Scott Ingrid U, VanVeldhuisen Paul C, Ip Michael S, Blodi Barbara A, Oden Neal L, Awh Carl C, Kunimoto Derek Y, Marcus Dennis M, Wroblewski John J, King Jacqueline
Department of Ophthalmology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania2Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania.
The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, Maryland.
JAMA. 2017 May 23;317(20):2072-2087. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.4568.
Studies have established the efficacy and safety of aflibercept for the treatment of macular edema due to central retinal vein occlusion. Bevacizumab is used off-label to treat this condition despite the absence of supporting data.
To investigate whether bevacizumab is noninferior to aflibercept for the treatment of macular edema secondary to central retinal or hemiretinal vein occlusion.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The SCORE2 randomized noninferiority clinical trial was conducted at 66 private practice or academic centers in the United States, and included 362 patients with macular edema due to central retinal or hemiretinal vein occlusion who were randomized 1:1 to receive aflibercept or bevacizumab. The first participant was randomized on September 17, 2014, and the last month 6 visit occurred on May 6, 2016. Analyses included data available as of December 30, 2016.
Eyes were randomized to receive intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (1.25 mg; n = 182) or aflibercept (2.0 mg; n = 180) every 4 weeks through month 6.
The primary outcome was mean change in visual acuity (VA) letter score (VALS) from the randomization visit to the 6-month follow-up visit, based on the best-corrected electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study VALS (scores range from 0-100; higher scores indicate better VA). The noninferiority margin was 5 letters, and statistical testing for noninferiority was based on a 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval.
Among 362 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 69 [12] years; 157 [43.4%] women; mean [SD] VALS at baseline, 50.3 [15.2] [approximate Snellen VA 20/100]), 348 (96.1%) completed the month 6 follow-up visit. At month 6, the mean VALS was 69.3 (a mean increase from baseline of 18.6) in the bevacizumab group and 69.3 (a mean increase from baseline of 18.9) in the aflibercept group (model-based estimate of between-group difference, -0.14; 97.5% CI, -3.07 to ∞; P = .001 for noninferiority), meeting criteria for noninferiority. Ocular adverse events in the aflibercept group included 4 participants with intraocular pressure (IOP) more than 10 mm Hg greater than baseline; ocular adverse events in the bevacizumab group included 1 participant with endophthalmitis (culture negative), 9 with IOP more than 10 mm Hg greater than baseline, 2 with IOP higher than 35 mm Hg, and 1 with angle-closure glaucoma not attributed to the study drug or procedure.
Among patients with macular edema due to central retinal or hemiretinal vein occlusion, intravitreal bevacizumab was noninferior to aflibercept with respect to visual acuity after 6 months of treatment.
研究已证实阿柏西普治疗视网膜中央静脉阻塞所致黄斑水肿的有效性和安全性。尽管缺乏支持数据,但贝伐单抗仍被用于治疗这种疾病。
探讨贝伐单抗治疗视网膜中央或半侧视网膜静脉阻塞继发黄斑水肿时是否不劣于阿柏西普。
设计、设置和参与者:SCORE2随机非劣效性临床试验在美国66个私人诊所或学术中心进行,纳入362例视网膜中央或半侧视网膜静脉阻塞所致黄斑水肿患者,按1:1随机分组接受阿柏西普或贝伐单抗治疗。首位参与者于2014年9月17日随机分组,最后一次访视于2016年5月6日进行。分析纳入截至2016年12月30日的可用数据。
将眼睛随机分组,每4周接受一次玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗(1.25mg;n = 182)或阿柏西普(2.0mg;n = 180),持续6个月。
主要结局是从随机分组访视到6个月随访时的最佳矫正视力(VA)字母评分(VALS)的平均变化,基于电子早期糖尿病视网膜病变研究的最佳矫正VALS(评分范围为0 - 100;分数越高表明视力越好)。非劣效性界值为5个字母,非劣效性的统计检验基于单侧97.5%置信区间。
在362例随机分组的参与者中(平均[标准差]年龄,69[12]岁;157例[43.4%]为女性;基线时平均[标准差]VALS为50.3[15.2][约Snellen视力20/100]),348例(96.1%)完成了6个月的随访。在6个月时,贝伐单抗组的平均VALS为69.3(较基线平均增加18.6),阿柏西普组为69.3(较基线平均增加18.9)(基于模型的组间差异估计值为 - 0.14;97.5%置信区间为 - 3.07至∞;非劣效性P = 0.001),符合非劣效性标准。阿柏西普组的眼部不良事件包括4例眼压(IOP)比基线高1 > 10mmHg的参与者;贝伐单抗组的眼部不良事件包括1例眼内炎(培养阴性)参与者、9例IOP比基线高 > 10mmHg的参与者、2例IOP高于35mmHg的参与者以及1例与研究药物或操作无关的闭角型青光眼参与者。
在视网膜中央或半侧视网膜静脉阻塞所致黄斑水肿患者中,治疗6个月后,玻璃体内注射贝伐单抗在视力方面不劣于阿柏西普。