The introduction of verteporfin photodynamic therapy in the UK: PDT users group (PDTUG) surveillance programme report 1

Ghanchi, Faruque; Fullarton, John R.; Blake, James; Harding, Simon

doi:10.1038/sj.eye.6702713

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The positive results for predominantly classic subfoveal lesions in the TAP trial has since prompted a large number of studies ( Sharma et al 2004;Arias et al 2005;Michels et al 2005;Brown et al 2006;Heier et al 2006;Slakter et al 2006;Gelisken et al 2007) and retrospective (Essex et al 2003;Axer-Siegel et al 2004a;Frennesson & Nilsson 2004;Pawlak et al 2004;Wachtlin et al 2005;Potter et al 2008;Yang et al 2006;Ghanchi et al 2007;Manku et al 2007;Pece et al 2007;Sharp et al 2007). In several of these reports, PDT monotherapy was used as a The VIP, VIO and VIM trials examined the efficacy of PDT in patients whose lesions either did not meet the TAP Study inclusion criteria or who were included but required further study (Table 1).…”

Section: The Tap Study: Pdt In Predominantly Classic Lesionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photodynamic therapy with verteporfin in age‐related macular degeneration: a systematic review of efficacy, safety, treatment modifications and pharmacoeconomic properties

Cruess

Zlateva

Pleil

et al. 2009

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.Photodynamic therapy (PDT) with verteporfin has been used less comprehensively in the treatment of exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and specifically of choroidal neovascularization (CNV), since the advent of antiangiogenic therapies. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in PDT as an adjunct to these and other agents in the treatment of neovascular AMD. In light of this new development and the European Medicines Evaluation Agency's (EMEA) recent labelling decision to rescind approval for the use of PDT in occult CNV lesions, the present systematic review was undertaken to revisit the evidence supporting its clinical application. Photodynamic therapy provided the first pharmacological treatment for patients suffering from subfoveal CNV, the major cause of severe vision loss in AMD. Key clinical trials evaluating efficacy and safety have examined patients with all lesion subtypes, with the primary labelled indication (i.e. lesions containing a classic component of ‡ 50% ) deriving from the results of the Treatment of Age-related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study. The subsequent TAP Study Group post hoc categorization of lesions as predominantly classic is open to question, however, as it appears that the overall efficacy in this group only may have reflected the especially strong response in 100% classic lesions. Based on a subgroup analysis of the Verteporfin in Photodynamic Therapy Study, the indication for PDT subsequently was expanded in some jurisdictions, including that of the EMEA, to include occult lesions with no classic component. However, the subsequent Visudyne in Occult Study found no benefit in 100% occult lesions, resulting in the EMEA rescinding its approval for this indication.

show abstract