OphSourceHomeJournal CollectionOphSource ShopEvents
Journal Home
Search for

Volume 114, Issue 2, Pages 246-252 (February 2007)


View previous. 11 of 49 View next.

Subgroup Analysis of the MARINA Study of Ranibizumab in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

MARINA Study GroupDavid S. Boyer, MD1Corresponding Author Informationemail address, Andrew N. Antoszyk, MD2, Carl C. Awh, MD3, Robert B. Bhisitkul, MD, PhD4, Howard Shapiro, PhD5, Nisha R. Acharya, MD, MS45

Received 12 September 2006; accepted 25 October 2006.

Objective

An examination of clinically relevant subgroups of patients in the MARINA study of ranibizumab in treatment of minimally classic or occult with no classic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD) was done. Objectives were to determine the effectiveness of ranibizumab across subgroups, compare the effectiveness of ranibizumab with that of sham injection within subgroups, and evaluate the relationship between selected baseline characteristics and visual acuity (VA) outcomes.

Design

Retrospective subgroup analyses of 24-month data from the MARINA study.

Participants and Controls

Seven hundred sixteen patients were randomly assigned to 0.3 mg ranibizumab (n = 238), 0.5 mg ranibizumab (n = 240), or sham treatment (n = 238).

Methods

Efficacy outcomes were compared across subgroups based on patients’ gender, age, baseline VA score, baseline CNV lesion size, CNV lesion type, and duration of neovascular AMD using univariate analyses. Multivariate analyses were performed on the change from baseline to 24 months in VA score to assess further the correlation between baseline characteristics and VA outcome.

Main Outcome Measures

Proportion of patients losing <15 letters from baseline, proportion gaining ≥15 letters from baseline, and mean VA score change from baseline.

Results

For each of the 3 VA end points, all subgroups of ranibizumab-treated patients did better on average than the sham-treated patients. Increasing age, larger CNV lesion size at baseline, and a higher baseline VA score were all associated with greater loss of letters in the sham group or less gain of letters in the ranibizumab groups. However, the net benefit of ranibizumab versus sham treatment was greater in patients who scored higher than in those who scored lower in baseline VA.

Conclusions

This subgroup analysis of 24-month data from the MARINA study indicates that ranibizumab treatment was associated with an average increase from baseline VA in all subgroups evaluated, and that ranibizumab treatment was superior to sham treatment across all subgroups. The most important predictors of VA outcomes were, in decreasing order of importance, baseline VA score, CNV lesion size, and age.

1 Retina-Vitreous Associates, Beverly Hills, California.

2 Charlotte Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat Associates, Charlotte, North Carolina.

3 Retina Vitreous Associates, Nashville, Tennessee.

4 Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California.

5 Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, California.

Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to David S. Boyer, MD, 8641 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 210, Beverly Hills, CA 90211.

 Manuscript no. 2006-1033.

Supported financially by Genentech, Inc. and Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.

PII: S0161-6420(06)01484-9

doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.10.045


View previous. 11 of 49 View next.