6533b82dfe1ef96bd129132c

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Efficacy and safety of ranibizumab with or without panretinal laser photocoagulation versus laser photocoagulation alone in proliferative diabetic retinopathy – the PRIDE study

Gabriele E. LangSandra LiakopoulosAndreas StahlJessica VoegelerKatrin LorenzGeorg SpitalClaudia Quiering

subject

medicine.medical_specialtyVisual acuitygenetic structuresbusiness.industrySignificant differencePhases of clinical researchGeneral MedicineDiabetic retinopathyPanretinal laser photocoagulationmedicine.diseaseAlternative treatment03 medical and health sciencesOphthalmologyRetinal neovascularization0302 clinical medicineOphthalmology030221 ophthalmology & optometrymedicineRanibizumabmedicine.symptombusiness030217 neurology & neurosurgerymedicine.drug

description

Purpose Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) is the current standard of care in proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). However, treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents might offer better patient outcomes with fewer side-effects. The PRIDE study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab with or without PRP compared with PRP alone in patients with PDR. Methods A total of 106 PDR patients without diabetic macular oedema were randomized to receive ranibizumab 0.5 mg monotherapy (n = 35), PRP (n = 35) or combined ranibizumab 0.5 mg/PRP (n = 36). The primary objective of this 12-month, multicentre, phase II study was to investigate the change in area of retinal neovascularization (NV). Complete regression of leakage and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were key secondary end-points. Results At Month 12, there was a statistically significant difference of -2.83 mm² in the least square mean change in NV area between the ranibizumab monotherapy and PRP group, favouring ranibizumab (95% CI [-5.45; -0.21], p = 0.0344). At Month 3, 67%/0%/67% of the patients in the ranibizumab/PRP/combination groups, respectively, showed complete regression of leakage from NVs, while at Month 12, 28%/8%/18% showed complete regression of leakage from NVs. BCVA change was greater in the ranibizumab group compared with the PRP monotherapy group at Month 12 (+1.6 letters; 95% CI [-2.3; 5.5] versus -3.9 letters; 95% CI [-7.8; -0.1], p = 0.0495). Conclusions Ranibizumab monotherapy is an alternative treatment option to laser treatment in patients with PDR. Ranibizumab showed stronger effects on NV leakage and area reduction while offering better visual acuity results than PRP alone.

https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.14312