A Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Brolucizumab vs. Aflibercept in Patients With Visual Impairment Due to Diabetic Macular Edema

This was a Phase III, randomized, double-masked, multi-center, active-controlled, two-arm study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of brolucizumab 6 mg compared to the active control, aflibercept 2 mg used per authorized label, in subjects with visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema (DME).

The study included a screening period of up to 2 weeks to assess eligibility, followed by a double-masked treatment period (Day 1 to Week 96). The baseline visit was defined as Day 1/Visit 1, and end of treatment visit as Visit 27 (Week 96). After the last treatment visit, there was a post-treatment follow-up period from Week 96 to Week 100 and an exit visit at Week 100. Subjects were assigned to one of two treatment arms in a 1:1 ratio: brolucizumab 6 mg/0.05 mL (5 loading doses each administered every 6 weeks (q6w) during loading phase then q12w/q8w during maintenance phase with an option to extend treatment interval by 4 weeks during the second year) or aflibercept 2 mg/0.05 mL (5 loading doses each administered every 4 weeks (q4w) during loading phase then q8w during maintenance phase).

Disease activity assessments (DAAs) were conducted by the masked investigator for both treatment arms at Week 32 and Week 36, i.e., 8 and 12 weeks after the end of the loading phase for subjects receiving brolucizumab, and at Week 48, Week 60 and Week 72 (i.e., every 12 weeks). In the brolucizumab arm, subjects who qualified for q12w during this initial q12w interval continued on a q12w treatment frequency unless disease activity was identified at any of the subsequent DAA visits, in which case subjects were switched to a q8w treatment interval until Week 72.

A one-time disease stability assessment was performed by the masked investigator at Week 72 in both treatment arms with the purpose of evaluating the potential for treatment interval extension by 4 weeks. The subjects in the brolucizumab arm who demonstrated disease stability in the one-time assessment at Week 72 under their current assigned treatment regimen (q12w or q8w) were considered for treatment interval extension. To evaluate the adequacy of the individualized q8w, q12w or q16w treatment intervals in the brolucizumab arm, DAAs were performed at every visit from Week 72 up to and including Week 96 (i.e., every 4 weeks) and subjects had their treatment interval modified accordingly. If after Week 72 disease activity had been identified by the masked investigator at a scheduled treatment visit (according to the subject specific treatment schedule q12w or q16w) the subject was assigned to q8w treatment schedule.

Eligibility Criteria:
Key Inclusion Criteria:

General

* Patients must give written informed consent before any study related assessments are performed
* Patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus and HbA1c of =\< 10% at screening
* Medication for the management of diabetes must have been stable within 3 months prior to randomization and is expected to remain stable during the course of the study

Study Eye

* Visual impairment due to DME with:

  1. BCVA score between 78 and 23 letters, inclusive, using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity testing charts at a testing distance of 4 meters (approximate Snellen equivalent of 20/32 to 20/320), at screening and baseline
  2. DME involving the center of the macula, with central subfield retinal thickness (measured from RPE to ILM inclusively) of \>= 320 micrometers (μm) on SD-OCT at screening If both eyes are eligible, the eye with the worse visual acuity will be selected for study eye. However, the investigator may select the eye with better visual acuity, based on medical reasons or local ethical requirements.

     Key Exclusion Criteria:
* Previous treatment with any anti-VEGF drugs or investigational drugs in the study eye
* Active proliferative diabetic retinopathy in the study eye as per the investigator
* Concomitant conditions or ocular disorders in the study eye at screening or baseline which could, in the opinion of the investigator, prevent response to study treatment or may confound interpretation of study results, compromise visual acuity or require medical or surgical intervention during the first 12-month study period (e.g., cataract, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal vascular occlusion, retinal detachment, macular hole, or choroidal neovascularization of any cause)
* Any active intraocular or periocular infection or active intraocular inflammation (e.g., infectious conjunctivitis, keratitis, scleritis, endophthalmitis, infectious blepharitis, uveitis) in study eye at screening or baseline
* Structural damage of the fovea in the study eye at screening likely to preclude improvement in visual acuity following the resolution of macular edema, including atrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium, subretinal fibrosis, laser scar(s), epiretinal membrane involving fovea or organized hard exudate plaques
* Uncontrolled glaucoma in the study eye defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) \> 25 millimeters mercury (mmHg) on medication or according to investigator's judgment, at screening or baseline
* Neovascularization of the iris in the study eye at screening or baseline
* Evidence of vitreomacular traction in the study eye at screening or baseline which, in the opinion of the investigator, affect visual acuity