↓ Skip to main content

Two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implants as monotherapy or in combination therapy for macular edema in retinal vein occlusion: subgroup analysis of a retrospective chart review study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ophthalmology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implants as monotherapy or in combination therapy for macular edema in retinal vein occlusion: subgroup analysis of a retrospective chart review study
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12886-015-0018-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael A Singer, Antonio Capone Jr, Pravin U Dugel, Richard F Dreyer, David G Dodwell, Daniel B Roth, Rui Shi, John G Walt, Lanita C Scott, David A Hollander, for the SHASTA Study Group

Abstract

Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) is a sustained-release biodegradable implant approved for treatment of macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion (RVO). The safety and efficacy of treatment of RVO-associated macular edema with sequential DEX implants in clinical practice was evaluated in patients who received DEX implant as monotherapy compared with patients who received DEX implant in combination with other RVO treatments. A multicenter, retrospective, open-label chart review study (one study eye/patient) evaluated use of DEX implant and outcomes in 289 patients with branch or central RVO who received at least 2 DEX implant treatments in the study eye. Data were collected from the time of the first implant (baseline) to 3-6 months after the last implant. Subgroup analysis evaluated outcomes in patients receiving only DEX implant during the study versus patients receiving DEX implant plus adjunctive RVO treatments. Endpoints included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) change from baseline. DEX implant was used as monotherapy in 84 (29.1%) patients and in combination with other therapy in 205 (70.9%) patients. Mean number of DEX implant treatments received was 3.1 in the monotherapy group and 3.3 in the combination therapy group (P = 0.344). Mean time between implants was longer in the combination therapy group (177 vs. 151 days, P < 0.001). Mean change from baseline BCVA after the first through sixth DEX implants ranged from +0.6 to +3.4 lines in the monotherapy group and +1.3 to +2.8 lines in the combination therapy group. Mean decrease from baseline CRT ranged from 165 to 230 μm in the monotherapy group and 136 to 175 μm in the combination therapy group. Increased intraocular pressure was more common in the combination therapy group. Treatment of RVO-associated macular edema with at least 2 sequential DEX implants was safe and effective both when used alone and when combined with other RVO treatments. Improvements in BCVA and CRT were generally similar in the monotherapy and combined therapy groups. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01411696 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 12 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,302,535
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#2,084
of 2,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,029
of 264,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#21
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,347 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.