In the United Arab Emirates, retinopathy has been shown to be present in 19% of the diabetic population, with diabetes identified in up to 40% of individuals aged over 55 years. Despite the prevalence of diabetic retinal diseases, there are no unified national guidelines on the management of diabetic macular edema (DME). These published guidelines are based on evidence taken from the literature and published trials of therapies, and consensus opinion of a representative expert panel with an interest in this condition, convened by the Emirates Society of Ophthalmology. The aim is to provide evidence-based, clinical guidance for the best management of different aspects of DME, with a special focus on vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy. Treatment should be initiated in patients with best-corrected visual acuity 20/30 or worse, and/or features of DME as seen on optical coherence tomography (OCT) with central retinal thickness (CRT) of at least 300 μm or in symptomatic patients with vision better than 20/25, and/or CRT less than 300 μm where there are OCT features consistent with center-involving macular edema. The treatment of DME is effective irrespective of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level, and treatment must not be denied or delayed in order to optimize systemic parameters. All ophthalmic treatment options should be discussed with the patient for better compliance and expectations. Non-center-involving DME can be initially observed until progression toward the center is documented. Macular laser no longer has a primary role in center-involving DME, and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy should be considered as first-line treatment for all patients, unless contraindicated. If anti-VEGF is contraindicated, a steroid dexamethasone implant can be considered for first-line treatment. Recommendations for the treatment of DME in special circumstances and in relapsing and refractory DME are also discussed.

UNASSIGNED: Nonproliferative (NPDR) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) without diabetic macular edema (DME) affect millions of individuals living with diabetes throughout the world. There is increasing data on various management strategies for such patients, but there is limited consensus on how the data should be adopted into clinical practice.
UNASSIGNED: This literature review and editorial presents and synthesizes the current evidence for various management paradigms for NPDR and PDR without DME.
UNASSIGNED: Retina specialists are an integral member of the diabetes management team, and should encourage patients on the importance of glycemic and cardiovascular optimization for both systemic and retinopathy risk factor reduction. The diabetic retinopathy severity scale (DRSS) is now an approvable endpoint for clinical trials in the United States, therefore becoming more clinically relevant. For PDR without DME, the Diabetic Retinopathy Study (DRS) and the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) established the standard of care with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). Laser parameters have since evolved to include less intense and earlier intervention. Studies have recently demonstrated that anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment of PDR is effective at regressing neovascularization and improving DRSS levels in many patients. Further evidence is required to determine optimal treatment frequency, duration, and retreatment criteria, in the real world. There are concerns for adverse events in patients being lost to follow up during anti-VEGF treatment. For NPDR without DME, the standard of care has been a wait-and-watch approach. Data within the DRS and the ETDRS suggest that PRP for severe NPDR can be an option for select patients as well. Multiple clinical trials have now demonstrated that anti-VEGF treatment can improve the DRSS score in NPDR. Further studies are required to assess whether this positively affects long-term visual outcomes, and whether the benefits outweigh the risks in the real world for routine use.
UNASSIGNED: There is cumulative evidence demonstrating the efficacy of various treatment options for NPDR and PDR without DME. Currently, patients would most likely benefit from thoughtful management strategies that are tailored to the individual patient.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the most common cause of vision loss among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), rendering it an important growing challenge in ophthalmology. In the past decades, the management strategies for DME had a few paradigm shifts, and the advent of an expanding number of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents also calls for an in-depth examination of the currently available evidence. This article was composed with the intention to provide recommendations for practicing clinicians to improve the management and, through it the outcomes of DME. Drawing from current guideline recommendations, clinical trial findings and local clinical experiences, these consensus recommendations for the management of DME were formed by an expert panel through iterations of discussion and voting. First, the treatment goal of DME is to achieve best visual outcome with edema improvement while minimizing treatment burden. Second, anti-VEGF therapy should be considered as the first-line treatment for patients with center-involving DME causing vision loss. Baseline visual acuity (VA) and central subfield thickness (CST) should be taken into consideration when choosing anti-VEGF agents. Third, early intensive anti-VEGF therapy (at least 3 monthly doses) is important for better patients\' VA and anatomical improvement. In non-responders who have already been treated with 3-5 injections of anti-VEGF agents, it is reasonable to switch to other modalities, such as steroids. Finally, for the follow-up phase, fixed or individualized dosing should be considered based on VA and OCT.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize recommendations for the use of intravitreal aflibercept with a treat-and-extend regimen to manage neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in the Asia-Pacific region. Although anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapies have improved the quality of life of patients with nAMD, a leading cause of blindness and visual impairment, the high treatment frequency recommended by current guidelines places a significant burden on patients and healthcare providers.
METHODS: Recommended guidelines from a consensus panel.
METHODS: An expert panel formed a consensus on recommendations for use of intravitreal aflibercept as treatment of nAMD in the Asia-Pacific region.
RESULTS: After 3 initial monthly doses, treatment interval could be extended by 4-week increments, to a maximum of 12 weeks, in patients with inactive disease. Conversely, in active disease, treatment intervals should be shortened, by 4 weeks, or to 4 weeks in cases of severe recurrence. Treatment could be ceased in patients with stable disease activity after 12 months of treatment at 12-week intervals, as a means to prevent over treatent and lifelong injections.
CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations could potentially minimize the number of treatments while maintaining efficacy and improve compliance by reducing the number of clinic visits compared with existing recommendations.

The Oncology Gold Standard (OGS) Expert Group on renal cell carcinoma (RCC) developed the consensus statement to provide community oncologists practical guidelines on the management of advanced clear cell (cc) RCC using published evidence, practical experience of experts in real life management, and results of a nationwide survey involving 144 health-care professionals. Six broad question categories containing 33 unique questions cover major situations in the routine management of RCC. This document serves as a ready guide for the standard of care to optimize outcome. The table of \"Take Home Messages\" at the end is a convenient tool for busy practitioners.