How the comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial results will impact clinical care

Janet Davis, Timothy Olsen, Michael Stewart, Paul Sternberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To provide a perspective on the impact of the Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial (CATT) on future clinical practices. Design: Interpretation of trial outcomes relative to clinical use of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) treatments, assessment of the influence of study design and execution on results, and review of unanalyzed safety data in the online supplement. Methods: Expert opinion. Results: The CATT study supports the selection of either ranibizumab or bevacizumab for treatment of AMD based on factors other than efficacy, such as cost, because monthly administration of bevacizumab was noninferior to the reference treatment of monthly ranibizumab in improving visual acuity at 1 year. Visual acuity results for bevacizumab as needed were inconclusive for noninferiority relative to monthly administration of either drug. The secondary outcome of decrease in thickness at the foveal center as measured by time-domain optical coherence tomography significantly favored the monthly ranibizumab group vs the bevacizumab-as-needed group but is more difficult to interpret as it did not correlate with visual acuity and is less appropriate for a noninferiority design. Bevacizumab groups had a statistically higher observed risk of serious adverse events; however, scrutiny of the online supplements shows similar numbers of cardiac and neurologic events in bevacizumab and ranibizumab users. Information regarding fellow eye treatment with anti-VEGF agents was not given. Conclusions: CATT provides the first level I evidence for bevacizumab in a large number of patients with neovascular AMD. The trial supports use of either drug as primary therapy and suggests that modification of monthly dosing regimens is feasible. A difference in cardiovascular safety between the 2 drugs was not apparent on inspection of the supplementary safety data.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)509-514
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican journal of ophthalmology
Volume152
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Macular Degeneration
Visual Acuity
Safety
Therapeutics
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Optical Coherence Tomography
Expert Testimony
Bevacizumab
Nervous System
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
Costs and Cost Analysis
Ranibizumab

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

How the comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial results will impact clinical care. / Davis, Janet; Olsen, Timothy; Stewart, Michael; Sternberg, Paul.

In: American journal of ophthalmology, Vol. 152, No. 4, 01.01.2011, p. 509-514.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e4ab9a2bfc3948149752fe0eab93cf09,
title = "How the comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial results will impact clinical care",
abstract = "Purpose: To provide a perspective on the impact of the Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial (CATT) on future clinical practices. Design: Interpretation of trial outcomes relative to clinical use of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) treatments, assessment of the influence of study design and execution on results, and review of unanalyzed safety data in the online supplement. Methods: Expert opinion. Results: The CATT study supports the selection of either ranibizumab or bevacizumab for treatment of AMD based on factors other than efficacy, such as cost, because monthly administration of bevacizumab was noninferior to the reference treatment of monthly ranibizumab in improving visual acuity at 1 year. Visual acuity results for bevacizumab as needed were inconclusive for noninferiority relative to monthly administration of either drug. The secondary outcome of decrease in thickness at the foveal center as measured by time-domain optical coherence tomography significantly favored the monthly ranibizumab group vs the bevacizumab-as-needed group but is more difficult to interpret as it did not correlate with visual acuity and is less appropriate for a noninferiority design. Bevacizumab groups had a statistically higher observed risk of serious adverse events; however, scrutiny of the online supplements shows similar numbers of cardiac and neurologic events in bevacizumab and ranibizumab users. Information regarding fellow eye treatment with anti-VEGF agents was not given. Conclusions: CATT provides the first level I evidence for bevacizumab in a large number of patients with neovascular AMD. The trial supports use of either drug as primary therapy and suggests that modification of monthly dosing regimens is feasible. A difference in cardiovascular safety between the 2 drugs was not apparent on inspection of the supplementary safety data.",
author = "Janet Davis and Timothy Olsen and Michael Stewart and Paul Sternberg",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ajo.2011.07.004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "152",
pages = "509--514",
journal = "American Journal of Ophthalmology",
issn = "0002-9394",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How the comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial results will impact clinical care

AU - Davis, Janet

AU - Olsen, Timothy

AU - Stewart, Michael

AU - Sternberg, Paul

PY - 2011/1/1

Y1 - 2011/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To provide a perspective on the impact of the Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial (CATT) on future clinical practices. Design: Interpretation of trial outcomes relative to clinical use of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) treatments, assessment of the influence of study design and execution on results, and review of unanalyzed safety data in the online supplement. Methods: Expert opinion. Results: The CATT study supports the selection of either ranibizumab or bevacizumab for treatment of AMD based on factors other than efficacy, such as cost, because monthly administration of bevacizumab was noninferior to the reference treatment of monthly ranibizumab in improving visual acuity at 1 year. Visual acuity results for bevacizumab as needed were inconclusive for noninferiority relative to monthly administration of either drug. The secondary outcome of decrease in thickness at the foveal center as measured by time-domain optical coherence tomography significantly favored the monthly ranibizumab group vs the bevacizumab-as-needed group but is more difficult to interpret as it did not correlate with visual acuity and is less appropriate for a noninferiority design. Bevacizumab groups had a statistically higher observed risk of serious adverse events; however, scrutiny of the online supplements shows similar numbers of cardiac and neurologic events in bevacizumab and ranibizumab users. Information regarding fellow eye treatment with anti-VEGF agents was not given. Conclusions: CATT provides the first level I evidence for bevacizumab in a large number of patients with neovascular AMD. The trial supports use of either drug as primary therapy and suggests that modification of monthly dosing regimens is feasible. A difference in cardiovascular safety between the 2 drugs was not apparent on inspection of the supplementary safety data.

AB - Purpose: To provide a perspective on the impact of the Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trial (CATT) on future clinical practices. Design: Interpretation of trial outcomes relative to clinical use of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) treatments, assessment of the influence of study design and execution on results, and review of unanalyzed safety data in the online supplement. Methods: Expert opinion. Results: The CATT study supports the selection of either ranibizumab or bevacizumab for treatment of AMD based on factors other than efficacy, such as cost, because monthly administration of bevacizumab was noninferior to the reference treatment of monthly ranibizumab in improving visual acuity at 1 year. Visual acuity results for bevacizumab as needed were inconclusive for noninferiority relative to monthly administration of either drug. The secondary outcome of decrease in thickness at the foveal center as measured by time-domain optical coherence tomography significantly favored the monthly ranibizumab group vs the bevacizumab-as-needed group but is more difficult to interpret as it did not correlate with visual acuity and is less appropriate for a noninferiority design. Bevacizumab groups had a statistically higher observed risk of serious adverse events; however, scrutiny of the online supplements shows similar numbers of cardiac and neurologic events in bevacizumab and ranibizumab users. Information regarding fellow eye treatment with anti-VEGF agents was not given. Conclusions: CATT provides the first level I evidence for bevacizumab in a large number of patients with neovascular AMD. The trial supports use of either drug as primary therapy and suggests that modification of monthly dosing regimens is feasible. A difference in cardiovascular safety between the 2 drugs was not apparent on inspection of the supplementary safety data.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053328390&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053328390&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.07.004

DO - 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.07.004

M3 - Article

C2 - 21961847

AN - SCOPUS:80053328390

VL - 152

SP - 509

EP - 514

JO - American Journal of Ophthalmology

JF - American Journal of Ophthalmology

SN - 0002-9394

IS - 4

ER -