throbber
The new england
`journal of medicine
`
`established in 1812
`
`october 5, 2006
`
`vol. 355 no. 14
`
`Ranibizumab for Neovascular Age-Related
`Macular Degeneration
`
`Philip J. Rosenfeld, M.D., Ph.D., David M. Brown, M.D., Jeffrey S. Heier, M.D., David S. Boyer, M.D.,
`Peter K. Kaiser, M.D., Carol Y. Chung, Ph.D., and Robert Y. Kim, M.D., for the MARINA Study Group*
`
`A BS TR AC T
`
`Background
`Ranibizumab — a recombinant, humanized, monoclonal antibody Fab that neu-
`tralizes all active forms of vascular endothelial growth factor A — has been evaluated
`for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
`
`Methods
`In this multicenter, 2-year, double-blind, sham-controlled study, we randomly as-
`signed patients with age-related macular degeneration with either minimally classic
`or occult (with no classic lesions) choroidal neovascularization to receive 24 monthly
`intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (either 0.3 mg or 0.5 mg) or sham injections.
`The primary end point was the proportion of patients losing fewer than 15 letters
`from baseline visual acuity at 12 months.
`
`Results
`We enrolled 716 patients in the study. At 12 months, 94.5% of the group given 0.3 mg
`of ranibizumab and 94.6% of those given 0.5 mg lost fewer than 15 letters, as com-
`pared with 62.2% of patients receiving sham injections (P<0.001 for both compari-
`sons). Visual acuity improved by 15 or more letters in 24.8% of the 0.3-mg group
`and 33.8% of the 0.5-mg group, as compared with 5.0% of the sham-injection
`group (P<0.001 for both doses). Mean increases in visual acuity were 6.5 letters in the
`0.3-mg group and 7.2 letters in the 0.5-mg group, as compared with a decrease of 10.4
`letters in the sham-injection group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The benefit in
`visual acuity was maintained at 24 months. During 24 months, presumed endoph-
`thalmitis was identified in five patients (1.0%) and serious uveitis in six patients
`(1.3%) given ranibizumab.
`
`Conclusions
`Intravitreal administration of ranibizumab for 2 years prevented vision loss and
`improved mean visual acuity, with low rates of serious adverse events, in patients
`with minimally classic or occult (with no classic lesions) choroidal neovascular-
`ization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. (ClinicalTrials.gov number,
`NCT00056836.)
`
`From the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute,
`University of Miami Miller School of Med-
`icine, Miami (P.J.R.); Vitreoretinal Con-
`sultants, Methodist Hospital, Houston
`(D.M.B.); Ophthalmic Consultants of
`Boston, Boston (J.S.H.); Retina Vitreous
`Associates Medical Group, Los Angeles
`(D.S.B.); the Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland
`Clinic Foundation, Cleveland (P.K.K.); and
`Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
`(C.Y.C., R.Y.K.). Address reprint requests
`to Dr. Rosenfeld at the Bascom Palmer
`Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmol-
`ogy, University of Miami Miller School of
`Medicine, 900 NW 17th St., Miami, FL
`33136, or at prosenfeld@med.miami.edu.
`
`*Principal investigators in the Minimally
`Classic/Occult Trial of the Anti-VEGF
`Antibody Ranibizumab in the Treatment
`of Neovascular Age-Related Macular De-
`generation (MARINA) Study Group are
`listed in the Appendix.
`
`N Engl J Med 2006;355:1419-31.
`Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society.
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`1419
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 01 of 13
`
`

`

`T h e ne w e ngl a nd jou r na l o f m e dic i ne
`
`A ge-related macular degeneration
`
`is a leading cause of irreversible blindness
`among people who are 50 years of age or
`older in the developed world.1-3 The neovascular
`form of the disease usually causes severe vision
`loss and is characterized by the abnormal growth
`of new blood vessels under or within the macula,
`the central portion of the retina responsible for
`high-resolution vision.
`Neovascularization in this disease is classified
`by fluorescein angiography into major angio-
`graphic patterns termed classic and occult, which
`may be associated with various degrees of aggres-
`siveness of disease, vision loss, and response to
`various treatment options.4 Pharmacologic thera-
`pies for neovascular disease that are available in
`the United States and Europe include verteporfin
`photodynamic therapy 5-8 — approved by the Food
`and Drug Administration only for predominant-
`ly classic lesions (in which 50% or more of the
`lesion consists of classic choroidal neovascular-
`ization) and by the European Agency for the
`Evaluation of Medicinal Products for both pre-
`dominantly classic lesions and occult disease with
`no classic lesions — and pegaptanib sodium.9
`Both treatments can slow the progression of vi-
`sion loss, but only a small percentage of treated
`patients show improvement in visual acuity.
`The age-related changes that stimulate patho-
`logic neovascularization are incompletely under-
`stood, but vascular endothelial growth factor A
`(VEGF-A) — a diffusible cytokine that promotes
`angiogenesis and vascular permeability — has
`been implicated as an important factor promoting
`neovascularization.10-15 Multiple biologically active
`forms of VEGF-A are generated by alternative
`messenger RNA splicing and proteolytic cleav-
`age,16 and two isoforms have been detected in
`choroidal neovascular lesions.15
`Ranibizumab — a recombinant, humanized
`monoclonal antibody Fab that neutralizes all ac-
`tive forms of VEGF-A — was recently approved by
`the Food and Drug Administration for the treat-
`ment of all angiographic subtypes of subfoveal
`neovascular age-related macular degeneration. In
`phase 1 and 2 clinical studies, ranibizumab dem-
`onstrated encouraging signs of biologic activity,
`with acceptable safety, when administered intra-
`vitreally for up to 6 months in patients with neo-
`vascular age-related macular degeneration.17-19 In
`our phase 3 study, Minimally Classic/Occult Trial
`of the Anti-VEGF Antibody Ranibizumab in the
`Treatment of Neovascular Age-Related Macular
`
`Degeneration (MARINA), we evaluated ranibi-
`zumab for the treatment of minimally classic or
`occult with no classic choroidal neovasculariza-
`tion associated with age-related macular degen-
`eration.
`
`Me thods
`
`Study Design
`At 96 sites in the United States, we enrolled 716
`patients in our 2-year, prospective, randomized,
`double-blind, sham-controlled study of the safety
`and efficacy of repeated intravitreal injections of
`ranibizumab among patients with choroidal neo-
`vascularization associated with age-related macu-
`lar degeneration. We performed a prespecified pri-
`mary efficacy analysis at 12 months. The primary
`efficacy end point was the proportion of patients
`who had lost fewer than 15 letters (approximate-
`ly 3 lines) from baseline visual acuity, as assessed
`with the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy
`Study (ETDRS) chart, with the use of standard-
`ized refraction and testing protocol at a starting
`test distance of 2 m. We obtained approval from
`the institutional review board at each study site
`before the enrollment of patients; all study sites
`complied with the requirements of the Health
`Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. The
`eligibility of lesions was confirmed by an inde-
`pendent central reading center with the use of
`standardized criteria and trained graders who
`were unaware of patients’ treatment assignments.
`Patients provided written informed consent be-
`fore determination of their full eligibility. Screen-
`ing lasted as long as 28 days.
`To be included in the study, patients had to be
`at least 50 years old; have a best corrected visual
`acuity of 20/40 to 20/320 (Snellen equivalent de-
`termined with the use of an ETDRS chart); have
`primary or recurrent choroidal neovasculariza-
`tion associated with age-related macular degen-
`eration, involving the foveal center; have a type of
`lesion that had been assessed with the use of
`fluorescein angiography and fundus photogra-
`phy as minimally classic or occult with no classic
`choroidal neovascularization; have a maximum
`lesion size of 12 optic-disk areas (1 optic-disk
`area equals 2.54 mm2 on the basis of 1 optic-disk
`diameter of 1.8 mm), with neovascularization
`composing 50% or more of the entire lesion; and
`have presumed recent progression of disease, as
`evidenced by observable blood, recent vision loss,
`or a recent increase in a lesion’s greatest linear
`
`1420
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 02 of 13
`
`

`

`r anibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degener ation
`
`diameter of 10% or more. (For a complete list of
`eligibility criteria, see Table 1 of the Supplemen-
`tary Appendix, available with the full text of this
`article at www.nejm.org.) There were no exclu-
`sion criteria regarding preexisting cardiovascular,
`cerebrovascular, or peripheral vascular condi-
`tions.
`
`Study Treatment
`We randomly assigned eligible patients in a 1:1:1
`ratio to receive ranibizumab (Lucentis, Genentech)
`at a dose of either 0.3 mg or 0.5 mg or a sham
`injection monthly (within 23 to 37 days) for 2 years
`(24 injections) in one eye. The evaluating physi-
`cian was unaware of the patient’s treatment as-
`signment; the physician who administered the
`injection was aware of the patient’s treatment as-
`signment regarding ranibizumab or sham treat-
`ment but was unaware of the dose of ranibizumab.
`Other personnel at each study site (except for those
`assisting with injections), patients, and personnel
`at the central reading center were unaware of the
`patient’s treatment assignment.
`Verteporfin photodynamic therapy was allowed
`if the choroidal neovascularization in the study
`eye became predominantly classic. On the basis
`of a policy decision by the Centers for Medicare
`and Medicaid Services to reimburse photodynam-
`ic therapy for small, minimally classic, and occult
`lesions as of April 1, 2004, the study protocol was
`amended to allow photodynamic therapy for min-
`imally classic or occult disease with no classic le-
`sions that were no larger than 4 optic-disk areas
`and were accompanied by a loss of 20 letters or
`more from baseline visual acuity, as confirmed
`at consecutive study visits. (A score of 55 letters
`is approximately equal to a Snellen equivalent of
`20/80 vision.)
`The study was designed and analyzed by a
`committee composed of both academic investiga-
`tors and representatives of the industry sponsor.
`In the analysis of the data and the writing of the
`manuscript, Dr. Rosenfeld had full and unre-
`stricted access to the data, and all the coauthors
`contributed to the interpretation of the data and
`the final version of the manuscript. All the au-
`thors vouch for the accuracy and completeness of
`the reported data.
`
`Statistical Analysis
`We performed efficacy analyses on an intention-
`to-treat basis among all patients with the use
`of a last-observation-carried-forward method for
`
`missing data. For all pairwise comparisons, the
`statistical model adjusted for baseline score for
`visual acuity (<55 letters vs. ≥55 letters) and sub-
`type of choroidal neovascularization (minimally
`classic vs. occult with no classic disease). Between-
`group comparisons for dichotomous end points
`were performed with the use of the Cochran chi-
`square test.20 Change from baseline visual acuity
`was analyzed with the use of analysis-of-variance
`models. For end points for lesion characteristics,
`analysis-of-covariance models adjusting for the
`baseline value were used. The Hochberg–Bonfer-
`roni multiple-comparison procedure21 was used
`to adjust for the two pairwise treatment com-
`parisons for the primary end point. Safety analy-
`ses included all treated patients.
`We determined the number of patients in each
`group on the basis of a 1:1:1 randomization ratio,
`Pearson’s chi-square test for the two pairwise
`comparisons of the primary end point, and the
`Hochberg–Bonferroni multiple comparison pro-
`cedure at an overall type I error of 0.0497 (adjust-
`ing for the three planned safety interim analyses
`before the primary efficacy analysis). Monte Carlo
`simulations were used to evaluate the power of
`the study. We estimated that the enrollment of
`720 patients would provide the study with a sta-
`tistical power of 95% to detect a significant dif-
`ference between one or both ranibizumab groups
`and the sham-injection group in the proportion of
`patients losing fewer than 15 letters at 12 months,
`assuming a proportion of 65% in each ranibi-
`zumab group and 50% in the sham-injection
`group. (For more details, see the Methods section
`of the Supplementary Appendix.)
`
`R esults
`
`Study Patients
`Between March 2003 and December 2003, 716 pa-
`tients were enrolled and randomly assigned to
`study treatment. Groups were balanced for demo-
`graphic and baseline ocular characteristics (Ta-
`ble 1).
`More than 90% of patients in each treatment
`group remained in the study at 12 months, and
`approximately 80 to 90% remained at 24 months
`(Table 2 of the Supplementary Appendix). The
`percentages who were still receiving study treat-
`ment were similarly high at 12 months and at
`the end of the study. After the unmasking of first-
`year results and discussion with the data and
`safety monitoring committee, ranibizumab was
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`1421
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 03 of 13
`
`

`

`T h e ne w e ngl a nd jou r na l o f m e dic i ne
`
`Table 1. Baseline Characteristics of the Patients.*
`
`Characteristic
`
`Sex — no. (%)
`
`Male
`
`Female
`
`Race — no. (%)†
`
`White
`
`Other
`
`Age — yr
`
`Mean
`
`Range
`
`Age group — no. (%)
`50−64 yr
`65−74 yr
`75−84 yr
`≥85 yr
`Previous therapy for age-related macular degeneration
`— no. (%)
`
`Any treatment
`
`Laser photocoagulation
`
`Medication‡
`
`Nutritional supplements
`
`Other
`
`No. of letters as measure of visual acuity§
`
`Mean
`
`<55 — no. (%)
`≥55 — no. (%)
`
`
`
`Sham Injection
`(N = 238)
`
`0.3 mg of
`Ranibizumab
`(N = 238)
`
`0.5 mg of
`Ranibizumab
`(N = 240)
`
`79 (33.2)
`
`159 (66.8)
`
`231 (97.1)
`
`7 (2.9)
`
`77±7
`
`56–94
`
`11 (4.6)
`
`67 (28.2)
`
`132 (55.5)
`
`28 (11.8)
`
`85 (35.7)
`
`153 (64.3)
`
`229 (96.2)
`
`9 (3.8)
`
`77±8
`
`52–95
`
`13 (5.5)
`
`64 (26.9)
`
`130 (54.6)
`
`31 (13.0)
`
`88 (36.7)
`
`152 (63.3)
`
`232 (96.7)
`
`8 (3.3)
`
`77±8
`
`52–93
`
`16 (6.7)
`
`64 (26.7)
`
`124 (51.7)
`
`36 (15.0)
`
`135 (56.7)
`
`140 (58.8)
`
`139 (57.9)
`
`22 (9.2)
`
`3 (1.3)
`
`121 (50.8)
`
`8 (3.4)
`
`53.6±14.1
`
`109 (45.8)
`
`129 (54.2)
`
`13 (5.5)
`
`1 (0.4)
`
`134 (56.3)
`
`3 (1.3)
`
`53.1±12.9
`
`115 (48.3)
`
`123 (51.7)
`
`14 (5.8)
`
`3 (1.2)
`
`127 (52.9)
`
`3 (1.2)
`
`53.7±12.8
`
`117 (48.8)
`
`123 (51.2)
`
`offered to all patients in October 2005, 2 months
`before the end of the last patient’s final study
`visit at 24 months. Of the patients in the sham-
`injection group, 12 were switched to receive
`0.5 mg of ranibizumab: 5 patients (2.1%) at 22
`months and 7 (2.9%) at 23 months, the last pos-
`sible injection visit. During the 2-year treatment
`period, 38 patients in the sham-injection group
`(16.0%), 2 patients in the group receiving 0.3 mg
`of ranibizumab (0.8%), and none in the group
`receiving 0.5 mg of ranibizumab received verte-
`porfin photodynamic therapy at least once. In the
`second year, 13 patients (5.5%) in the sham-injec-
`tion group and none in the ranibizumab groups
`chose to discontinue study treatment and receive
`pegaptanib sodium, which was approved in the
`United States in December 2004 for the treatment
`of neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
`
`Of these 13 patients, 8 remained in the follow-up
`group at 24 months.
`
`Primary and Secondary End Points
`The primary and key secondary efficacy results at
`12 months (prespecified primary analysis) and
`24 months are summarized in Figures 1 and 2.
`The study met its primary end point (Fig. 1A) at
`12 months. Of the patients who were treated with
`ranibizumab, 94.5% of the patients receiving
`0.3 mg and 94.6% of those receiving 0.5 mg had
`lost fewer than 15 letters from baseline visual
`acuity, as compared with 62.2% in the sham-injec-
`tion group (P<0.001 for the comparison of each
`dose with the sham-injection group). At 24 months,
`this end point was met by 92.0% of the patients
`receiving 0.3 mg of ranibizumab and 90.0% of
`those receiving 0.5 mg, as compared with 52.9%
`
`1422
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 04 of 13
`
`

`

`r anibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degener ation
`
`Table 1. (Continued.)
`
`Characteristic
`
`Visual acuity (approximate Snellen equivalent) — no. (%)§
`
`20/200 or worse
`
`Better than 20/200 but worse than 20/40
`
`20/40 or better
`
`Type of choroidal neovascularization — no. (%)
`
`Occult with no classic lesion
`
`Minimally classic lesion
`
`Predominantly classic lesion
`
`Missing data
`
`Size of lesion — optic-disk area¶
`
`Mean
`
`Range
`
`Size of choroidal neovascularization — optic-disk area¶
`
`Mean
`
`Range
`
`Size of leakage from choroidal neovascularization
`plus staining of retinal pigment epithelium —
`optic-disk area¶
`
`Sham Injection
`(N = 238)
`
`0.3 mg of
`Ranibizumab
`(N = 238)
`
`0.5 mg of
`Ranibizumab
`(N = 240)
`
`32 (13.4)
`
`170 (71.4)
`
`36 (15.1)
`
`151 (63.4)
`
`87 (36.6)
`
`0
`
`1 (0.4)
`
`4.4±2.5
`
`0.0−11.8
`
`4.3±2.4
`
`0.0–11.8
`
`35 (14.7)
`
`176 (73.9)
`
`27 (11.3)
`
`151 (63.4)
`
`86 (36.1)
`
`1 (0.4)
`
`0
`
`4.3±2.5
`
`0.1−11.8
`
`4.1±2.5
`
`0.0–11.8
`
`31 (12.9)
`
`173 (72.1)
`
`36 (15.0)
`
`149 (62.1)
`
`91 (37.9)
`
`0
`
`0
`
`4.5±2.6
`
`0.3−12.0
`
`4.3±2.5
`
`0.1–12.0
`
`Mean
`
`Range
`
`3.5±2.5
`
`0.0−12.9
`
`3.6±2.5
`
`0.0−12.0
`
`3.5±2.6
`
`0.0−13.5
`
`* Plus–minus values are means ±SD. Percentages may not total 100 because of rounding.
`† Race was determined by the investigators.
`‡ Medications included triamcinolone acetonide, prednisolone ophthalmic, and diclofenac sodium.
`§ Visual acuity was measured with the use of ETDRS charts at a starting distance of 2 m. A score of 55 letters is approxi-
`mately equal to a Snellen equivalent of 20/80.
`¶ One optic-disk area is equal to 2.54 mm2 on the basis of one optic-disk diameter of 1.8 mm.
`
`in the sham-injection group (P<0.001 for each
`comparison). The visual-acuity benefit associated
`with ranibizumab was independent of the size of
`the baseline lesion, the lesion type, or baseline
`visual acuity (Fig. 1B and 1C).
`At 12 and 24 months, approximately one quar-
`ter of patients treated with 0.3 mg of ranibizu-
`mab and one third of patients treated with 0.5 mg
`of ranibizumab had gained 15 or more letters in
`visual acuity, as compared with 5.0% or less of
`those in the sham-injection group (P<0.001 for
`each comparison) (Fig. 1D).
`At both doses of ranibizumab, the mean im-
`provement from baseline in visual-acuity scores
`was evident 7 days after the first injection (P = 0.006
`for the 0.3-mg dose and P = 0.003 for the 0.5-mg
`dose), whereas mean visual acuity in the sham-
`injection group declined steadily over time at each
`
`monthly assessment (P<0.001 for both compari-
`sons) (Fig. 2A). At 12 months, mean increases in
`visual acuity were 6.5 letters in the 0.3-mg group
`and 7.2 letters in the 0.5-mg group, as compared
`with a decrease of 10.4 letters in the sham-injec-
`tion group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The
`benefit in visual acuity was maintained at 24
`months. The average benefit associated with
`ran ibizumab over that of sham injection was
`approximately 17 letters in each dose group at
`12 months and 20 to 21 letters at 24 months.
`At baseline, the percentages of patients with
`20/40 vision or better were similar among the
`three groups (Fig. 2B). At 12 months, approxi-
`mately 40% of patients receiving ranibizumab had
`20/40 vision or better, as compared with 11.3% in
`the sham-injection group (P<0.001). At 24 months,
`of the patients receiving ranibizumab, 34.5% of
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`1423
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 05 of 13
`
`

`

`T h e ne w e ngl a nd jou r na l o f m e dic i ne
`
`those in the 0.3-mg group and 42.1% in the 0.5-mg
`group had at least 20/40 vision, whereas the pro-
`portion in the sham-injection group had dropped
`to 5.9% (P<0.001 for each comparison).
`A single patient in the sham-injection group
`had 20/20 or better vision at baseline. Among pa-
`tients receiving ranibizumab, 3.8% in the 0.3-mg
`group and 7.9% in the 0.5-mg group had 20/20
`vision or better at 12 months, and 6.7% in the
`0.3-mg group and 7.9% in the 0.5-mg group had
`20/20 vision or better at 24 months. In the sham-
`injection group, only two patients (0.8%) had
`20/20 vision or better at 12 months (P<0.001 for
`the comparison with the 0.5-mg group and P = 0.03
`for the comparison with the 0.3-mg group), and
`one (0.4%) had 20/20 vision or better at 24 months
`(P<0.001 for the comparison with each ranibi-
`zumab group).
`The percentages of patients with visual acuity
`of 20/200 or worse were similar among the three
`groups at baseline (Fig. 2C). At 12 and 24 months,
`the percentages in the ranibizumab-treated groups
`remained about the same, whereas the percent-
`ages in the sham-injection group had increased
`by 3 to 3.5 times (P<0.001 for the comparison
`with each ranibizumab dose at 12 and 24 months).
`Very few patients receiving ranibizumab had se-
`vere vision loss (30 letters or more) from baseline
`(0.8% of the 0.3-mg group and 1.2% of the 0.5-mg
`group), as compared with 14.3% of the sham-
`injection group at 12 months; at 24 months, 3.4%
`of the 0.3-mg group and 2.5% of the 0.5-mg group
`had severe vision loss, as compared with 22.7%
`of the sham-injection group (P<0.001 for the com-
`parison with each dose at 12 and 24 months).
`Ranibizumab treatment was associated with
`arrested growth of and leakage from choroidal
`neovascularization (including intense, progressive
`staining of the retinal pigment epithelium) (Fig. 3A
`through Fig. 3D). The mean change from base-
`line in each of the ranibizumab-treated groups
`differed significantly from that in the sham-injec-
`tion group at 12 and 24 months (P<0.001 for each
`comparison).
`
`Adverse Events
`Cumulative adverse events for the 24-month study
`period are summarized in Table 2. Each of the
`key serious ocular adverse events occurred in dif-
`ferent patients (Table 3 of the Supplementary Ap-
`
`Figure 1 (facing page). Rate of Loss or Gain of Visual
`Acuity at 12 and 24 Months Associated with Ranibizumab,
`as Compared with Sham Injection.
`Panel A shows the percentage of patients in each group
`who lost fewer than 15 letters from baseline visual acuity
`at 12 months (the primary efficacy end point) and at
`24 months. Panels B and C summarize the percentage
`of patients who lost fewer than 15 letters at 12 and 24
`months, respectively, according to lesion size (1 optic-
`disk area is equal to 2.54 mm2 on the basis of 1 optic-
`disk diameter of 1.8 mm), baseline visual acuity (a score
`of 55 letters is approximately equal to a Snellen equiva-
`lent of 20/80), and lesion type. Panel D shows the per-
`centage of patients who gained 15 or more letters from
`baseline at 12 and 24 months. For the study overall,
`treatment comparisons were based on the Cochran
`chi-square test stratified according to the visual-acuity
`score at day 0 (<55 letters vs. ≥55 letters) and choroi-
`dal neovascularization subtype. Pearson’s chi-square
`test was used for treatment comparisons in each sub-
`group. The last-observation-carried-forward method
`was used to handle missing data. All tests were two-
`sided (P<0.001 for all comparisons between each ra-
`nibizumab group and the sham-injection group). I bars
`represent 95% confidence intervals.
`
`pendix). Investigator-reported cases of endophthal-
`mitis, as well as any case of serious uveitis treated
`with intravitreal antibiotics, were presumed to be
`endophthalmitis. The presumed endophthalmitis
`rate was 5 of 477 patients (1.0%) or, alternatively,
`a rate per injection of 0.05% (5 of 10,443 total
`injections). In four of the five presumed cases of
`endophthalmitis, neither vitreous nor aqueous
`culture showed growth.
`Slit-lamp examination revealed inflammation
`(of any cause, including endophthalmitis) through-
`out the study in the ranibizumab groups (Table 2,
`and Table 4 and 5 of the Supplementary Appen-
`dix).22,23 Most of the inflammation in all groups
`was designated as trace or 1+.
`Ranibizumab had no long-term effect on intra-
`ocular pressure, on average, as assessed by month-
`ly preinjection measurements during the 2-year
`follow-up. Intraocular pressure was increased on
`average 1 hour after ranibizumab injections at
`protocol-mandated intraocular-pressure assess-
`ments; however, the absence of corresponding
`changes in preinjection measurements suggests
`the postinjection increases were transient. On
`average, postinjection intraocular pressure in-
`creased from the preinjection value by 1.9 to 3.5
`mm Hg in the 0.3-mg group and 2.1 to 3.4 mm Hg
`
`1424
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 06 of 13
`
`

`

`r anibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degener ation
`
`Sham injection
`(n=238)
`
`0.3 mg of ranibizumab
`(n=238)
`
`0.5 mg of ranibizumab
`(n=240)
`
`94.5
`
`94.6
`
`92.0
`
`90.0
`
`62.2
`
`52.9
`
`12 Months
`
`24 Months
`
`96 96
`
`93 93
`
`97 97
`
`93 93
`
`93 91
`
`95 97
`
`66
`
`58
`
`76
`
`50
`
`62
`
`62
`
`≤4 Optic-Disk
`Areas
`
`>4 Optic-Disk
`Areas
`
`<55 Letters
`
`≥55 Letters
`
`Minimally
`Classic Lesion
`
`Occult with No
`Classic Lesion
`
`123 134 125
`
`115 104 115
`
`109 115 117
`
`129 123 123
`
`87 86 91
`
`150 151 149
`
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`Loss of <15 Letters (%)
`
`Loss of <15 Letters (%)
`
`A
`
`B 12 Months
`
`93 94
`
`91 86
`
`95 93
`
`89 87
`
`90 89
`
`93 91
`
`54
`
`52
`
`68
`
`51
`
`54
`
`40
`
`≤4 Optic-Disk
`Areas
`
`>4 Optic-Disk
`Areas
`
`<55 Letters
`
`≥55 Letters
`
`Minimally
`Classic Lesion
`
`Occult with No
`Classic Lesion
`
`No. of Observations
`
`C 24 Months
`
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`Loss of <15 Letters (%)
`
`No. of Observations
`
`123 134 125
`
`115 104 115
`
`109 115 117
`
`129 123 123
`
`87 86 91
`
`150 151 149
`
`33.8
`
`24.8
`
`5.0
`
`12 Months
`
`33.3
`
`26.1
`
`3.8
`
`24 Months
`
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`Increase of ≥15 Letters (%)
`
`D
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`1425
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 07 of 13
`
`

`

`T h e ne w e ngl a nd jou r na l o f m e dic i ne
`
`0.5 mg of ranibizumab
`0.3 mg of ranibizumab
`
`Sham injection
`
`15
`
`18
`
`21
`
`24
`
`12
`Month
`
`0
`
`3
`
`6
`
`9
`
`10
`
`5
`
`0
`
`−5
`
`−10
`
`−15
`
`(no. of letters)
`
`Mean Change in Visual Acuity
`
`Mean Change from
`Baseline
`0.5 mg of ranibizumab
`0.3 mg of ranibizumab
`Sham injection
`
`(day 7)
`+2.6
`+2.3
`+0.6
`
`+5.9
`+5.1
`−3.7
`
`+6.5
`+5.6
`−6.6
`
`+7.2
`+5.9
`−9.1
`
`+7.2
`+6.5
`−10.4
`
`+7.4
`+6.9
`−11.8
`
`+6.8
`+6.1
`−13.6
`
`+6.7
`+6.2
`−15.0
`
`+6.6
`+5.4
`−14.9
`
`Sham injection
`(n=238)
`
`0.3 mg of ranibizumab
`(n=238)
`
`0.5 mg of ranibizumab
`(n=240)
`
`38.7
`
`40.0
`
`42.1
`
`34.5
`
`15.1 11.3 15.0
`
`10.9
`
`5.9
`
`Baseline
`
`12 Months
`
`24 Months
`
`42.9
`
`47.9
`
`13.4 14.7 12.9
`
`12.2
`
`11.7
`
`14.7 15.0
`
`Baseline
`
`12 Months
`
`24 Months
`
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`100
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`or Better (%)
`
`or Worse (%)
`
`Snellen Equivalent of 20/40
`
`Snellen Equivalent of 20/200
`
`A
`
`B
`
`C
`
`Figure 2. Mean Changes from Baseline in Visual Acuity and Snellen Equivalents at 12 and 24 Months.
`Panel A shows the mean changes from baseline in visual acuity during a 24-month period. At each monthly assess-
`ment, P<0.001 for the comparison between each ranibizumab group and the sham-injection group. On day 7,
`P = 0.006 for patients receiving 0.3 mg of ranibizumab and P = 0.003 for those receiving 0.5 mg. Panels B and C
`show the change from baseline in the percentage of patients with a Snellen equivalent of 20/40 or better and the
`percentage of patients with 20/200 or worse, respectively, at 12 and 24 months (P<0.001 for the comparison be-
`tween each ranibizumab group and the sham-injection group at 12 and 24 months). Treatment comparisons use
`pairwise models adjusted for visual-acuity scores at day 0 (<55 letters vs. ≥55 letters) and for the type of choroidal
`neovascularization. Analysis of variance was used to assess the change in visual acuity from baseline at each monthly
`assessment. The Cochran chi-square test was used for the comparison of percentages. The last-observation-carried-
`forward method was used to handle missing data. All statistical tests were two-sided. I bars represent SE in Panel A
`and 95% confidence intervals in Panels B and C.
`
`1426
`
`n engl j med 355;14 www.nejm.org october 5, 2006
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org at ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP on May 4, 2021. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Exhibit 2119
`Page 08 of 13
`
`

`

`r anibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degener ation
`
`Sham injection
`(n=238)
`
`0.3 mg of ranibizumab
`(n=238)
`
`0.5 mg of ranibizumab
`(n=240)
`
`A Total Area of Choroidal Neovascularization
`8
`
`B Change from Baseline in Choroidal Neovascularization
`3
`
`12 Months
`
`24 Months
`
`12
`
`0
`
`−1
`
`−2
`
`−3
`
`Optic-Disk Area
`Mean Change in
`
`Baseline
`
`12 Months
`
`24 Months
`
`67 5 4 2 13
`
`0
`
`Mean Optic-Disk Area
`
`C Area of Leakage
`8
`
`D Change from Baseline in Leakage
`3
`
`12 Months
`
`24 Months
`
`12
`
`0
`
`−1
`
`−2
`
`−3
`
`Optic-Disk Area
`Mean Change in
`
`Baseline
`
`12 Months
`
`24 Months
`
`67 5 4 2 13
`
`0
`
`Mean Optic-Disk Area
`
`Figure 3. Mean (±SE) Changes in Choroidal Neovascularization and Leakage.
`Leakage refers to that associated with choroidal neovascularization plus intense, progressive staining of the retinal
`pigment epithelium. One optic-disk area is equal to 2.54 mm2. Pairwise analysis of covariance was adjusted for the
`visual-acuity score at day 0 (<55 letters vs. ≥55 letters), the subtype of choroidal neovascularization, and the base-
`line value of the end point. Missing data were imputed according to the last-observation-carried-forward approach.
`P<0.001 for the comparison between each ranibizumab group and the sham-injection group at 12 and 24 months.
`All statistical tests were two-sided.
`
`in the 0.5-mg group, as compared with 0.8 to
`1.5 mm Hg in the sham-injection group. Postin-
`jection intraocular pressure of 30 mm Hg or more
`occurred in approximately 13.0% of patients in
`the 0.3-mg group and 17.6% of those in the 0.5-
`mg group, as compared with 3.4% of those in the
`sham-injection group. Intraocular pressure of 40
`mm Hg or more occurred in 2.3% of patients in
`each ranibizumab group and in no patients in
`the sham-injection group. A postinjection intra-
`ocular pressure of 50 mm Hg or more occurred
`in 0.6% of each ranibizumab group.
`Ranibizumab was not associated with an in-
`creased frequency of cataracts (15.7% of patients
`in the sham-injection group, as compared with
`15.5% in each ranibizumab group). However, lens
`status did change in a few patients during the
`2-year treatment period. Of patients whose study
`eye was phakic at baseline and whose lens status
`was known at 24 months, the study eye of 6 of
`117 patients in the 0.3-mg group (5.1%) and 8 of
`111 patients in the 0.5-mg group (7.2%) had be-
`come pseudophakic by 24 months, as compared
`
`with no patients in the sham-injection group. At
`24 months, ranibizumab-treated patients whose
`study eye had been phakic and then became pseu-
`dophakic during the course of the study had vi-
`sual acuity similar to that of ranibizumab-treated
`patients overall.
`Seventeen deaths occurred during the 2-year
`study. In the sham-injection group, six patients
`(2.5%) died: two from strokes, one from cong

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket