title: Baseline characteristics and response to treatment of participants with hemiretinal compared with branch retinal or central retinal vein occlusion in the standard care vs corticosteroid for retinal vein occlusion (SCORE) study: SCORE study report 14.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare baseline characteristics and treatment response of participants with hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) with those of participants with branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) or central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) in the Standard Care vs COrticosteroid for REtinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) Study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Eyes were randomized to standard care, 1 mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide, or 4 mg intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Standard care was observation in the SCORE-CRVO trial and grid photocoagulation in the SCORE-BRVO trial. The HRVO eyes were enrolled in the SCORE-BRVO trial. Baseline characteristics, changes in visual acuity and center point thickness, safety outcomes, and number of treatments were compared among HRVO, BRVO, and CRVO participants.
  
  
  RESULTS
  At baseline, HRVO eyes were intermediate between BRVO and CRVO eyes in area of retinal thickening, area of fluorescein leakage, visual acuity, and center point thickness. No differences in visual acuity change from baseline to 1 year were noted between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO. Within triamcinolone-treated eyes, HRVO eyes did not differ from BRVO eyes in visual acuity change, but HRVO eyes fared better than CRVO eyes. There were no differences in center point thickness change between standard care groups for HRVO and BRVO, nor were there differences across the 3 disease entities for triamcinolone-treated eyes. There were no differences in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The HRVO participants were similar to BRVO and CRVO participants regarding most demographic characteristics, with fundus findings intermediate between BRVO and CRVO. In the SCORE Study, HRVO was treated as BRVO; HRVO eyes responded to treatment similarly to BRVO eyes, and there was no difference among the 3 disease entities in frequency of protocol treatments and adverse events.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00105027.
authors.forename: Ingrid U
authors.initials: IU
authors.lastname: Scott
authors.forename: Paul C
authors.initials: PC
authors.lastname: Vanveldhuisen
authors.forename: Neal L
authors.initials: NL
authors.lastname: Oden
authors.forename: Michael S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Ip
authors.forename: Amitha
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Domalpally
authors.forename: Bernard H
authors.initials: BH
authors.lastname: Doft
authors.forename: Michael J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Elman
authors.forename: Barbara A
authors.initials: BA
authors.lastname: Blodi
mesh_terms: D005260:Female; D005938:Glucocorticoids / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D006801:Humans; D058449:Intravitreal Injections; D008297:Male; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D012169:Retinal Vein / Q000473:pathology*; D012170:Retinal Vein Occlusion / Q000145:classification / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000473:pathology*; D041623:Tomography, Optical Coherence; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014222:Triamcinolone Acetonide / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D014792:Visual Acuity
chemical_list: D005938:Glucocorticoids; D014222:Triamcinolone Acetonide