Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: We present the results of a Phase 2a randomized controlled trial investigating the safety, and secondary endpoints of subretinal rAAV.sFLT-1 gene therapy in patients with active wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD). METHODS: vg). All patients were assessed every 4weeks to the week 52 primary endpoint. FINDINGS: Ocular adverse events (AEs) in the rAAV.sFLT-1 group were mainly procedure related and self-resolved. All 11 phakic patients in the rAAV.sFLT-1 group showed progression of cataract following vitrectomy. No systemic safety signals were observed and none of the serious AEs were associated with rAAV.sFLT-1. AAV2 capsid was not detected and rAAV.sFLT-1 DNA was detected transiently in the tears of 13 patients. ELISPOT analysis did not identify any notable changes in T-cell response. In the rAAV.sFLT-1 group 12 patients had neutralizing antibodies (nAb) to AAV2. There was no change in sFLT-1 levels in bodily fluids. In the rAAV.sFLT-1 group, Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) improved by a median of 1.0 (IQR: -3.0 to 9.0) Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters from baseline compared to a median of -5.0 (IQR: -17.5 to 1.0) ETDRS letters change in the control group. Twelve (57%) patients in the rAAV.sFLT-1 group maintained or improved vision compared to 4 (36%) in the control group. The median number of ranibizumab retreatments was 2.0 (IQR: 1.0 to 6.0) for the gene therapy group compared to 4.0 (IQR: 3.5 to 4.0) for the control group. Interpretation rAAV.sFLT-1 combined with the option for co-treatment appears to be a safe and promising approach to the treatment of wAMD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Constable et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: