Purpose: To compare
ischemia-related clinical outcomes in patients treated with either
ranibizumab pro re
nata (PRN) or single
dexamethasone implant in the
Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion (COMRADE-B) or
Central Retinal Vein Occlusion (COMRADE-C) trials.Methods: A post-hoc analysis of the Phase IIIb, 6-month, multicenter, double-masked, randomized, COMRADE-B and COMRADE-C trials. Change over 6 months in
retinal ischemia status (central avascular [CA] zone and peripheral nonperfusion [PNP]), mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the development of shunt vessels and neovascularization, and frequency of
laser therapy were assessed in
retinal vein occlusion (RVO) patients treated with either
ranibizumab 0.5 mg PRN or single
dexamethasone 0.7 mg implant, as per European labels, in the COMRADE-B (N = 244;
ranibizumab, 126,
dexamethasone, 118) or COMRADE-C (N = 243;
ranibizumab, 124,
dexamethasone, 119) trials. BCVA progression in ischemic vs. non-ischemic patients based on the
ischemia assessment at month 6 was carried out.Results: Visual acuity (VA) gains from baseline to month 6 were higher with
ranibizumab than with
dexamethasone in both patients with central
ischemia and those with peripheral
retinal nonperfusion, independent of the type of RVO (branch or central). The presence of CA and PNP had a significant impact on VA gain over 6 months in CRVO patients (p < .0001), while there was no significant impact in BRVO.
Ranibizumab was associated with less new
ischemia than
dexamethasone. Central RVO patients treated with
dexamethasone received more
laser treatments over the 6 months than those treated with
ranibizumab, while there was no difference in the frequency of
laser therapy between the branch RVO treatment groups.Conclusions: VA gain over six months in
ranibizumab-treated RVO patients is not affected by
ischemia, and is associated with less development of new
ischemia during the first 6 months of treatment and equal or fewer
laser treatments than
dexamethasone implant.