Ophthalmology · 2024
Disease Activity and Therapeutic Response to Pegcetacoplan for Geographic Atrophy Identified by Deep Learning-Based Analysis of OCT.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеКлиническое исследование III фазыМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schmidt-Erfurth Ursula, Mai Julia, Reiter Gregor S, Riedl Sophie, Vogl Wolf-Dieter, Sadeghipour Amir, McKeown Alex, Foos Emma, Scheibler Lukas, Bogunovic Hrvoje
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To quantify morphological changes of the photoreceptors (PRs) and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) layers under pegcetacoplan therapy in geographic atrophy (GA) using deep learning-based analysis of OCT images.
DESIGN: Post hoc longitudinal image analysis.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients with GA due to age-related macular degeneration from 2 prospective randomized phase III clinical trials (OAKS and DERBY).
METHODS: Deep learning-based segmentation of RPE loss and PR degeneration, defined as loss of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) layer on OCT, over 24 months.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in the mean area of RPE loss and EZ loss over time in the pooled sham arms and the pegcetacoplan monthly (PM)/pegcetacoplan every other month (PEOM) treatment arms.
RESULTS: A total of 897 eyes of 897 patients were included. There was a therapeutic reduction of RPE loss growth by 22% and 20% in OAKS and 27% and 21% in DERBY for PM and PEOM compared with sham, respectively, at 24 months. The reduction on the EZ level was significantly higher with 53% and 46% in OAKS and 47% and 46% in DERBY for PM and PEOM compared with sham at 24 months. The baseline EZ-RPE difference had an impact on disease activity and therapeutic response. The therapeutic benefit for RPE loss increased with larger EZ-RPE difference quartiles from 21.9%, 23.1%, and 23.9% to 33.6% for PM versus sham (all P < 0.01) and from 13.6% (P = 0.11), 23.8%, and 23.8% to 20.0% for PEOM versus sham (P < 0.01) in quartiles 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively, at 24 months. The therapeutic reduction of EZ loss increased from 14.8% (P = 0.09), 33.3%, and 46.6% to 77.8% (P < 0.0001) between PM and sham and from 15.9% (P = 0.08), 33.8%, and 52.0% to 64.9% (P < 0.0001) between PEOM and sham for quartiles 1 to 4 at 24 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning-based OCT analysis objectively identifies and quantifies PR and RPE degeneration in GA. Reductions in further EZ loss on OCT are even higher than the effect on RPE loss in phase 3 trials of pegcetacoplan treatment. The EZ-RPE difference has a strong impact on disease progression and therapeutic response. Identification of patients with higher EZ-RPE loss difference may become an important criterion for the management of GA secondary to AMD.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.
DESIGN: Post hoc longitudinal image analysis.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients with GA due to age-related macular degeneration from 2 prospective randomized phase III clinical trials (OAKS and DERBY).
METHODS: Deep learning-based segmentation of RPE loss and PR degeneration, defined as loss of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) layer on OCT, over 24 months.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in the mean area of RPE loss and EZ loss over time in the pooled sham arms and the pegcetacoplan monthly (PM)/pegcetacoplan every other month (PEOM) treatment arms.
RESULTS: A total of 897 eyes of 897 patients were included. There was a therapeutic reduction of RPE loss growth by 22% and 20% in OAKS and 27% and 21% in DERBY for PM and PEOM compared with sham, respectively, at 24 months. The reduction on the EZ level was significantly higher with 53% and 46% in OAKS and 47% and 46% in DERBY for PM and PEOM compared with sham at 24 months. The baseline EZ-RPE difference had an impact on disease activity and therapeutic response. The therapeutic benefit for RPE loss increased with larger EZ-RPE difference quartiles from 21.9%, 23.1%, and 23.9% to 33.6% for PM versus sham (all P < 0.01) and from 13.6% (P = 0.11), 23.8%, and 23.8% to 20.0% for PEOM versus sham (P < 0.01) in quartiles 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively, at 24 months. The therapeutic reduction of EZ loss increased from 14.8% (P = 0.09), 33.3%, and 46.6% to 77.8% (P < 0.0001) between PM and sham and from 15.9% (P = 0.08), 33.8%, and 52.0% to 64.9% (P < 0.0001) between PEOM and sham for quartiles 1 to 4 at 24 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning-based OCT analysis objectively identifies and quantifies PR and RPE degeneration in GA. Reductions in further EZ loss on OCT are even higher than the effect on RPE loss in phase 3 trials of pegcetacoplan treatment. The EZ-RPE difference has a strong impact on disease progression and therapeutic response. Identification of patients with higher EZ-RPE loss difference may become an important criterion for the management of GA secondary to AMD.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.