Intravitreal Aflibercept for Diabetic Macular Edema: 100-Week Results From the VISTA and VIVID Studies.


Journal Article

PURPOSE: To compare efficacy and safety of 2 dosing regimens of intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) with macular laser photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Two similarly designed, randomized, phase 3 trials, VISTA(DME) and VIVID(DME). PARTICIPANTS: Patients (eyes; n=872) with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus who had DME with central involvement. METHODS: Eyes received IAI 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), IAI 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 monthly doses (2q8), or laser control. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was mean change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at week 52. This report presents the 100-week results including mean change from baseline in BCVA, proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters, and proportion of eyes with a ≥2-step improvement in the Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score. RESULTS: Mean BCVA gain from baseline to week 100 with IAI 2q4, IAI 2q8, and laser control was 11.5, 11.1, and 0.9 letters (P < 0.0001) in VISTA and 11.4, 9.4, and 0.7 letters (P < 0.0001) in VIVID, respectively. The proportion of eyes that gained ≥15 letters from baseline at week 100 was 38.3%, 33.1%, and 13.0% (P < 0.0001) in VISTA and 38.2%, 31.1%, and 12.1% (P ≤ 0.0001) in VIVID. The proportion of eyes that lost ≥15 letters at week 100 was 3.2%, 0.7%, and 9.7% (P ≤ 0.0220) in VISTA and 2.2%, 1.5%, and 12.9% (P ≤ 0.0008) in VIVID. Significantly more eyes in the IAI 2q4 and 2q8 groups versus those in the laser control group had a ≥2 step improvement in the DRSS score in both VISTA (37.0% and 37.1% vs. 15.6%; P < 0.0001) and VIVID (29.3% and 32.6% vs. 8.2%; P ≤ 0.0004). In an integrated safety analysis, the most frequent serious ocular adverse event was cataract (2.4%, 1.0%, and 0.3% for 2q4, 2q8, and control). CONCLUSIONS: In both VISTA and VIVID, the 52-week visual and anatomic superiority of IAI over laser control was sustained through week 100, with similar efficacy in the 2q4 and 2q8 groups. Safety in these studies was consistent with the known safety profile of IAI.

Full Text

Cited Authors

  • Brown, DM; Schmidt-Erfurth, U; Do, DV; Holz, FG; Boyer, DS; Midena, E; Heier, JS; Terasaki, H; Kaiser, PK; Marcus, DM; Nguyen, QD; Jaffe, GJ; Slakter, JS; Simader, C; Soo, Y; Schmelter, T; Yancopoulos, GD; Stahl, N; Vitti, R; Berliner, AJ; Zeitz, O; Metzig, C; Korobelnik, J-F

Published Date

  • October 2015

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 122 / 10

Start / End Page

  • 2044 - 2052

PubMed ID

  • 26198808

Pubmed Central ID

  • 26198808

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1549-4713

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.06.017


  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States