External radiotherapy in macular degeneration: Technique and preliminary subjective response

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(96)00428-2Get rights and content

Abstract

Purpose: This study attempted to assess the toxicity and possible preliminary benefits from teh administration of low-dose external beam irradiation for age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). The premise of the treatment is that radiation induces regression and/or promotes inactivation of the subretinal neovasculature which would result in reabsorption of fluid and blood. This would reduce the risk for further leakage or bleedings, as well as subretinal fibrosis. Consequently, the beneficial effect could be translated into stabilization of visual acuity and prevention of progression of the wet ARMD with the possibility for slight improvement.

Methods and Materials: Allegheny University Department of Radiation Oncology treated 41 patients prospectively from January through October 1995 with low-dose irradiation for wet-type macular degeneration. A total of 39 patients were treated with a total dose of 14.4 Gy in eight fractions of 1.8 Gy/fraction over 10–13 elapsed days. The first two patients were treated with a total dose of 10 Gy in fivefractions of 2 Gy. Patients were evaluated at 2–3 weeks and 2–3 months. Some of the patients (6.7%) had laser treatment in the study eye: 21.9% (9) once, 5% (2) twice, 9.7% (4) thrice or more. Subjective visual acuity and toxicity data were collected on all patients.

Results: At 2–3 weeks after treatment 29 patients (70%) retained their visual acuity without change, 10 (24.5%) stated they had improved vision, adn 2 (4.8%) stated their vision continued to decrease. At 2–3 months after treatment, 27 patients (65.8%) had no change in their vision, 11 (27%) had an improvement in their vision, and 3 (7.2%) had a decrease in visual acuity. Six patients of 41 in the treated group had acute transient side effects.

Conclusion: Our observation in this group of 41 patients support the conclusion that many patients will have improved or stable vision after treatment with low-dose irradiation for age-related wet-type macular degeneration.

References (10)

  • R.W. Young

    Pathophysiology of age related macular degeneration

    Survey Ophthalmol.

    (1987)
  • G. Bergink et al.

    Radiation therapy for subfoveal neovascular membranes in age related macular degeneration. Pilot study

    Graefe Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol.

    (1994)
  • G.J. Bergink et al.

    Radiation therapy for age-related subfoveal choroidal neovascular membranes. A pilot study

    Docum. Ophthalmol.

    (1995)
  • U. Chakravarthy et al.

    Treatment of age related subfoveal neovascular membranes by teletherapy: A pilot study

    Br. J. Ophthalmol.

    (1993)
  • I.H. Chisholm

    Treatment of age related subfoveal neovascular membranes by teletherapy

    Br. J. Ophthalmol.

    (1993)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (54)

  • Radiation therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration

    2013, International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
    Citation Excerpt :

    Radiation was well tolerated, with cataract developing by 12 months in 1 patient treated with 15 Gy. This landmark paper engendered several additional phase 1/phase 2 studies (Table 1) (31-47). Several drawbacks limit the conclusiveness and generalizability of these early studies.

  • Effect of irradiation on neovascularization in rat skinfold chambers: Implications for clinical trials of low-dose radiotherapy for wet-type age-related macular degeneration

    2004, International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
    Citation Excerpt :

    In 1993, Chakravarthy et al. (1) reported a study of the use of low-dose radiotherapy for age-related macular degeneration; during a 12-month follow-up period, 63% of the cases showed no subsequent worsening of visual acuity and 77% showed atrophy of the CNV. Additional clinical trials have produced contradictory results: most replicated the original findings (2–8), but others failed to do so (9, 10). Possible explanations of these contradictory results include differences in the stage of disease, in the evaluation of the therapy, and in the evaluation of the CNV.

  • Radiotherapy in age-related macula degeneration

    2002, International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
  • Treatment of age-related macular degeneration

    2000, Clinical Eye and Vision Care
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text