MyVisionTest News Archive
Jul 15, 2008
Avastin Treatment for CNV From Causes Other Than AMD
A new study finds that CNV secondary to non-AMD causes treated with Avastin responded favorably and similarly, despite varying underlying etiologies.
The investigators performed a retrospective analysis of eyes that received intravitreous Avastin (bevacizumab, 1.25 mg), for subfoveal non-AMD CNV at a referral-based retinal practice. Repeated treatment with Avastin occurred if there were signs of persistent or recurrent exudation. The main outcome measure was visual acuity (VA).
The study included 39 eyes of 36 patients with subfoveal CNV secondary to multifocal choroiditis (n = 12), angioid streaks (n = 11), myopic degeneration (n = 10), idiopathic disease (n = 4), or other disease (n = 2). The median baseline VA was 20/60. The mean follow-up was 58.8 weeks, and the mean number of injections per eye was 3.4. After 3-month follow-up, the median VA was 20/30. At last follow-up, the median VA was 20/40. There was no correlation between underlying diagnosis and VA change during follow-up.
The authors comment that this study suggest that CNV from non–AMD-related causes may respond similarly in terms of anatomical and visual outcomes to intravitreous Avastin treatment and that extrapolation of experience from AMD-related CNV to non–AMD-related CNV cases may be valid.
Read more...
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(7):941-945.
Tags: Avastin, myopia, histoplasmosis

The investigators performed a retrospective analysis of eyes that received intravitreous Avastin (bevacizumab, 1.25 mg), for subfoveal non-AMD CNV at a referral-based retinal practice. Repeated treatment with Avastin occurred if there were signs of persistent or recurrent exudation. The main outcome measure was visual acuity (VA).
The authors comment that this study suggest that CNV from non–AMD-related causes may respond similarly in terms of anatomical and visual outcomes to intravitreous Avastin treatment and that extrapolation of experience from AMD-related CNV to non–AMD-related CNV cases may be valid.
Read more...
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(7):941-945.