Further studies of the visually evoked subcortical potential in man

The Visually Evoked Subcortical Potential, a far-field signal, was originally defined to flash stimulation as a triphasic positive-negative-positive complex with mean latencies of P21 N26.2 P33.6 (Harding and Rubinstein 1980). Inconsistent with its subcortical source however, the signal was found to be tightly localised to the mastoid. This thesis re-examines the earlier protocols using flash stimulation and with auditory masking establishes by topographic studies that the VESP has a widespread scalp distribution, consistent with a far-field source of the signal, and is not a volume-conducted electroretinogram (ERG). Furthermore, mastoid localisation indicates auditory contamination from the click, on discharge of the photostimulator. The use of flash stimulation could not precisely identify the origin of the response. Possible sources of the VESP are the lateral geniculate body (LGB) and the superior colliculus. The LGB received 80% of the nerve fibres from the retina, and responds to high contrast achromatic stimulation in the form of drifting gratings of high spatial frequencies. At low spatial frequencies, it is more sensitive to colour. The superior colliculus is insensitive to colour and suppressed by contrast and responds to transitory rapid movements, and receives about 20% of the optic nerve fibres. A pattern VESP was obtained to black and white checks as a P23.5 N29.2 P34 complex in 93% of normal subjects at an optimal check size of 12'. It was also present as a P23.0 N28.29 P32.23 complex to red and green luminance balanced checks at 2o check size in 73% of subjects. These results were not volume-conducted pattern electroretinogram responses. These findings are consistent with the spatial frequency properties of the lateral geniculate body which is the considered source of the signal. With further work, the VESP may supplement electrodiagnosis of post-chiasmal lesions.

Ranibizumab versus Bevacizumab to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration:one-year findings from the IVAN Randomized Trial

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab and bevacizumab intravitreal injections to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). DESIGN: Multicenter, noninferiority factorial trial with equal allocation to groups. The noninferiority limit was 3.5 letters. This trial is registered (ISRCTN92166560). PARTICIPANTS: People >50 years of age with untreated nAMD in the study eye who read =25 letters on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart. METHODS: We randomized participants to 4 groups: ranibizumab or bevacizumab, given either every month (continuous) or as needed (discontinuous), with monthly review. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome is at 2 years; this paper reports a prespecified interim analysis at 1 year. The primary efficacy and safety outcome measures are distance visual acuity and arteriothrombotic events or heart failure. Other outcome measures are health-related quality of life, contrast sensitivity, near visual acuity, reading index, lesion morphology, serum vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels, and costs. RESULTS: Between March 27, 2008 and October 15, 2010, we randomized and treated 610 participants. One year after randomization, the comparison between bevacizumab and ranibizumab was inconclusive (bevacizumab minus ranibizumab -1.99 letters, 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.04 to 0.06). Discontinuous treatment was equivalent to continuous treatment (discontinuous minus continuous -0.35 letters; 95% CI, -2.40 to 1.70). Foveal total thickness did not differ by drug, but was 9% less with continuous treatment (geometric mean ratio [GMR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.97; P = 0.005). Fewer participants receiving bevacizumab had an arteriothrombotic event or heart failure (odds ratio [OR], 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05 to 1.07; P = 0.03). There was no difference between drugs in the proportion experiencing a serious systemic adverse event (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.80 to 2.27; P = 0.25). Serum VEGF was lower with bevacizumab (GMR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.54; P

Verteporfin photodynamic therapy cohort study:report 1: effectiveness and factors influencing outcomes

Purpose - To compare the visual outcomes after verteporfin photodynamic therapy (VPDT) administered in routine clinical practice with those observed in the Treatment of Age-related macular degeneration with Photodynamic therapy (TAP) trials and to quantify the effects of clinically important baseline covariates on outcome. Design - A prospective longitudinal study of patients treated with VPDT in 45 ophthalmology departments in the United Kingdom with expertise in the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Participants - Patients with wholly or predominantly classic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) of any cause with a visual acuity =20/200 in the eye to be treated. Methods - Refracted best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and contrast sensitivity were measured in VPDT-treated eyes at baseline and subsequent visits. Eyes were retreated at 3 months if CNV was judged to be active. Baseline angiograms were graded to quantify the percentages of classic and occult CNV. Treated eyes were categorized as eligible or ineligible for TAP, or unclassifiable. Main Outcome Measures - Best-corrected visual acuity and contrast sensitivity during 1 year of follow-up after initial treatment. Results - A total of 7748 treated patients were recruited. Data from 4043 patients with a diagnosis of nAMD were used in the present analysis. Reading center determination of lesion type showed that 87% were predominantly classic CNV. Eyes received 2.4 treatments in year 1 and 0.4 treatments in year 2. Deterioration of BCVA over 1 year was similar to that observed in the VPDT arms of the TAP trials and was not influenced by TAP eligibility classification. Best-corrected visual acuity deteriorated more quickly in current smokers; with increasing proportion of classic CNV, increasing age, and better baseline BCVA; and when the fellow eye was the better eye.

Ranibizumab 0.5 mg for diabetic macular edema with bimonthly monitoring after a phase of initial treatment:18-month, multicenter, phase IIIB RELIGHT study

Abstract PURPOSE: To evaluate ranibizumab 0.5 mg using bimonthly monitoring and individualized re-treatment after monthly follow-up for 6 months in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: A phase IIIb, 18-month, prospective, open-label, multicenter, single-arm study in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N = 109) with visual impairment due to DME. METHODS: Participants received 3 initial monthly ranibizumab 0.5 mg injections (day 0 to month 2), followed by individualized best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography-guided re-treatment with monthly (months 3-5) and subsequent bimonthly follow-up (months 6-18). Laser was allowed after month 6. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean change in BCVA from baseline to month 12 (primary end point), mean change in BCVA and central retinal thickness (CRT) from baseline to month 18, gain of ≥10 and ≥15 letters, treatment exposure, and incidence of adverse events over 18 months. RESULTS: Of 109 participants, 100 (91.7%) and 99 (90.8%) completed the 12 and 18 months of the study, respectively. The mean age was 63.7 years, the mean duration of DME was 40 months, and 77.1% of the participants had received prior laser treatment (study eye). At baseline, mean BCVA was 62.9 letters, 20% of patients had a baseline BCVA of >73 letters, and mean baseline CRT was 418.1 μm, with 32% of patients having a baseline CRT <300 μm. The mean change in BCVA from baseline to month 6 was +6.6 letters (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.9-8.3), and after institution of bimonthly treatment the mean change in BCVA at month 12 was +4.8 letters (95% CI, 2.9-6.7; P < 0.001) and +6.5 letters (95% CI, 4.2-8.8) at month 18. The proportion of participants gaining ≥10 and ≥15 letters was 24.8% and 13.8% at month 12 and 34.9% and 19.3% at month 18, respectively. Participants received a mean of 6.8 and 8.5 injections over 12 and 18 months, respectively. No new ocular or nonocular safety findings were observed during the study. CONCLUSIONS: The BCVA gain achieved in the initial 6-month treatment period was maintained with an additional 12 months of bimonthly ranibizumab PRN treatment.

Changes in intraocular pressure in study and fellow eyes in the IVAN trial

PURPOSE: To describe changes in intraocular pressure (IOP) in the 'alternative treatments to Inhibit VEGF in Age-related choroidal Neovascularisation (IVAN)' trial (registered as ISRCTN92166560). DESIGN: Randomised controlled clinical trial with factorial design. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n=610) with treatment naïve neovascular age-related macular degeneration were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either ranibizumab or bevacizumab and to two regimens, namely monthly (continuous) or as needed (discontinuous) treatment. METHODS: At monthly visits, IOP was measured preinjection in both eyes, and postinjection in the study eye. OUTCOME MEASURES: The effects of 10 prespecified covariates on preinjection IOP, change in IOP (postinjection minus preinjection) and the difference in preinjection IOP between the two eyes were examined. RESULTS: For every month in trial, there was a statistically significant rise in both the preinjection IOP and the change in IOP postinjection during the time in the trial (estimate 0.02 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.03, p<0.001 and 0.03 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.04, p=0.002, respectively). There was also a small but significant increase during the time in trial in the difference in IOP between the two eyes (estimate 0.01 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.005 to 0.02, p<0.001). There were no differences between bevacizumab and ranibizumab for any of the three outcomes (p=0.93, p=0.22 and p=0.87, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents induce increases in IOP of small and uncertain clinical significance.