Baseline characteristics and response to treatment of participants with hemiretinal compared with branch retinal or central retinal vein occlusion in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) study: SCORE study report 14

Ingrid Scott, Paul C. VanVeldhuisen, Neal L. Oden, Michael S. Ip, Amitha Domalpally, Bernard H. Doft, Michael J. Elman, Barbara A. Blodi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare baseline characteristics and treatment response of participants with hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) with those of participants with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) or central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) Study. Methods: Eyes were randomized to standard care, 1mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, or 4 mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Standard care was observation in the SCORE-CRVO trial and grid photocoagulation in the SCORE-BRVO trial. The HRVO eyes were enrolled in the SCORE-BRVO trial. Baseline characteristics, changes in visual acuity and center point thickness, safety outcomes, and number of treatments were compared among HRVO, BRVO, and CRVO participants. Results: At baseline, HRVO eyes were intermediate between BRVO and CRVO eyes in area of retinal thickening, area of fluorescein leakage, visual acuity, and center point thickness. No differences in visual acuity change from baseline to 1 year were noted between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO. Within triamcinolone-treated eyes, HRVO eyes did not differ from BRVO eyes in visual acuity change, but HRVO eyes fared better than CRVO eyes. There were no differences in center point thickness change between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO, nor were there differences across the 3 disease entities for triamcinolone-treated eyes. There were no differences in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Conclusions: The HRVO participants were similar to BRVO and CRVO participants regarding most demographic characteristics, with fundus findings intermediate between BRVO and CRVO. In the SCORE Study, HRVO was treated as BRVO; HRVO eyes responded to treatment similarly to BRVO eyes, and there was no difference among the 3 disease entities in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00105027.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1517-1524
Number of pages8
JournalArchives of Ophthalmology
Volume130
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2012

Fingerprint

Retinal Vein
Retinal Vein Occlusion
Adrenal Cortex Hormones
Veins
Therapeutics
Visual Acuity
Triamcinolone
Triamcinolone Acetonide
Clinical Protocols

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

@article{997739afeeb6475e87dede52e60664ac,
title = "Baseline characteristics and response to treatment of participants with hemiretinal compared with branch retinal or central retinal vein occlusion in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) study: SCORE study report 14",
abstract = "Objective: To compare baseline characteristics and treatment response of participants with hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) with those of participants with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) or central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) Study. Methods: Eyes were randomized to standard care, 1mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, or 4 mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Standard care was observation in the SCORE-CRVO trial and grid photocoagulation in the SCORE-BRVO trial. The HRVO eyes were enrolled in the SCORE-BRVO trial. Baseline characteristics, changes in visual acuity and center point thickness, safety outcomes, and number of treatments were compared among HRVO, BRVO, and CRVO participants. Results: At baseline, HRVO eyes were intermediate between BRVO and CRVO eyes in area of retinal thickening, area of fluorescein leakage, visual acuity, and center point thickness. No differences in visual acuity change from baseline to 1 year were noted between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO. Within triamcinolone-treated eyes, HRVO eyes did not differ from BRVO eyes in visual acuity change, but HRVO eyes fared better than CRVO eyes. There were no differences in center point thickness change between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO, nor were there differences across the 3 disease entities for triamcinolone-treated eyes. There were no differences in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Conclusions: The HRVO participants were similar to BRVO and CRVO participants regarding most demographic characteristics, with fundus findings intermediate between BRVO and CRVO. In the SCORE Study, HRVO was treated as BRVO; HRVO eyes responded to treatment similarly to BRVO eyes, and there was no difference among the 3 disease entities in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00105027.",
author = "Ingrid Scott and VanVeldhuisen, {Paul C.} and Oden, {Neal L.} and Ip, {Michael S.} and Amitha Domalpally and Doft, {Bernard H.} and Elman, {Michael J.} and Blodi, {Barbara A.}",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/archophthalmol.2012.2728",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "130",
pages = "1517--1524",
journal = "JAMA Ophthalmology",
issn = "2168-6165",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "12",

}

Baseline characteristics and response to treatment of participants with hemiretinal compared with branch retinal or central retinal vein occlusion in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) study : SCORE study report 14. / Scott, Ingrid; VanVeldhuisen, Paul C.; Oden, Neal L.; Ip, Michael S.; Domalpally, Amitha; Doft, Bernard H.; Elman, Michael J.; Blodi, Barbara A.

In: Archives of Ophthalmology, Vol. 130, No. 12, 01.12.2012, p. 1517-1524.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Baseline characteristics and response to treatment of participants with hemiretinal compared with branch retinal or central retinal vein occlusion in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) study

T2 - SCORE study report 14

AU - Scott, Ingrid

AU - VanVeldhuisen, Paul C.

AU - Oden, Neal L.

AU - Ip, Michael S.

AU - Domalpally, Amitha

AU - Doft, Bernard H.

AU - Elman, Michael J.

AU - Blodi, Barbara A.

PY - 2012/12/1

Y1 - 2012/12/1

N2 - Objective: To compare baseline characteristics and treatment response of participants with hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) with those of participants with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) or central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) Study. Methods: Eyes were randomized to standard care, 1mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, or 4 mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Standard care was observation in the SCORE-CRVO trial and grid photocoagulation in the SCORE-BRVO trial. The HRVO eyes were enrolled in the SCORE-BRVO trial. Baseline characteristics, changes in visual acuity and center point thickness, safety outcomes, and number of treatments were compared among HRVO, BRVO, and CRVO participants. Results: At baseline, HRVO eyes were intermediate between BRVO and CRVO eyes in area of retinal thickening, area of fluorescein leakage, visual acuity, and center point thickness. No differences in visual acuity change from baseline to 1 year were noted between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO. Within triamcinolone-treated eyes, HRVO eyes did not differ from BRVO eyes in visual acuity change, but HRVO eyes fared better than CRVO eyes. There were no differences in center point thickness change between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO, nor were there differences across the 3 disease entities for triamcinolone-treated eyes. There were no differences in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Conclusions: The HRVO participants were similar to BRVO and CRVO participants regarding most demographic characteristics, with fundus findings intermediate between BRVO and CRVO. In the SCORE Study, HRVO was treated as BRVO; HRVO eyes responded to treatment similarly to BRVO eyes, and there was no difference among the 3 disease entities in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00105027.

AB - Objective: To compare baseline characteristics and treatment response of participants with hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) with those of participants with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) or central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) Study. Methods: Eyes were randomized to standard care, 1mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, or 4 mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Standard care was observation in the SCORE-CRVO trial and grid photocoagulation in the SCORE-BRVO trial. The HRVO eyes were enrolled in the SCORE-BRVO trial. Baseline characteristics, changes in visual acuity and center point thickness, safety outcomes, and number of treatments were compared among HRVO, BRVO, and CRVO participants. Results: At baseline, HRVO eyes were intermediate between BRVO and CRVO eyes in area of retinal thickening, area of fluorescein leakage, visual acuity, and center point thickness. No differences in visual acuity change from baseline to 1 year were noted between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO. Within triamcinolone-treated eyes, HRVO eyes did not differ from BRVO eyes in visual acuity change, but HRVO eyes fared better than CRVO eyes. There were no differences in center point thickness change between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO, nor were there differences across the 3 disease entities for triamcinolone-treated eyes. There were no differences in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Conclusions: The HRVO participants were similar to BRVO and CRVO participants regarding most demographic characteristics, with fundus findings intermediate between BRVO and CRVO. In the SCORE Study, HRVO was treated as BRVO; HRVO eyes responded to treatment similarly to BRVO eyes, and there was no difference among the 3 disease entities in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00105027.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871181053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84871181053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archophthalmol.2012.2728

DO - 10.1001/archophthalmol.2012.2728

M3 - Article

C2 - 23229691

AN - SCOPUS:84871181053

VL - 130

SP - 1517

EP - 1524

JO - JAMA Ophthalmology

JF - JAMA Ophthalmology

SN - 2168-6165

IS - 12

ER -