Elsevier

Ophthalmology

Volume 115, Issue 9, September 2008, Pages 1447-1459.e10
Ophthalmology

Original article
A Randomized Trial Comparing Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide and Focal/Grid Photocoagulation for Diabetic Macular Edema

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.06.015Get rights and content

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 1-mg and 4-mg doses of preservative-free intravitreal triamcinolone in comparison with focal/grid photocoagulation for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).

Design

Multicenter, randomized clinical trial.

Participants

Eight hundred forty study eyes of 693 subjects with DME involving the fovea and with visual acuity of 20/40 to 20/320.

Methods

Eyes were randomized to focal/grid photocoagulation (n = 330), 1 mg intravitreal triamcinolone (n = 256), or 4 mg intravitreal triamcinolone (n = 254). Retreatment was given for persistent or new edema at 4-month intervals. The primary outcome was evaluated at 2 years.

Main Outcome Measures

Visual acuity measured with the electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study method (primary), optical coherence tomography-measured retinal thickness (secondary), and safety.

Results

At 4 months, mean visual acuity was better in the 4-mg triamcinolone group than in either the laser group (P<0.001) or the 1-mg triamcinolone group (P = 0.001). By 1 year, there were no significant differences among groups in mean visual acuity. At the 16-month visit and extending through the primary outcome visit at 2 years, mean visual acuity was better in the laser group than in the other 2 groups (at 2 years, P = 0.02 comparing the laser and 1-mg groups, P = 0.002 comparing the laser and 4-mg groups, and P = 0.49 comparing the 1-mg and 4-mg groups). Treatment group differences in the visual acuity outcome could not be attributed solely to cataract formation. Optical coherence tomography results generally paralleled the visual acuity results. Intraocular pressure increased from baseline by 10 mmHg or more at any visit in 4%, 16%, and 33% of eyes in the 3 treatment groups, respectively, and cataract surgery was performed in 13%, 23%, and 51% of eyes in the 3 treatment groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Over a 2-year period, focal/grid photocoagulation is more effective and has fewer side effects than 1-mg or 4-mg doses of preservative-free intravitreal triamcinolone for most patients with DME who have characteristics similar to the cohort in this clinical trial. The results of this study also support that focal/grid photocoagulation currently should be the benchmark against which other treatments are compared in clinical trials of DME.

Financial Disclosure(s)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Section snippets

Patients and Methods

This phase III randomized, multicenter clinical trial was conducted by the DRCR.net at 88 clinical sites in the United States. The study adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant informed consent forms were approved by multiple institutional review boards. Each subject gave written informed consent to participate in the study. Study oversight was provided by an independent data and safety monitoring

Results

Between July 2004 and May 2006, 693 subjects (mean age±SD, 63±9 years; 49% women) were enrolled, 147 (21%) with 2 study eyes. The 840 study eyes with DME were assigned randomly to either focal/grid photocoagulation (n = 330), 1 mg triamcinolone (n = 256), or 4 mg triamcinolone (n = 254). At baseline, the mean±SD visual acuity letter score in study eyes was 59±11 (approximately 20/63) and the mean±SD OCT central subfield retinal thickness was 424±130 μm. The baseline characteristics of the 3

Discussion

This phase III randomized clinical trial compared 1-mg and 4-mg doses of preservative-free triamcinolone with focal/grid photocoagulation as treatments for eyes with DME and visual acuity ranging from 20/40 to 20/320. At 4 months, a greater positive treatment response on visual acuity was seen in the 4-mg triamcinolone group compared with the other 2 groups. However, by 1 year, there was little difference in visual acuity between the groups, and at the time of the 2-year primary outcome

References (55)

  • A. Martidis et al.

    Intravitreal triamcinolone for refractory diabetic macular edema

    Ophthalmology

    (2002)
  • J.B. Jonas et al.

    Intraocular pressure elevation after intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injection

    Ophthalmology

    (2005)
  • D.A. Antonetti et al.

    Vascular endothelial growth factor induces rapid phosphorylation of tight junction proteins occludin and zonula occluden: 1A potential mechanism for vascular permeability in diabetic retinopaty and tumors

    J Biol Chem

    (1999)
  • M. Nauck et al.

    Corticosteriods inhibit the expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor gene in human vascular smooth muscle cells

    Euro J Pharmacol

    (1998)
  • R.W. Beck et al.

    A computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study testing protocol

    Am J Ophthalmol

    (2003)
  • M.C. Gillies et al.

    Intravitreal triamcinolone for refractory diabetic macular edema: two-year results of a double-masked, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial

    Ophthalmology

    (2006)
  • A. Schottelius et al.

    Higher expression of glucocorticoid receptor in peripheral mononuclear cells in inflammatory bowel disease

    Am J Gastroenterol

    (2000)
  • P. Massin et al.

    Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for diabetic diffuse macular edema: preliminary results of a prospective controlled trial

    Ophthalmology

    (2004)
  • The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

    N Engl J Med

    (1993)
  • Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33)

    Lancet

    (1998)
  • A. Gray et al.

    Implementing intensive control of blood glucose concentration and blood pressure in type 2 diabetes in England: cost analysis (UKPDS 63)

    BMJ

    (2002)
  • I.M. Stratton et al.

    Additive effects of glycaemia and blood pressure exposure on risk of complications in type 2 diabetes: a prospective observational study (UKPDS 75)

    Diabetologia

    (2006)
  • Photocoagulation for diabetic macular edemaEarly Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study report number 1

    Arch Ophthalmol

    (1985)
  • T. Ikeda et al.

    Vitrectomy for cystoid macular oedema with attached posterior hyaloid membrane in patient with diabetes

    Br J Ophthalmol

    (1999)
  • K.L. Hartley et al.

    Pars plana vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling for diabetic macular edema

    Retina

    (2008)
  • M.S. Figueroa et al.

    Surgical and anatomical outcomes of pars plana vitrectomy for diffuse nontractional diabetic macular edema

    Retina

    (2008)
  • Effect of ruboxistaurin in patients with diabetic macular edema: thirty-month results of the randomized PKC-DMES clinical trial

    Arch Ophthalmol

    (2007)
  • Cited by (0)

    Manuscript no. 2008-530.

    Available online: July 26, 2008.

    A list of the members of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network participating in the trial appears in the online Appendix 1 available at http://aaojournal.org.

    Writing Committee. Lead authors: Michael S. Ip, Allison R. Edwards, Roy W. Beck, Neil M. Bressler; additional writing committee members (in alphabetical order): Lloyd Paul Aiello, David J. Browning, Michael J. Elman, Scott M. Friedman, Frederick L. Ferris, Adam R. Glassman, Craig Kollman, Angela Price.

    A complete list of all DRCR.net investigator financial disclosures can be found at www.drcr.net.

    Supported through a cooperative agreement from the National Eye Institute and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland (grant nos.: EY14231, EY14269, EY14229).

    The funding organization participated in oversight of the conduct of the study and review of the manuscript but not directly in the design of the study, the conduct of the study, data collection, data management, data analysis, interpretation of the data, or preparation of the manuscript. Allergan, Inc., provided the triamcinolone and topical antibiotics after successfully competing for a request for proposals issued by DRCR.net for a company to provide a preservative-free triamcinolone for the study. As per the DRCR.net Industry Collaboration Guidelines (available at www.drcr.net), the DRCR.net had complete control over the design of the protocol, ownership of the data, and all editorial content of presentations and publications related to the protocol. Allergan, Inc., has provided unrestricted funds to DRCR.net for its discretionary use.

    Correspondence: Michael S. Ip, MD, c/o Jaeb Center for Health Research, 15310 Amberly Drive, Suite 350, Tampa, FL 33647. E-mail: [email protected].

    View full text