Abstract
The eye, which is under constant exposure to environmental pathogens, has evolved various anatomic and immunological barriers critical to the protection of tissues lacking regenerative capacity, and the maintenance of a clear optic pathway essential to vision. By bypassing the ocular barriers, intravitreal (IVT) injection has become the mainstay for the delivery of drugs to treat conditions that affect the back of the eye. Both small molecules and biotherapeutics have been successfully administered intravitreally, and several drugs have been approved for the treatment of (wet) age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema. However, IVT injection is an invasive procedure, which requires sufficient technical expertise from the healthcare professional administering the drug. Potential side effects include bleeding, retinal tear, cataracts, infection, uveitis, loss of vision, and increased ocular pressure. Pharmaceutical companies often differ in their drug development plan, including drug administration techniques, collection of ocular tissues and fluids, ophthalmology monitoring, and overall conduct of nonclinical and clinical studies. The present effort, under the aegis of the Innovation & Quality Ophthalmic Working Group, aims at understanding these differences, identifying pros and cons of the various approaches, determining the gaps in knowledge, and suggesting feasible good practices for nonclinical and early clinical IVT drug development.