This Article  • Abstract  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (218)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Choroidal Neovascularization  • Macular Degeneration  • Retinal/ Chorioretinal Disorders  • Randomized Controlled Trial  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Two-Year Results of 2 Randomized Clinical Trials—TAP Report 2

Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration With Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group

Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:198-207.

ABSTRACT
Objective  To report 24-month vision and fluorescein angiographic outcomes from trials evaluating photodynamic therapy with verteporfin (Visudyne; CIBA Vision Corp, Duluth, Ga) in patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization (CNV) caused by age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

Design  Two multicenter, double-masked, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials.

Setting  Twenty-two ophthalmology practices in Europe and North America.

Participants  Patients with subfoveal CNV lesions caused by AMD with greatest linear dimension on the retina measuring 5400 µm or less, with evidence of classic CNV and best-corrected visual acuity (approximate Snellen equivalent) between 20/40 and 20/200.

Methods  The methods were similar to those described in our 1-year results,¹ with follow-up examinations beyond 1 year continuing every 3 months (except for Photograph Reading Center evaluations, which occurred only at month 18 and month 24 examinations). During the second year, the same regimen (with verteporfin or placebo as applied at baseline) was used if angiography showed fluorescein leakage from CNV. The primary outcome was the proportion of eyes with fewer than 15 letters (approximately 3 lines) of visual acuity loss at the month 24 examination, adhering to an intent-to-treat analysis. The last observation was carried forward to impute for any missing data.

Results  Three hundred fifty-one (87%) of 402 patients in the verteporfin group compared with 178 (86%) of 207 patients in the placebo group completed the month 24 examination. Beneficial outcomes with respect to visual acuity and contrast sensitivity noted at the month 12 examination in verteporfin-treated patients were sustained through the month 24 examination. At the month 24 examination for the primary outcome, 213 (53%) of 402 verteporfin-treated patients compared with 78 (38%) of 207 placebo-treated patients lost fewer than 15 letters (P<.001). In subgroup analyses for predominantly classic lesions (in which the area of classic CNV makes up at least 50% of the area of the entire lesion) at baseline, 94 (59%) of 159 verteporfin-treated patients compared with 26 (31%) of 83 placebo-treated patients lost fewer than 15 letters at the month 24 examination (P<.001). For minimally classic lesions (in which the area of classic CNV makes up <50% but >0% of the area of the entire lesion) at baseline, no statistically significant differences in visual acuity were noted. Few additional photosensitivity adverse reactions and injection site adverse events were associated with verteporfin therapy in the second year of follow-up.

Conclusions  The visual acuity benefits of verteporfin therapy for AMD patients with predominantly classic CNV subfoveal lesions are safely sustained for 2 years, providing more compelling evidence to use verteporfin therapy for these cases. For AMD patients with subfoveal lesions that are minimally classic, there is insufficient evidence to warrant routine use of verteporfin therapy.

INTRODUCTION

Jump to Section  • Top  • Introduction  • Patients and methods  • Results  • Comment  • Conclusions  • Author information  • References

IN 1999, THE Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration With Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group reported 1-year results from 2 randomized clinical trials of photodynamic therapy with verteporfin (Visudyne; CIBA Vision Corp, Duluth, Ga) conducted among patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization (CNV) caused by age-related macular degeneration (AMD).¹ At the time of enrollment, patients were randomly assigned to verteporfin or placebo infusion followed by application of laser light to activate verteporfin or to serve as a sham treatment for patients given placebo. A visual acuity benefit through 1 year of follow-up was demonstrated for the entire study group assigned to verteporfin therapy and was even stronger for subfoveal lesions that were predominantly classic (in which the area of classic CNV was at least 50% of the area of the entire lesion). Based on these 1-year outcomes, verteporfin therapy was recommended for treatment of patients with predominantly classic CNV lesions due to AMD. However, at the time of this recommendation, it was not possible to determine whether these benefits would persist beyond 1 year.

Minimally classic lesions (in which the area of classic CNV was <50% of the area of the entire lesion) fared better when assigned to verteporfin therapy (202 patients) compared with placebo (103 patients) with respect to contrast sensitivity measurements (mean of 2.0 vs 4.1 letters lost), progression of classic CNV beyond the area of the entire lesion noted at baseline (37.1% vs 62.1%), and lesion growth (>6 disc areas in 45.5% vs 71.8%). However, visual acuity outcomes of minimally classic lesions assigned to verteporfin were not significantly different from those assigned to placebo. The purpose of this report is to provide additional information on the potential of verteporfin therapy to reduce the risk of vision loss compared with placebo therapy for the entire study group and for predominantly classic lesions, as well as to determine if the visual acuity outcomes for minimally classic lesions were significantly different from those assigned to placebo, based on 2-year outcomes completed by participants as of October 14, 1999.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Jump to Section  • Top  • Introduction  • Patients and methods  • Results  • Comment  • Conclusions  • Author information  • References

The highlights of the study protocol are described in our earlier report¹ with pertinent aspects summarized as follows. Before patient enrollment began, the design was reviewed by a study advisory group (members of the TAP Study Group who advise the study sponsors on the scientific aspects of the investigation), the institutional review board of the participating clinical center, and a data- and safety-monitoring committee independent of the study sponsors and the TAP Study Group. Monitoring of the clinical centers (including all visual acuity examiners) and the Photograph Reading Center continued through the second year of follow-up.

PATIENT SELECTION AND ENTRY EVALUATIONS

Regulatory agencies require 2 randomized clinical trials to independently confirm a statistically significant benefit for a primary outcome to be considered for regulatory approval. As described previously,¹ the TAP Investigation consisted of 2 randomized clinical trials that were designed identically and run concurrently, except that 10 of the clinical centers from North America and Europe were assigned to study A, and the other 12 were assigned to study B. Patients were enrolled in these 2 trials from December 1996 through October 1997, when the target sample size was attained. Vision testing, color photographs, fluorescein angiography, medical histories, and physical examinations were completed within 8 days prior to enrollment in the trial.

Patient Selection

Patients had to fulfill eligibility criteria determined by an ophthalmologist certified to enroll and treat study participants. Key features of the eligibility criteria included a best-corrected visual acuity (following the TAP protocol¹) letter score of between 73 and 34 (Snellen equivalent, approximately 20/40 to 20/200), fluorescein angiographic evidence (using definitions previously described^2-3) of subfoveal CNV in which at least 50% of the lesion was CNV, at least some of the lesion had classic CNV, and the lesion's greatest linear dimension was no larger than 5400 µm.

TAP Investigation Design

As with the 1-year results,¹ because the investigation used the same organizational structure concurrently and because baseline characteristics, completeness of follow-up, and outcomes were similar for the 2-year results of study A and study B, the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee recommended (with agreement by the TAP Study Group) that the scientific presentation of the results in peer-reviewed publications should use the combined data set in accordance with the design and primary goal of the investigation.

Vision Testing, Photographs, Other Medical Aspects, and Study Entry

Vision testing, stereoscopic color fundus photographs, fluorescein angiograms, and other medical aspects were described in detail previously.¹ After reviewing and signing a statement of written informed consent accompanied by an oral consent process with a certified investigator (ophthalmologist), patients judged by a TAP-certified enrolling ophthalmologist to satisfy all eligibility criteria were assigned randomly to verteporfin or placebo infusion in a 2:1 ratio, respectively.

Random Assignments and Masking

Random assignments and masking were performed as described in our previous study.¹ Masking with regard to treatment assignment was done with all patients, vision examiners, photographers, ophthalmologists, Photograph Reading Center personnel, and clinic monitors. Only the study coordinator and any other person assisting in the setup of verteporfin or placebo solutions were aware of the treatment assignment; these individuals were trained to make every reasonable attempt to maintain masking of participating patients and all other study personnel. In the first year of follow-up, 2 patients were likely unmasked, and 4 treating ophthalmologists (but not the patients) were unmasked on 1 patient each. There were no known additional instances of unmasking in the second year of follow-up. All investigators and study coordinators were informed of their patients' treatment assignments on February 18, 2000, after the database for this investigation was finalized on February 17, 2000. Patients were subsequently informed of their assignments; the success of masking was not formally evaluated.

Verteporfin Therapy, Placebo Therapy, Patient Follow-up, and Fluorescein Angiographic Assessment

Verteporfin therapy, placebo therapy, and patient follow-up were performed in all clinical centers according to a standard protocol described previously¹ that remained unchanged through the second year of follow-up. Fluorescein angiographic assessment at follow-up was graded in a masked fashion at treating centers every 3 months and at the Photograph Reading Center at the month 18 and month 24 examination.

STATISTICAL METHODS

Sample Size Estimation and Outcome Measurements

A target sample size of 270 patients in each trial or 540 patients for both trials was needed for the evaluation of at least 225 patients in each trial at the last follow-up, assuming 17% died or were lost to follow-up.

The primary efficacy outcome at 2 years, as at 1 year,¹ was the proportion of eyes that had lost fewer than 15 letters (<3 lines of visual acuity loss) compared with the baseline examination. Secondary efficacy outcomes included the proportion of eyes that had lost fewer than 30 letters (<6 lines of visual acuity loss) compared with baseline, mean changes in visual acuity, proportion of study eyes with visual acuity of 20/200 or less at the month 24 examination, mean changes in contrast threshold, and angiographic outcomes (progression of classic CNV and size of lesion) at the month 24 examination.

Statistical Analysis

The primary efficacy analyses were based on a strict intent-to-treat analysis; patients were analyzed within the group to which they were randomized. The proportion of eyes that lost fewer than 15 or 30 letters from baseline to the month 24 examination were analyzed using a Pearson ² test.⁴ The frequency distributions of changes in visual acuity from baseline, visual acuity categories, and changes in contrast sensitivity from baseline were compared between groups using a Wilcoxon rank sum test.⁵ The mean change in visual acuity and contrast sensitivity from baseline was compared between groups using a 2-sample t test.⁵ The times to a loss of 15 or more letters and separately of 30 or more letters were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.⁶ The loss counted as an event only if it was confirmed at the next visit or observed at the patient's final visit. The complements of the Kaplan-Meier estimates at each scheduled visit are displayed graphically using point estimates from each visit. Assessments of fluorescein leakage and lesion size were compared between groups using a Pearson ² test.⁴ The intent-to-treat analysis included all randomized patients; missing values were imputed by carrying the last observation forward. All primary and secondary outcomes for the entire study group and the predominantly classic subgroup were similar without this imputation. Wherever outcomes are given at specific time points (eg, at the month 24 examination), the results are for that time point with the last observation carried forward. The phrase "last observation carried forward" is repeated in tables and figures only where appropriate; it does not appear within the text of the "Results" section. To test for interactions between treatment and subgroup variables, a logistic regression model was used for binary response variables.⁷

DATA MONITORING AND REPORTING

Data monitoring was continued by the same Data and Safety Monitoring Committee approximately every 6 months as described previously,¹ with no prospectively defined stopping rules. No safety concerns were voiced by the committee at its reviews on January 28, 1999, and August 9, 1999. On March 22, 2000, 12-month data analyzed by the sponsors were reviewed along with an independent analysis of the month 12 through month 24 efficacy analyses conducted by the Jaeb Center for Health Research (Tampa, Fla) to verify the accuracy of the sponsors' data analyses. Based on this review of the data and to comply with Securities and Exchange Commission policies in Canada and the United States, the top-line results of these analyses were shared with the public via a news release from the sponsors on March 27, 2000. The data on which this public announcement was based were reviewed by the TAP Study Advisory Group and the TAP Study Group on April 16, 2000, and are presented in this report.

RESULTS

Jump to Section  • Top  • Introduction  • Patients and methods  • Results  • Comment  • Conclusions  • Author information  • References

Three hundred fifty-one (87%) of the 402 patients in the verteporfin-treated group compared with 178 (86%) of the 207 patients in the placebo-treated group completed the month 24 examination (Figure 1), a loss of only an additional 7% in each group during the second 12 months of follow-up. By the month 21 examination (the last visit within the investigation when retreatment could be applied), 181 patients (45%) of the verteporfin-treated group and 135 patients (65%) of the placebo-treated group received retreatment (Figure 1), down from 64% and 79%, respectively, at the month 12 examination. Patients in the verteporfin-treated group received an average of 2.2 treatments per participant from the month 12 through the month 21 examination (Table 1), for a total of 5.6 treatments from the onset of the study.

View larger version (101K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 1. Profile of participants randomized, receiving treatment for choroidal neovascularization (CNV), and completing follow-up (at least a protocol visual acuity assessment) through the month 24 examination.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 1. Treatments Administered Through the Month 21 Examination*

VISION OUTCOMES

The distribution of change in visual acuity at the month 24 examination is shown in Table 2. For the primary outcome, the beneficial effects noted at the month 12 examination were sustained through the month 24 examination; 213 (53%) of 402 study eyes in the verteporfin-treated group compared with 78 (38%) of 207 study eyes in the placebo-treated group (P<.001) lost fewer than 15 letters (<3 lines) of visual acuity. This outcome represented 8% fewer study eyes in both the verteporfin- and placebo-treated groups compared with the month 12 examination results. The avoidance of severe visual acuity loss (<30 letters or <6 lines) was also sustained, occurring more often (82% vs 70%) in the verteporfin-treated group (P<.001) and representing 3% and 6% fewer study eyes in the verteporfin- and placebo-treated groups, respectively, compared with the month 12 examination results. Based on estimates from Kaplan-Meier rates at every follow-up examination after study entry, the proportion of eyes with a loss of 15 or more letters (3 lines; Figure 2) or of 30 or more letters (6 lines; Figure 3) at each visit remained lower in the verteporfin-treated group through the month 24 examination.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 2. Frequency Distribution of Changes in Visual Acuity From Baseline by Treatment at the Month 24 Follow-up Examination*

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 2. Kaplan-Meier estimate of the cumulative probability of eyes treated with verteporfin or given placebo with moderate visual acuity loss (15 letters or approximately 3 lines) at each 3-month study visit over time. First row of numbers below each 3-month follow-up indicates number at risk assigned to verteporfin. Second row of numbers below each 3-month follow-up indicates number at risk assigned to placebo.

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier estimate of the cumulative probability of eyes treated with verteporfin or given placebo with severe visual acuity loss (30 letters or approximately 6 lines) at each 3-month study visit over time. First row of numbers below each 3-month follow-up indicates number at risk assigned to verteporfin. Second row of numbers below each 3-month follow-up indicates number at risk assigned to placebo.

The actual visual acuity scores at the month 24 examination (Table 3) show that the proportion of study eyes with a visual acuity of 20/200 or less remained smaller in the verteporfin-treated group compared with the placebo-treated group (41.0% vs 55.2%; P = .001), representing a 6% and 7% increase over the month 12 outcomes, respectively. The change in the mean contrast sensitivity score from baseline (Figure 4) remained stable through the month 24 examination only in the verteporfin-treated group. The verteporfin-treated group lost 1.3 letters at both the month 12 and month 24 examination compared with the baseline score. In contrast, the placebo-treated group lost 4.5 letters at the month 12 examination and 5.2 letters at the month 24 examination compared with baseline. The difference in change from baseline at the month 24 examination (1.3 letters vs 5.2 letters) was statistically significant (P<.001).

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 3. Visual Acuity Categories in Study Eyes by Treatment at the Month 24 Follow-Up Examination*

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 4. Mean number of letters of contrast sensitivity lost at each 3-month study visit over time for eyes assigned to verteporfin treatment or placebo, with last observation carried forward for missing values.

FLUORESCEIN ANGIOGRAPHIC OUTCOMES

The proportion of eyes with progression of classic CNV beyond the area of the lesion identified at baseline (Figure 5) was significantly smaller in the verteporfin-treated group compared with the group given placebo (23.1% vs 53.6%; P<.001), a decrease from 46% and 71.1%, respectively, at the month 12 examination. The proportion of eyes with absence of classic CNV either within or beyond the area of the lesion identified at baseline (Figure 5) continued to increase through the month 24 examination and remained higher in study eyes assigned to verteporfin compared with placebo (51.2% vs 28.5%; P<.001), an increase from 18.8% and 9.1%, respectively, at the month 12 examination. Lesion size at the month 24 examination is shown in Figure 6. Placebo-treated lesions were almost twice as likely as those treated with verteporfin to be more than 6 disc areas in size, and 2.5 times more likely to be greater than 9 disc areas in size.

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 5. On left, percentage of eyes treated with verteporfin (n = 361) and eyes given placebo (n = 187) identified at baseline with classic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) with complete absence of leakage from classic CNV at the month 24 examination, with last observation carried forward for missing values. On right, percentage of eyes treated with verteporfin (n = 402) and eyes given placebo (n = 207) with progression of classic CNV beyond the lesion's area at baseline at the month 24 examination, with last observation carried forward for missing values.

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 6. Distribution of lesion sizes at the month 24 examination for 402 eyes assigned to verteporfin treatment and 207 eyes assigned to placebo, with last observation carried forward for missing values.

SUBGROUP ANALYSES

Subgroup analyses for the primary outcome (Table 4) were undertaken at the month 24 examination to determine treatment effects in different subpopulations and to further explore outcomes based on lesion composition that were judged to be clinically relevant at the month 12 examination. As noted earlier,¹ no subgroups were identified at the month 24 examination in which eyes given placebo had a better outcome than eyes treated with verteporfin. Consistent with the 1-year results, only lesion components at baseline as judged by the Photograph Reading Center affected the magnitude of the treatment benefit to a statistically significant degree (Table 4; P_i.05 for the test of interaction). A large treatment benefit was sustained when the lesion was predominantly classic CNV (ie, the area of classic CNV occupied at least 50% of the area of the entire lesion) at baseline, with 94 (59%) of the 159 eyes treated with verteporfin losing less than 15 letters at the month 24 examination, compared with 26 (31%) of the 83 eyes given placebo. As with the primary outcome for the entire group, this subgroup represented 8% fewer study eyes in both the verteporfin-treated and placebo-treated groups compared with the month 12 examination results.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 4. Eyes With a Loss of Less Than 15 Letters at Month 24 by Treatment Group and Baseline Characteristics* Table 4. Eyes With a Loss of Less Than 15 Letters at Month 24 by Treatment Group and Baseline Characteristics* (cont)

No clinically meaningful difference with respect to the primary visual acuity outcome was observed in the group of patients with minimally classic lesions (ie, the area of classic CNV occupied <50% but >0% of the area of the entire lesion) at baseline, with 96 (47.5%) of 202 verteporfin-treated patients compared with 46 (44.2%) of 104 placebo-treated patients losing less than 15 letters at the month 24 examination (P = .58). For the subgroup of lesions with no classic CNV at baseline, the number of patients was small; these cases should not have been enrolled, because the eligibility criteria required evidence of classic CNV at baseline. At the month 24 examination, 23 (56%) of 41 verteporfin-treated patients compared with 6 (30%) of 20 placebo-treated patients lost less than 15 letters of visual acuity (P = .06). When the entire study population was analyzed by absence or presence of occult CNV, the treatment benefit for the subgroup without occult CNV (ie, lesions with classic CNV but no occult CNV) remained substantial at the month 24 examination, with 65 (70%) of 93 verteporfin-treated patients losing less than 15 letters, compared with 14 (29%) of 49 placebo-treated patients (P<.001).

ADDITIONAL ANALYSES FOR PREDOMINANTLY CLASSIC LESIONS

Because the visual acuity benefit at the month 12 examination was stronger in eyes with predominantly classic CNV at baseline and because this benefit was sustained through the month 24 examination, further information on outcomes for this subgroup is given in Table 5. At the month 24 examination for this subgroup, the proportion of eyes losing at least 15 or 30 letters, the proportion of eyes with a letter score below 34 (Snellen equivalent, 20/200), the mean change in visual acuity score or contrast sensitivity score from baseline, the proportion of eyes losing at least 9 letters (3 segments) in contrast sensitivity score from baseline, and angiographic outcomes were significantly better (P<.001) in the verteporfin-treated patients compared with the placebo-treated patients. In a subsequent exploratory analysis, even when study eyes with classic but no occult CNV were removed from the subgroup with predominantly classic CNV, visual acuity benefits for predominantly classic with occult CNV were noted and were even stronger than at the month 12 examination. For example, 12 (17%) of the 69 patients treated with verteporfin that had this lesion composition at baseline, compared with 14 (36%) of the 39 patients treated with placebo, had lost at least 30 letters (P = .03) at the month 24 examination. Also, for lesions with predominantly classic CNV with occult CNV at baseline, the mean change from baseline in contrast sensitivity score was almost 0 in the verteporfin-treated group compared with -6 letters (approximately 2 segments of contrast) in the placebo-treated group.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 5. Visual Acuity, Contrast Sensitivity, and Fluorescein Angiography Outcomes at Month 24 Examination for Predominantly Classic CNV Lesions at Baseline*

SAFETY

An adverse event (irrespective of relationship to treatment) was reported in 378 patients (94%) in the verteporfin-treated group and 192 patients (92.8%) in the placebo-treated group. Adverse events considered by the treating ophthalmologist to be associated with therapy were reported in 192 patients (47.8%) treated with verteporfin and 70 (33.8%) patients given placebo. Adverse events judged to be clinically relevant, listed in Table 6, included visual disturbances in 89 verteporfin-treated patients (22.1%) compared with 32 placebo-treated patients (15.5%). This represents only 18 and 8 more patients with adverse events, respectively, compared with the month 12 examination. Only 10 (2.5%) and 5 (2.4%) additional patients had injection site adverse events, respectively, between the month 12 and month 24 examination. One additional patient in the verteporfin-treated group reported infusion-related back pain in the second 12 months of follow-up. Allergic reactions remained uncommon and were less frequent in the verteporfin-treated group (2.0%) compared with the placebo-treated group (3.9%). In the verteporfin-treated group, 2 additional photosensitivity reactions were noted in the second 12 months of follow-up for a total of 14 adverse effects (3.5%). Also in the second 12 months of follow-up, there were 5 and 4 additional deaths, respectively, for a total number of 13 deaths (3.2%) in the verteporfin-treated group and 8 (3.9%) in the placebo-treated group. No additional patients stopped treatment because of an adverse event judged by the treating ophthalmologist to be related to study treatment in the second 12 months of follow-up, keeping the total number of withdrawals due to adverse events, as described previously,¹ at 7 patients (1.7%), all in the verteporfin-treated group. For both groups, the distribution of the size of the lesion plus any surrounding atrophy was not significantly different from the distribution of the size of the lesion without the inclusion of surrounding atrophy, suggesting that by the month 24 examination, verteporfin-treated eyes had developed no additional surrounding atrophy compared with placebo-treated eyes.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 6. Clinically Relevant Adverse Events Irrespective of Relationship to Treatment

COMMENT

Jump to Section  • Top  • Introduction  • Patients and methods  • Results  • Comment  • Conclusions  • Author information  • References

The overall beneficial outcomes with verteporfin therapy reported previously¹ in cases of subfoveal CNV in AMD, with evidence of classic CNV at enrollment in the TAP Investigation, were sustained through 2 years of follow-up. The results from this additional year provide more compelling evidence for the effectiveness of verteporfin therapy in the management of lesions judged to be predominantly classic CNV at baseline. Most of the visual acuity loss in both the verteporfin-treated group and the placebo-treated group occurred in the first year, especially during the first 3 to 6 months of therapy. No striking loss of vision or atrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium was noted in the verteporfin-treated group in the second year of follow-up. The minimal additional visual acuity loss and contrast sensitivity loss in this group during the second 12 months suggests that the photodynamic therapy selectively avoided substantial damage to the photoreceptors and underlying retinal pigment epithelium. Recent studies have indicated that decreased levels of contrast sensitivity in patients with decreased visual acuity from AMD are associated with decreased levels of visual function.⁸

The minimal worsening of vision outcomes during the second 12 months of follow-up was noted despite the relatively low proportion of study eyes treated with verteporfin that had absence of leakage from classic CNV (18.8%) at the month 12 examination as judged by the Photograph Reading Center. The average number of applications of verteporfin treatment in the second year (2.2) was lower than the average number of applications in the first year (3.4). The limited additional vision loss in the verteporfin-treated group in the second 12 months does not necessarily suggest that retreatments were unnecessary during this period. Without retreatment of study eyes with fluorescein leakage from CNV during the second 12 months of follow-up, the favorable outcomes at the month 24 examination might not have been attained.

Angiographic outcomes provide further evidence to the visual acuity information that the lesions were stabilizing on verteporfin therapy, because the proportion of study eyes treated with verteporfin that had progression of classic CNV decreased from 43% to 23% between the month 12 and month 24 examination. Similarly, the difference in percentage of verteporfin-treated patients with absence of classic CNV increased from 23% to 51.2%, a much greater jump than in patients given placebo, which increased only from 13% to 28.5%.

As was noted at the month 12 examination, the treatment benefit at the month 24 examination was stronger not only for the subgroup of eyes with predominantly classic lesions but also for the subgroup of eyes composed of classic CNV with no occult CNV at baseline. However, in an exploratory retrospective analysis, even when study eyes with classic but no occult CNV were removed from the subgroup with predominantly classic CNV, visual acuity and contrast sensitivity benefits for predominantly classic with occult CNV were noted and were even stronger than at the month 12 examination.

For lesions judged to be minimally classic at the baseline examination by the Photograph Reading Center, contrast sensitivity and fluorescein angiography outcomes at both the month 12 and month 24 examinations were significantly better in verteporfin-treated patients compared with those given placebo. These positive outcomes were not accompanied by significantly better visual acuity outcomes than in placebo-treated cases. These results also confirm that using fluorescein angiographic outcomes to predict those for visual acuity may not always work, because significantly better angiographic results do not always correlate with better outcomes for visual acuity.

The favorable outcomes for verteporfin therapy noted for the small number of patients whose eyes had no classic CNV at baseline (according to the Photograph Reading Center) were less evident at the month 24 examination, when the difference between the percentage of verteporfin-treated patients and placebo-treated patients who lost less than 15 letters only approached statistical significance. The Verteporfin in Photodynamic Therapy (VIP) Trial, which was to enroll patients with subfoveal lesions caused by AMD with occult CNV but no classic CNV, will provide more precise data regarding the benefits and risks of verteporfin therapy in such cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Jump to Section  • Top  • Introduction  • Patients and methods  • Results  • Comment  • Conclusions  • Author information  • References

The 2-year outcomes from the TAP Investigation strengthen the evidence from the 1-year results that verteporfin therapy can safely reduce the risk of vision loss in patients with predominantly classic subfoveal CNV caused by AMD, with or without occult CNV, and that verteporfin should be prescribed for this type of lesion. For AMD patients with minimally classic subfoveal lesions, there is insufficient evidence at this time to make a recommendation regarding the use of verteporfin therapy.

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Jump to Section  • Top  • Introduction  • Patients and methods  • Results  • Comment  • Conclusions  • Author information  • References

Accepted for publication November 2, 2000.

This study was financially supported by CIBA Vision AG, Bülach, Switzerland, and QLT Inc, Vancouver, British Columbia.

The Wellman Laboratories of Photomedicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, are an owner of a patent covering the use of verteporfin. Should the Wellman Laboratories of Photomedicine receive royalties or other financial remuneration related to that patent, Dr Schmidt-Erfurth would receive a share of the same in accordance with the Wellman Laboratories of Photomedicine's institutional Patent Policy and Procedures, which includes royalty-sharing provisions. The Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary is a co-owner of a patent covering the use of verteporfin. In addition, the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary is the sole owner of claims in patent applications relating to the selective destruction of subretinal choroidal neovasculature for the treatment of macular degeneration and other disorders. Should the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary receive royalties or other financial remuneration related to the patent and patent filing, Drs Miller and Gragoudas would receive a share of the same in accordance with the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary's institutional Patent Policy and Procedures, which includes royalty-sharing provisions.

The following authors have indicated a financial interest as follows: paid consultants of Novartis Ophthalmics or QLT, Inc, or both: Mark S. Blumenkranz, MD, Neil M. Bressler, MD, Michael J. Potter, MD; support for scientific presentations at meetings and travel expenses: Susan B. Bressler, MD, Jordi M. Monés, MD; ownership of QLT stock: Patricia Harvey, MD, Lawrence J. Singerman, MD; patent interest in verteporfin: Evangelos S. Gragoudas, MD, Joan W. Miller, MD, Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, MD. Detailed statements are on file with the ARCHIVES office.

Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration With Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group

Clinical Centers

The Wilmer Ophthalmological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md: Ann Eager.

Cole Eye Institute, The Cleveland Clinical Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio: Stephen Burke.

Texas Retina Associates, Dallas: Jean Arnwine, Rubye Collins, Hank Aguado.

St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, England: Salim Natha.

Medizinische Universität zu Lübeck, Klinik für Augenheilkunde, Lübeck, Germany: Hanno Elsner, Kai Honnicke, Verena Wintzer.

Zweng Memorial Retinal Research Foundation, Menlo Park, Calif: Kathy Honeycutt, Lora Lamborn.

Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Miami, Fla: Jael Gosdenovich, Linda Duria.

Vitreous-Retina-Macula Consultants of New York, New York, NY: Maria Scolaro.

Devers Eye Institute, Portland, Ore: Harold Crider, Milton Johnson.

Associated Retina Consultants, Royal Oak, Mich: Kristi Cumming.

CIBA Vision AG, Bülach, Switzerland: Alain Bobillier.

CIBA Vision Corp, Duluth, Ga: Leann McAlister, Roberta Birch.

QLT Inc, Vancouver, British Columbia: Marcia Mason, Ursula McCurry, Terri So.

Writing Committee for TAP Report 2

Jennifer Arnold, MD, Irene Barbazetto, MD, Reginald Birngruber, MD, Mark S. Blumenkranz, MD, Susan B. Bressler, MD, Neil M. Bressler, MD, Guy Donati, MD, Gary Edd Fish, MD, Evangelos S. Gragoudas, MD, Patricia Harvey, MD, Peter K. Kaiser, MD, Hilel Lewis, MD, Joan W. Miller, MD, Jordi M. Monés, MD, Michael J. Potter, MD, Constantin J Pournaras, MD, Andrew P. Schachat, MD, Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, MD, Lawrence J. Singerman, MD, H. Andrew Strong, PhD, Hubert van den Berg, PhD, George A. Williams, MD.

A complete list of the participants in the TAP Study Group is available in Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1343-1344, with updates as of January 11, 2000, above.

Corresponding author: Neil M. Bressler, MD, Suite 115, 550 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21205-2005 (e-mail: pstaflin{at}jhmi.edu). Reprints: Medical Information, CIBA Vision Corporation, 11460 Johns Creek Pkwy, Duluth, GA 30097.

A complete list of the participants in the TAP Study Group is available in Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1343-1344, with updates as of January 11, 2000, shown below.

REFERENCES

Jump to Section  • Top  • Introduction  • Patients and methods  • Results  • Comment  • Conclusions  • Author information  • References

1. Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration With Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group. Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration with verteporfin: one-year results of 2 randomized clinical trials—TAP report 1. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1329-1345. FREE FULL TEXT 2. Macular Photocoagulation Study Group. Subfoveal neovascular lesions in age-related macular degeneration: guidelines for evaluation and treatment in the Macular Photocoagulation Study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109:1242-1257. FREE FULL TEXT 3. Bressler NM, Gragoudas ES, Bressler SB. Age-related macular degeneration, part 2: RPE detachment and subretinal neovascularization. In: Albert DM, Jakobiec FA, eds. Principles and Practice of Ophthalmology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1999:1992-2013. 4. Chow SC, Lui JP. Analysis of categorical data. In: Design and Analysis of Clinical Trials: Concepts and Methodologies. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1998:331-333. 5. Chow SC, Lui JP. Analysis of continuous data. In: Design and Analysis of Clinical Trials: Concepts and Methodologies. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1998:277-280, 286-290. 6. Lee ET. Nonparametric methods of estimating survival functions. In: Statistical Methods for Survival Data Analysis. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1992:66-78. 7. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Interpretation of the coefficients of the logistic regression model. In: Applied Logistic Regression. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1989:63-68. 8. McClure ME, Hart PM, Jackson AJ, Stevenson MR, Chakravarthy U. Macular degeneration: do conventional measurements of impaired visual function equate with visual disability? Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:244-250. FREE FULL TEXT

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Photoreceptors Repair by Autologous Transplantation of Retinal Pigment Epithelium and Partial-Thickness Choroid Graft in Rabbits
Zhang et al.
IOVS 2009;50:2982-2988.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Visual Acuity Outcomes Among Sham vs No-Treatment Controls From Randomized Trials
Hawkins et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:725-731.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Triple therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration using single-session photodynamic therapy combined with intravitreal bevacizumab and triamcinolone
Yip et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2009;93:754-758.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Comparison of Macular Translocation with Patch Graft in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Chen et al.
IOVS 2009;50:1848-1855.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Forecasting Age-Related Macular Degeneration Through the Year 2050: The Potential Impact of New Treatments
Rein et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:533-540.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Observational prospective study of the effectiveness in routine clinical practice of verteporfin photodynamic therapy in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration
Murjaneh et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2009;93:468-473.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Early Effects of Intravitreal Triamcinolone Acetonide on Inflammation and Proliferation in Human Choroidal Neovascularization
Tatar et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:275-281.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Folic Acid, Pyridoxine, and Cyanocobalamin Combination Treatment and Age-Related Macular Degeneration in Women: The Women's Antioxidant and Folic Acid Cardiovascular Study
Christen et al.
Arch Intern Med 2009;169:335-341.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Age-related macular degeneration
Ayoub and Patel
JRSM 2009;102:56-61.
FULL TEXT  

Implications of bevacizumab on vascular endothelial growth factor and endostatin in human choroidal neovascularisation
Tatar et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2009;93:159-165.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Infrared features of classic choroidal neovascularisation in exudative age-related macular degeneration
Semoun et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2009;93:182-185.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Same-day administration of verteporfin and ranibizumab 0.5 mg in patients with choroidal neovascularisation due to age-related macular degeneration
Schmidt-Erfurth et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:1628-1635.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Photodynamic therapy with verteporfin for age-related macular degeneration or polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy: comparison of the presence of serous retinal pigment epithelial detachment
Saito et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:1642-1647.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Photoreceptor Protection after Photodynamic Therapy Using Dexamethasone in a Rat Model of Choroidal Neovascularization
She et al.
IOVS 2008;49:5008-5014.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Intersession Repeatability of Visual Acuity Scores in Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Patel et al.
IOVS 2008;49:4347-4352.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Combination of Photodynamic Therapy and Intraocular Triamcinolone for Exudative Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Long-Term Chorioretinal Macular Atrophy
Piermarocchi et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:1367-1374.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reduced fluence versus standard photodynamic therapy in combination with intravitreal triamcinolone: short-term results of a randomised study
Sacu et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:1347-1351.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Coagulation Gene Predictors of Photodynamic Therapy for Occult Choroidal Neovascularization in Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Parmeggiani et al.
IOVS 2008;49:3100-3106.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Bevacizumab Treatment for Subfoveal Choroidal Neovascularization From Causes Other Than Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Chang et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:941-945.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Optical coherence tomography: limits of the retinal-mapping program in age-related macular degeneration
Krebs et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:933-935.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Effect of Bevacizumab on Inflammation and Proliferation in Human Choroidal Neovascularization
Tatar et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:782-790.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A prospective randomised study on low-dose transpupillary thermotherapy versus photodynamic therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration
Odergren et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:757-761.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Evaluation of the New Photosensitizer Stakel (WST-11) for Photodynamic Choroidal Vessel Occlusion in Rabbit and Rat Eyes
Berdugo et al.
IOVS 2008;49:1633-1644.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Age-related macular degeneration: diagnosis and management
Cook et al.
Br Med Bull 2008;85:127-149.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Simultaneous but Not Prior Inhibition of VEGF165 Enhances the Efficacy of Photodynamic Therapy in Multiple Models of Ocular Neovascularization
Ju et al.
IOVS 2008;49:662-670.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Early Effects of Triamcinolone on Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor and Endostatin in Human Choroidal Neovascularization
Tatar et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:193-199.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The role of dynamic indocyanine green angiography in the diagnosis and treatment of retinal angiomatous proliferation
Bearelly et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:191-196.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Identifying Research Priorities: The Value of Information Associated with Repeat Screening for Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Bojke et al.
Med Decis Making 2008;28:33-43.
ABSTRACT  

Histopathological findings in postmortem eyes after photodynamic therapy for choroidal neovascularisation in age-related macular degeneration: report of two cases
Kang et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:1602-1606.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Suppression of Choroidal Neovascularization by Dendritic Cell Vaccination Targeting VEGFR2
Mochimaru et al.
IOVS 2007;48:4795-4801.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Intravitreal Bevacizumab vs Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Bashshur et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2007;125:1357-1361.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy with an appearance similar to classic choroidal neovascularisation on fluorescein angiography
Iida
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:1103-1104.
FULL TEXT  

Types of choroidal neovascularisation in newly diagnosed exudative age-related macular degeneration
Cohen et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:1173-1176.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Matrix metalloproteinases in human choroidal neovascular membranes excised following verteporfin photodynamic therapy
Tatar et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:1183-1189.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The 100 Most Frequently Cited Articles in Ophthalmology Journals
Ohba et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2007;125:952-960.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Recurrence of choroidal neovascularisation after photodynamic therapy in patients with age-related macular degeneration
Potter and Szabo
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:753-756.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Correlation between Focal Macular Electroretinograms and Angiographic Findings after Photodynamic Therapy
Ishikawa et al.
IOVS 2007;48:2254-2259.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reduced Photoreceptor Damage after Photodynamic Therapy through Blockade of Nitric Oxide Synthase in a Model of Choroidal Neovascularization
She et al.
IOVS 2007;48:2268-2277.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Two-year results of surgical removal of choroidal neovascular membranes related to non-age-related macular degeneration
Essex et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:649-654.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Anxiety and Depression Prevalence Rates in Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Augustin et al.
IOVS 2007;48:1498-1503.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Beta Carotene Supplementation and Age-Related Maculopathy in a Randomized Trial of US Physicians
Christen et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2007;125:333-339.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Combined photodynamic therapy and intravitreal triamcinolone injection for the treatment of choroidal neovascularisation secondary to pathological myopia: a pilot study
Chan et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:174-179.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Effect of verteporfin photodynamic therapy on endostatin and angiogenesis in human choroidal neovascular membranes
Tatar et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:166-173.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Public Health Impact of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Extrapolated from Visual Acuity
Bandello et al.
IOVS 2007;48:96-103.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

New treatments for age-related macular degeneration
Imrie and Bailey
Age Ageing 2007;36:8-10.
FULL TEXT  

Neurotrophic Factors Minimize the Retinal Toxicity of Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy
Paskowitz et al.
IOVS 2007;48:430-437.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Triamcinolone acetonide suppresses early proangiogenic response in retinal pigment epithelial cells after photodynamic therapy in vitro
Obata et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:100-104.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Dose-Ranging Study of Lutein Supplementation in Persons Aged 60 Years or Older
Rosenthal et al.
IOVS 2006;47:5227-5233.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Different transitions of multifocal electroretinogram recordings between patients with age-related macular degeneration and polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy after photodynamic therapy
Imai et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:1524-1530.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ranibizumab Combined With Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Year 1 Results of the FOCUS Study.
Heier et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:1532-1542.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ranibizumab for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Rosenfeld et al.
NEJM 2006;355:1419-1431.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ranibizumab versus Verteporfin for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Brown et al.
NEJM 2006;355:1432-1444.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Very Effective Treatment for Neovascular Macular Degeneration
Stone
NEJM 2006;355:1493-1495.
FULL TEXT  

Estimating the yearly number of eyes with treatable neovascular age-related macular degeneration using a direct standardization method and a markov model.
Korobelnik et al.
IOVS 2006;47:4270-4276.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Intravitreal Bevacizumab for Choroidal Neovascularization Caused by AMD (IBeNA Study): Results of a Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Study.
Costa et al.
IOVS 2006;47:4569-4578.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Some ethical considerations for the "off-label" use of drugs such as Avastin.
Wong and Kyle
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:1218-1219.
FULL TEXT  

Evolving European guidance on the medical management of neovascular age related macular degeneration.
Chakravarthy et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:1188-1196.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Phase I clinical trial results of verteporfin enhanced feeder vessel therapy in subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation in age related macular degeneration
Kozak et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:1152-1156.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Photodynamic therapy for subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation in Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease
Nowilaty et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:982-986.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Verteporfin photodynamic therapy induced apoptosis in choroidal neovascular membranes
Petermeier et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:1034-1039.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Flavonoids protect human retinal pigment epithelial cells from oxidative-stress-induced death.
Hanneken et al.
IOVS 2006;47:3164-3177.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Pegaptanib: A Novel Approach to Ocular Neovascularization
Chapman and Beckey
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2006;40:1322-1326.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lesion morphology in age-related macular degeneration and its therapeutic significance.
Beaumont and Kang
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:807-812.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Consequences of verteporfin photodynamic therapy on choroidal neovascular membranes.
Tatar et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:815-823.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Occult With No Classic Subfoveal Choroidal Neovascular Lesions in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Clinically Relevant Natural History Information in Larger Lesions With Good Vision From the Verteporfin in Photodynamic Therapy (VIP) Trial: VIP Report No. 4.
Writing Committee for the VIP Study Group
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:660-664.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Sequenced combined intravitreal triamcinolone and indocyanine green angiography-guided photodynamic therapy for retinal angiomatous proliferation.
Freund et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:487-492.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Perspectives on verteporfin therapy combined with intravitreal corticosteroids.
Schmidt-Erfurth et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:561-563.
FULL TEXT  

Should corticosteroids be considered as part of the standard care with photodynamic therapy?
Zarbin
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:563-571.
FULL TEXT  

Combined photodynamic therapy and intravitreal triamcinolone injection for the treatment of subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation in age related macular degeneration: a comparative study.
Chan et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:337-341.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Iris Pigment Epithelial Translocation in the Treatment of Exudative Macular Degeneration: A 3-Year Follow-up.
Aisenbrey et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:183-188.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Long term results after transpupillary thermotherapy in eyes with occult choroidal neovascularisation associated with age related macular degeneration: a prospective trial
Stolba et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:158-161.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ultrahigh resolution optical coherence tomography in non-exudative age related macular degeneration
Pieroni et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:191-197.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Influence of Treatment Parameters on Selectivity of Verteporfin Therapy
Michels et al.
IOVS 2006;47:371-376.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ocular Changes after Photodynamic Therapy
Tzekov et al.
IOVS 2006;47:377-385.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Treatment of Retinal Angiomatous Proliferation in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Series of 104 Cases of Retinal Angiomatous Proliferation
Bottoni et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:1644-1650.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Retinal Anastomosis to Choroidal Neovascularization: A Bum Rap for a Difficult Disease
Bressler
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:1741-1743.
FULL TEXT  

Inflammatory Markers in Age-Related Maculopathy: Cross-sectional Analysis From the Muenster Aging and Retina Study
Dasch et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:1501-1506.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Complications After Photodynamic Therapy
Schnurrbusch et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:1347-1350.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Verteporfin Therapy for Subfoveal Choroidal Neovascularization in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Four-Year Results of an Open-Label Extension of 2 Randomized Clinical Trials: TAP Report No. 7
Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration With
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:1283-1285.
FULL TEXT  

Optical coherence tomography guided retreatment of photodynamic therapy
Krebs et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005;89:1184-1187.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Correlation of optical coherence tomography, with or without additional colour fundus photography, with stereo fundus fluorescein angiography in diagnosing choroidal neovascular membranes
Sandhu and Talks
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005;89:967-970.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Macular Function after PDT in Myopic Maculopathy: Psychophysical and Electrophysiological Evaluation
Varano et al.
IOVS 2005;46:1453-1462.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Verteporfin Therapy of Subfoveal Minimally Classic Choroidal Neovascularization in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: 2-Year Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial
Visudyne in Minimally Classic Choroidal Neovascula
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:448-457.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Three Cases of Large Retinal Capillary Hemangiomas Treated With Verteporfin and Photodynamic Therapy
Aaberg et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:328-332.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Impact of lesion size on photodynamic therapy with verteporfin of predominantly classic lesions in age related macular degeneration
Arias et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005;89:312-315.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Optical coherence tomography in photodynamic therapy for subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation secondary to age related macular degeneration: a cross sectional study
Sahni et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005;89:316-320.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Photodynamic Therapy With Verteporfin: Observations on the Introduction of a New Treatment Into Clinical Practice
Schein et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:58-63.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Factors influencing visual acuity after intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide as treatment of exudative age related macular degeneration
Jonas et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2004;88:1557-1562.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

BDNF Reduces the Retinal Toxicity of Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy
Paskowitz et al.
IOVS 2004;45:4190-4196.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

CAI Is a Potent Inhibitor of Neovascularization and Imparts Neuroprotection in a Mouse Model of Ischemic Retinopathy
Franklin et al.
IOVS 2004;45:3756-3766.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A prospective study of visual function and quality of life following PDT in patients with wet age related macular degeneration
Armbrecht et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2004;88:1270-1273.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Choroidal Neovascularization After Central Retinal Vein Occlusion in a 47-Year-Old Man
DiLoreto et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:1398-1401.
FULL TEXT  

Cost effectiveness of photodynamic therapy with verteporfin for age related macular degeneration: the UK case
Smith et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2004;88:1107-1112.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Colour vision testing as an aid to diagnosis and management of age related maculopathy
Arden and Wolf
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2004;88:1180-1185.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Expression of Leukocyte Adhesion Molecules in Human Subfoveal Choroidal Neovascular Membranes Treated with and without Photodynamic Therapy
Yeh et al.
IOVS 2004;45:2368-2373.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Selective Photodynamic Therapy by Targeted Verteporfin Delivery to Experimental Choroidal Neovascularization Mediated by a Homing Peptide to Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2
Renno et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:1002-1011.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Subthreshold Transpupillary Thermotherapy Reduces Experimental Choroidal Neovascularization in the Mouse without Collateral Damage to the Neural Retina
Ming et al.
IOVS 2004;45:1969-1974.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Treatment of age-related macular degeneration
Browning et al.
JRSM 2004;97:166-169.
FULL TEXT  

Photodynamic Therapy for Occult Choroidal Neovascularization With Pigment Epithelium Detachment in Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Axer-Siegel et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:453-459.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Prevalence of Age-Related Macular Degeneration in the United States
The Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group
Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:564-572.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT