The Ocriplasmin for Treatment for Symptomatic Vitreomacular Adhesion Including Macular Hole (OASIS) trial electroretinogram substudy assessed a possible association between vitreomacular adhesion and best-corrected visual acuity with changes to full-field electroretinograms as part of a prospective, randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled clinical trial studying the efficacy and safety of ocriplasmin for the treatment of symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion.

Purpose: To evaluate patient-reported visual function after ocriplasmin through the 25item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) in patients with symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion/vitreomacular traction including macular hole.Methods: This was a prespecified analysis of a secondary endpoint from the OASIS trial. Patients received a single intravitreal injection of ocriplasmin (0.125 mg) or sham and completed the VFQ-25 questionnaire at baseline and at Months 6, 12, and 24. Clinically meaningful ($5-point) changes from baseline were assessed.Results: Of the 220 patients enrolled, 146 received ocriplasmin and 74 received sham. At Month 24, the percentage of patients with a $5-point improvement from baseline in VFQ-25 composite scores was higher with ocriplasmin versus sham (51.4% vs. 30.1%, 95% confidence interval, 8.1-34.5, P = 0.003). The percentage of patients with $5-point worsening at Month 24 was lower with ocriplasmin versus sham (9.5% vs. 15.6%, 95% confidence interval: 215.6 to 3.5, P = 0.191). A larger percentage of patients treated with ocriplasmin versus sham experienced a $5-point improvement in VFQ-25 composite and subscale scores at Month 24 regardless of baseline full-thickness macular hole status.Conclusion: A larger percentage of patients with symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion/ vitreomacular traction reported clinically meaningful improvements in self-assessed visual function with ocriplasmin than sham.

Substudy results suggest that fixation and sensitivity parameters tended to be better in the ocriplasmin group than in the sham group over time. The substudy identified parameters that were distinct between patients with and without vitreomacular adhesion resolution, suggesting that microperimetry warrants further study as a relevant biomarker for visual function.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.