This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.

Researcher challenges universal use of AREDS2 formulation

Issue: September 25, 2014

Add topic to email alerts

Receive an email when new articles are posted on

Please provide your email address to receive an email when new articles are posted on .

Subscribe

Added to email alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

Back to Healio

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Back to Healio

SAN DIEGO — Optimal treatment for 65% of AREDS2 study patients is something other than the AREDS formulation, Carl C. Awh, MD, told colleagues at the American Society of Retina Specialists annual meeting.

Carl C. Awh

In an outcomes analysis of AREDS patients and AREDS data, Awh said patients with high complement factor H (CFH) risk and no ARMS2 risk treated with the AREDS formulation had a 135% increased AMD progression compared with those treated with placebo — that is, 13% of patients in the study.

“Our subgroup analysis suggests that genotype-directed nutritional therapy could result in improved outcomes for patients with moderate AMD,” Awh said.

Patients with low CFH risk and high ARMS2 risk had 37% decreased AMD progression if treated with the AREDS formulation rather than placebo.

“These were 35% of our study patients,” Awh said. “We think it is this genotype group that drives the overall benefit of the AREDS formulation.”