BACKGROUND: Bullous pilomatricoma is a rare variant of pilomatricoma. As it has been published in sporadic case reports, a limited understanding of its clinicopathological characteristics restricts its effective diagnosis and treatment.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the clinicopathological and immunohistochemical characteristics of bullous pilomatricoma to better understand the bullous transformation of pilomatricoma.
METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective study of 12 patients with bullous pilomatricoma and compared their clinical, histopathological, and immunohistochemical data with those of patients with ordinary pilomatricoma.
RESULTS: Bullous pilomatricoma showed no sex preference, with a mean onset age of 31.2 years. The common sites were the upper extremities and trunk. Bullous pilomatricoma had a shorter disease duration, a larger diameter, and a greater tendency to increase in size than those of ordinary pilomatricoma. Histopathologically, bullous pilomatricoma had a shorter duration, lesser calcification, more mitotic figures, and distinct dermal features from those of ordinary pilomatricoma. Immunohistochemically, the expression of Matrix Metalloprotease (MMP)-2, MMP-9, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-3 (VEGFR-3), and VEGF-C was elevated.
CONCLUSIONS: The study was retrospective, and the sample size was small.
CONCLUSIONS: The distinctive features of bullous pilomatricoma potentially result from dermal changes associated with the release of angiogenic factors and proteolytic enzymes. This comprehensive analysis provides novel insights into the clinical features and pathogenesis of bullous pilomatricoma.

BACKGROUND: regular intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment is crucial for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), and delayed treatment can exacerbate disease progression.
METHODS: we compared the outcomes of on-time versus delayed intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment for patients with nAMD. This study was conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with a 2-year follow-up period. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and anatomical findings were evaluated before the pandemic, during the pandemic, and at 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-months post-pandemic.
RESULTS: The delayed and on-time groups comprised 54 and 72 patients, respectively. After the pandemic, the injection interval increased by 0.65 ± 1.51 months (p = 0.003), with 22.2% of the patients in the delayed group switching to the treat-and-extended regimen (p < 0.001). The delayed group showed greater mean BCVA deterioration (p = 0.027) and central subfield thickness (p = 0.037) at 6 months and worse maximum subretinal fluid height (p = 0.022) at 18 months than the on-time group. No difference was observed between the groups in the second year.
CONCLUSIONS: the negative effects of delaying anti-VEGF treatment because of the COVID-19 pandemic can be ameliorated by changing the treatment regimen and shortening treatment intervals.

BACKGROUND: Research on the cardiovascular toxicity of angiogenesis inhibitors among patients with cancer in Taiwan is lacking. This observational study explored the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) associated with angiogenesis inhibitors in Taiwan.
RESULTS: We conducted a nested case-control study using the TCR (Taiwan Cancer Registry) linked with the Taiwan National Insurance Claim Database. We matched every case with 4 controls using risk-set sampling by index date, age, sex, cancer type, and cancer diagnosis date. Conditional logistic regression was used to evaluate the risks of MACEs and different cardiovascular events using propensity score adjustment or matching. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the risks matched by cancer stages or exposure within 1 year. Among a cohort of 284 292 after the exclusion of prevalent cases, the incidences of MACEs among the overall cohort and those exposed to angiogenesis inhibitors were 22.5 and 32.5 events per 1000 person-years, respectively. We matched 17 817 cases with 70 740 controls, with a mean age of 74.9 years, and 56.8% of patients were men. After propensity score adjustment, angiogenesis inhibitors were associated with increased risks of MACEs (odds ratio, 4.56; 95% CI, 1.78-11.59). Significantly increased risks were noted for heart failure hospitalization, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, and venous thromboembolism, but not for new-onset atrial fibrillation. Similar results were observed after matching by cancer stage or restriction of 1-year exposure.
CONCLUSIONS: Angiogenesis inhibitors were associated with increased risks of MACEs among patients with various malignancies in Taiwan but were not associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and durability of intravitreal faricimab in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) with unsatisfactory response to traditional anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents.
METHODS: Single-centre, prospective cohort study of all consecutive patients with nAMD who were switched to intravitreal faricimab from intravitreal ranibizumab or aflibercept, due to unsatisfactory treatment response (maximal fluid-free interval ≤ 8 weeks). Intravitreal faricimab was administered with a loading dose of four 4-weekly injections, followed by an 8-week extension. A treat and extend (T&E) regime was adopted thereafter. Primary outcome was the difference between the maximal fluid-free interval achieved with faricimab, and the one achieved before the switch. Morpho-functional outcomes were also assessed. Secondary outcome was accordance with clinical management when applying faricimab pivotal trial criteria versus our real-world T&E protocol, measured as a proportion.
RESULTS: Twenty-six eyes of 26 patients with a median age of 82 years (range 77-85) were included. Patients were followed for 30.2 weeks (range 26.3-33.1). Maximal fluid-free interval after switch to faricimab (Mdn = 6.0 weeks; IQR = 4-8) was longer than the maximum interval before the switch (Mdn = 4.0 weeks; IQR = 4-4), p < 0.001. Comparing real-world T&E protocol with pivotal trial criteria, 8 (30.8%) eyes received the same clinical management while 18 (69.2%) eyes were kept at a shorter interval when following our T&E protocol. No serious adverse events were recorded.
CONCLUSIONS: Faricimab appears to increase the fluid-free interval and allow extension of dosing interval in patients with nAMD poorly responsive to traditional anti-VEGF drugs.

Although anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment is effective for treating diabetic macular edema (DME), the effect of the microaneurysm (MA) status on the therapeutic efficacy of an anti-VEGF treatment remains unclear. Our current study investigated the effects of the number and the presence or absence of leaking MAs on DME and the efficacy of anti-VEGF therapy. A total of 51 eyes of 47 DME patients were administered anti-VEGF treatment. Fluorescence angiography results were used to determine the number of MAs and the presence or absence of leakage, with these findings matched to the optical coherence tomography maps. The correlation between the number of MAs and the retinal thicknesses and the influence of the leaking MAs was examined in order to definitively determine the effect of the anti-VEGF treatment. There was a correlation between the number of MAs and the retinal thickness of the sector in both the 6 mm (correlation coefficients: 0.42) and 3 mm (0.34) sectors (P < .001). There was also a correlation between the number of MAs and the retinal thickness in both the 6 mm (0.31) and 3 mm (0.24) sectors after undergoing the treatment (P < .01). There was a significant difference between the mean thickness of the leaking versus the non-leaking MAs in the 6 mm (388 ± 87 μm) and 3 mm (477 ± 108 μm) sectors before treatment (P < .01). There was also a significant difference for the retinal thickness between the sectors with and without leaking MAs after the treatment (P < .01). The degree of retinal edema before treatment is associated with the number of MAs and the presence of leaking MAs. Anti-VEGF treatment is less effective for focal macular edema with large numbers of MAs, which includes leaking MAs.

The status of vascular endothelial-derived growth factor (VEGF) in the pathogenesis of tuberculous meningitis (TBM) remains far from clear. We prospectively evaluated the role of serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) VEGF in TBM.
This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care center in North India from January 2018 to June 2019. Consecutive drug-naive patients (n = 82) of TBM diagnosed on the basis of modified Ahuja\'s criteria were included in the study. The results were compared with 49 control subjects (n = 49). Serum and CSF VEGF were done in all the cases and controls. Follow-up serum VEGF levels were done in 34 patients after 3 months of completion of antitubercular therapy. The VEGF levels were estimated using the human VEGF enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit.
The mean age was 29.9 ± 13.1 years. The study group consisted of 33 (40.2%) men and 49 (59.8%) women. BACTEC MGIT960 was positive in 15 (18%) patients while multiplex tuberculosis polymerase chain reaction was positive in 73 (89%) patients. Levels of VEGF in serum and CSF of TBM patients were not elevated when compared to controls. There was no association between final outcome in TBM and decrease in serum levels of VEGF at follow-up.
VEGF may not be playing a significant role in the pathogenesis of TBM. Future studies with larger sample size may clarify the status of VEGF further in TBM.

The innovation of leukocyte platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) has added enormous impact on wound healing dynamics especially the field of periodontal regeneration. The release of growth factors (GF) is thought to improve the clinical outcomes in infrabony defects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effect of covering L-PRF contained infrabony defects with collagen membranes (CM), and to compare their GF release profile to uncovered L-PRF defects and open flap debridement (OFD).
Thirty non- smoking patients with infrabony pockets participated to be randomly assigned to OFD group (n = 10), L-PRF group (n = 10), or L-PRF protected CM group (n = 10). Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL) and the radiographic defect base fill (DBF) were measured at baseline and at 6 month following surgical intervention. Gingival crevicular fluid samples were obtained on days 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, 21 and 30 days following surgery for the Platelet Derived Growth Factor-BB (PDGF-BB) and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors (VEGF) release profile evaluation.
For all patients, a statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) reduction in PI, GI, PD and CAL were reported throughout the study period. Differences between the three treatment modalities were not statistically significant. PRF + CM showed a statistically significant DBF compared to OFD and L-PRF groups at follow up. Quantitative analysis of PDGF-BB and VEGF levels demonstrated a statistically significant (P < 0.001) decline between measurement intervals for all groups with no statistically significant differences between the three groups.
Within the limitations of this study, L-PRF coverage with CM may augment defect base fill through its mechanical protective effect without enhancement in the release profile of VEGF and PDGF. The non-significant intergroup differences question the validity of the claimed extra physiologic concentration of GF offered by L-PRF harvests.
The present study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05496608), (11/08/2022).

To evaluate effectiveness of dexamethasone intravitreal implant 0.7 mg (DEX) monotherapy in the AUSSIEDEX study non-responder subgroup, defined by diabetic macular oedema (DME) refractory to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents.
This prospective, open-label, observational, real-world study included pseudophakic and phakic (scheduled for cataract surgery) eyes that did not achieve a ≥5-letter best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gain and/or clinically significant central subfield retinal thickness (CRT) improvement after 3-6 anti-VEGF injections for DME (N=143 eyes), regardless of baseline BCVA and CRT. After an initial DEX injection (baseline visit), reinjection was permitted at ≥16-week intervals.
changes in mean BCVA and CRT from baseline to week 52. Safety assessments included adverse events.
Of 143 eyes, 53 (37.1%) and 89 (62.2%) switched to DEX after 3-6 (early) and >6 (late) anti-VEGF injections, respectively; 1 (0.7%) had missing information. With 2.3 injections (mean) over 52 weeks, the change in mean BCVA from a baseline of 57.8 letters was not significant at week 52. Mean CRT improved significantly from a baseline of 417.8 μm at week 52 (mean change -60.9 μm; p<0.001). Outcomes were similar in eyes switched to DEX early and late. No unexpected adverse events were reported; no filtration surgeries were required.
To date, AUSSIEDEX is the largest prospective, real-world study of DEX monotherapy for treatment-naïve or anti-VEGF-refractory DME. Following early or late switch from anti-VEGF agents, DEX significantly improved anatomic outcomes at 52 weeks without new safety concerns, supporting use in anti-VEGF-refractory DME.
NCT02731911.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of adjuvant intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy in juvenile Coats disease.
METHODS: This retrospective, observational study included a total of 62 eyes in 62 pediatric patients with juvenile Coats disease treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF agents followed for a mean of 67.08 months (ranged from 60 to 93 months). All affected eyes were managed initially with one session of ablative treatment plus adjuvant intravitreal anti-VEGF agent (0.5 mg/0.05 ml ranibizumab or conbercept). Ablative treatment was repeated if telangiectatic retinal vessels were not completely regressed or recurred. Anti-VEGF therapy was repeated if subretinal fluid or macular edema still existed. Treatments above were repeated every 2 to 3 months. We reviewed clinical and photographic records of patients including the demographics, clinical characteristics and interventions.
RESULTS: At final visit, all 62 affected eyes had partially or completely disease resolution; none progressed to advanced stage namely neovascular glaucoma or phthisis bulbi, respectively. No ocular or systemic side effects related to intravitreal injections were observed during follow-up. In terms of 42 affected eyes that could cooperate with visual examination, best corrected visual acuity improved in 14 (14/42, 33.3%) eyes, stabled in 25 (25/42, 59.5%) eyes, and worsened in 3 (3/42, 7.1%) eyes. In the field of complications, 22 (22/62, 35.5%) eyes developed cataracts; 33 (33/62, 53.2%) eyes developed vitreoretinal fibrosis, of whom 14 (14/33, 42.4%) eyes in the subgroup of stage 3B developed progressive TRD; 40 (40/62, 64.5%) eyes developed subretinal fibrosis. Multivariate regression analysis showed increased clinical stage may be associated with the development of vitreo- and subretinal fibrosis (adjusted odds ratio:16.77,17.59; 95% CI:4.50-62.53, 3.98-77.86, respectively, all P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant intravitreal ranibizumab or conbercept combined with ablative therapies may be a long-term safe and effective treatment for juvenile Coats disease.

Our retrospective, single-center, observational study aimed to evaluate the initial responses to intravitreal injection of brolucizumab (IVBr) in patients undergoing anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy for diabetic macular edema (DME). In total, 23 eyes of 20 patients with DME treated with at least one intravitreal injection of ranibizumab or aflibercept within one year and then switched to IVBr were included. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and macular volume (MV) on optical coherence tomography images were evaluated just before the most recent conventional anti-VEGF (ranibizumab/aflibercept) injection therapy (V1), one month after the most recent traditional anti-VEGF therapy (V2), just before the first IVBr (V3), and one month after the first IVBr (V4). BCVA, CMT, MV, and presence of intraocular inflammation (IOI) were evaluated at each visit. Anterior chamber flare values were also examined at V3 and V4. BCVA showed significant improvement at V2 (0.30 ± 0.23) than V1 (0.39 ± 0.29) and at V4 (0.34 ± 0.26) than V3 (0.48 ± 0.34) (P = 0.002, P < 0.001). However, no significant difference was observed between V2 and V4 (P = 0.257). CMT was significantly thinner at V2 (346.8 ± 90.2 µm) than V1 (495.5 ± 123.8 µm), and at V4 (322.2 ± 95.7 µm) than V3 (536.5 ± 166.0 µm) (P < 0.001, P < 0.001), but no significant difference was observed between V2 and V4 (P = 0.140). MV was significantly smaller at V2 (11.6 ± 2.0 mm3) than V1 (12.6 ± 1.9 mm3) and at V4 (11.2 ± 2.0 mm3) than V3 (12.6 ± 2.0 mm3) (P < 0.001, P < 0.001), and even significantly smaller at V4 than V2 (P = 0.009). No patient had IOI. No significant changes were observed in anterior chamber flare values between V3 and V4 (25.6 ± 14.6 vs. 24.0 ± 11.5 photon count/ms; P = 0.543). Both CMT and MV significantly reduced without any adverse events one month after switching from conventional anti-VEGF to IVBr therapy for DME, including IOI. MV was significantly lower for IVBr than anti-VEGF therapy after one month of treatment. Therefore, brolucizumab may be a viable treatment option for DME patients considering switching from conventional anti-VEGF agents for various reasons, such as poor response or inability to extend dosing intervals.