvement with ranibizumab vs 0.5-3 letters following focal/grid laser photocoagulation monotherapy) with a favorable safety and tolerability profile. Ranibizumab was also studied in combination with focal/grid laser photocoagulation, showing no additional gains in vision versus ranibizumab monotherapy.
The identified trials provide support for the safety and efficacy of ranibizumab in the treatment of vision loss due to DME and present a strong case for the shift to first-line treatment with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors from focal/grid laser photocoagulation, the standard of care since the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study of 1985.
回顾雷珠单抗的药理学、疗效和安全性数据,并将其与治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿(DME)的其他治疗选择进行比较,以确定其在治疗中的可能作用。
最初使用 PubMed 搜索来确定所有与雷珠单抗治疗 DME 相关的试验。该搜索于 2013 年 2 月进行,没有排除旧试验的时间框架(所有包括的参考文献均发表于 1987 年 1 月至 2013 年 2 月之间)。在对这些文章的参考文献进行审查后,还从 PubMed、制造商网站和 clinicaltrials.gov 获取了其他来源。
排除了在动物中进行的试验和用其他语言书写的试验。审查了其余试验的摘要,以确定与本综述相关的内容。优先考虑随机对照试验。作者认为有必要时,还从参考文献的审查中获取了其他信息来源。
确定了 6 项研究雷珠单抗在 DME 患者中的作用的 2 期或 3 期随机对照试验。在这些试验中,雷珠单抗始终比局部/网格激光光凝或假治疗产生更显著的平均最佳矫正视力提高(雷珠单抗治疗组提高 7.4-12.5 个字母,而局部/网格激光光凝单药治疗组提高 0.5-3 个字母),且具有良好的安全性和耐受性。雷珠单抗还与局部/网格激光光凝联合研究,与雷珠单抗单药治疗相比,视力无进一步提高。
确定的试验为雷珠单抗治疗 DME 导致的视力丧失的安全性和疗效提供了支持,并为从 1985 年的早期糖尿病性视网膜病变研究以来的标准治疗——局部/网格激光光凝,转向血管内皮生长因子抑制剂的一线治疗提供了有力证据。