TY - JOUR
T1 - A randomized clinical trial of intravitreal bevacizumab versus intravitreal dexamethasone for diabetic macular edema
T2 - The BEVORDEX study
AU - Gillies, Mark C.
AU - Lim, Lyndell L.
AU - Campain, Anna
AU - Quin, Godfrey J.
AU - Salem, Wedad
AU - Li, Ji
AU - Goodwin, Stephanie
AU - Aroney, Christine
AU - McAllister, Ian L.
AU - Fraser-Bell, Samantha
PY - 2014/12/1
Y1 - 2014/12/1
N2 - Objective: To report the 12-month results of the first head-to-head comparison of a dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) versus bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) for center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME). Design: Phase 2, prospective, multicenter, randomized, single-masked clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01298076). Participants: We enrolled 88 eyes of 61 patients with center-involving DME. Methods: Forty-two eyes were randomized to receive bevacizumab every 4 weeks and 46 eyes were randomized to receive a dexamethasone implant every 16 weeks, both pro re nata. Results were analyzed using linear regression with generalized estimation equation methods to account for between-eye correlation. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of eyes that improved vision by 10 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution letters. Secondary outcomes included mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), change in central macular thickness (CMT), injection frequency, and adverse events. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire. Results: Improvement in BCVA of 10 or more letters was found in 17 of 42 eyes (40%) treated with bevacizumab compared with 19 of 46 dexamethasone implant-treated eyes (41%; P = 0.83). None of the 42 bevacizumab eyes lost 10 letters or more, whereas 5 of 46 (11%) dexamethasone implant eyes did, mostly because of cataract. Mean CMT decreased by 122 μm for bevacizumab eyes and by 187 μm for dexamethasone implant eyes (P = 0.015). Bevacizumab-treated eyes received a mean of 8.6 injections compared with 2.7 injections for dexamethasone implant eyes. Significant improvement in IVI scores occurred for both treatment groups. Conclusions: Dexamethasone implant achieved similar rates of visual acuity improvement compared with bevacizumab for DME, with superior anatomic outcomes and fewer injections. Both treatments were associated with improvement in visual quality-of-life scores. However, more dexamethasone implant-treated eyes lost vision, mainly because of cataract.
AB - Objective: To report the 12-month results of the first head-to-head comparison of a dexamethasone implant (Ozurdex; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) versus bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) for center-involving diabetic macular edema (DME). Design: Phase 2, prospective, multicenter, randomized, single-masked clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01298076). Participants: We enrolled 88 eyes of 61 patients with center-involving DME. Methods: Forty-two eyes were randomized to receive bevacizumab every 4 weeks and 46 eyes were randomized to receive a dexamethasone implant every 16 weeks, both pro re nata. Results were analyzed using linear regression with generalized estimation equation methods to account for between-eye correlation. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of eyes that improved vision by 10 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution letters. Secondary outcomes included mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), change in central macular thickness (CMT), injection frequency, and adverse events. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire. Results: Improvement in BCVA of 10 or more letters was found in 17 of 42 eyes (40%) treated with bevacizumab compared with 19 of 46 dexamethasone implant-treated eyes (41%; P = 0.83). None of the 42 bevacizumab eyes lost 10 letters or more, whereas 5 of 46 (11%) dexamethasone implant eyes did, mostly because of cataract. Mean CMT decreased by 122 μm for bevacizumab eyes and by 187 μm for dexamethasone implant eyes (P = 0.015). Bevacizumab-treated eyes received a mean of 8.6 injections compared with 2.7 injections for dexamethasone implant eyes. Significant improvement in IVI scores occurred for both treatment groups. Conclusions: Dexamethasone implant achieved similar rates of visual acuity improvement compared with bevacizumab for DME, with superior anatomic outcomes and fewer injections. Both treatments were associated with improvement in visual quality-of-life scores. However, more dexamethasone implant-treated eyes lost vision, mainly because of cataract.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84922192847&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.07.002
DO - 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.07.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 25155371
AN - SCOPUS:84922192847
SN - 0161-6420
VL - 121
SP - 2473
EP - 2481
JO - Ophthalmology
JF - Ophthalmology
IS - 12
ER -