Uveitis, the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT), and Intravitreal Biologics for Ocular Inflammation

• Type of Material: Article
• Authors: Steven Yeh, Emory University; Thomas A. Albini, University of Miami; Andrew A. Moshfeghi, University of Miami; Robert B. Nussenblatt, National Eye Institute
• Language: English
• Date: 2012-09-01
• Publisher: Elsevier: 12 months
• Publication Version: Author Accepted Manuscript (After Peer Review)
• Copyright Statement: © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
• License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
• Final Published Version (URL): http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2012.05.011
• Title of Journal or Parent Work: American Journal of Ophthalmology
• ISSN: 0002-9394
• Volume: 154
• Issue: 3
• Start Page: 429
• End Page: 435
• Grant/Funding Information: Supported by Intramural funding from the National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health (RBN), an unrestricted grant from Research to Prevent Blindness (SY, Emory Eye Center).
• Keywords: Science & Technology; DISEASE; PHARMACOKINETICS; CHOROIDAL NEOVASCULARIZATION; INFLIXIMAB THERAPY; INJECTION; RITUXIMAB; REFRACTORY UVEITIS; Ophthalmology; Life Sciences & Biomedicine; BEVACIZUMAB AVASTIN; RANIBIZUMAB; NONINFECTIOUS UVEITIS
• Research Categories: Health Sciences, Opthamology; Health Sciences, Immunology

Abstract

Purpose: To provide perspective on the implications of the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT) on intravitreal biologic agents in uveitis and retinal diseases in which ocular inflammatory pathways are central to their pathogenesis. Design: Interpretative essay. Methods: Literature review and interpretation. Results: Besides the clear importance of CATT from a patient treatment perspective in age-related macular degeneration (AMD), these data highlight the critical relevance of highly specific protein immunotherapies offered with biologic agents. The CATT trial also provides a reminder regarding the importance of rigorous efficacy and safety monitoring required when administering intravitreal biologic therapy. Within the field of uveitis, systemic and local biologics have been used to effectively treat uveitis, targeting pathways implicated in both angiogenesis and inflammation (eg, tumor necrosis factor-α [TNF-α] and interleukin-2 pathways), and research on intravitreal biologic therapy for uveitis and AMD will continue to expand. With over 25 ongoing clinical trials on intravitreal biologic therapy for AMD, enthusiasm for vanguard biologic therapies should be tempered by judicious monitoring for adverse events. Conclusion: The importance of the CATT trial encompasses day-to-day treatment decisions for AMD, as well as lessons on how biologics for ocular disease should be implemented into clinical practice. Specifically, the introduction of intravitreal biologic therapies into clinical practice for uveitis, AMD, and other ocular diseases in which inflammation is involved should be guided by a clear understanding of the immunotherapeutic agent and its molecular target and with rigorous monitoring for both patient benefit and patient safety.