Half-Life vs. Real Life: How Real-World Evidence Is Reframing Wet AMD Treatment

The Biological Design of Bolus Therapy

The advent of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy has been one of the most important breakthroughs in retinal care.¹ The availability of anti-VEGFs has transformed treatment, expectations, and outcomes for both clinicians and patients.¹ For the first time, we were able to not only slow vision loss in wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) but could meaningfully improve visual outcomes for many patients.^1-3 However, over time, real-world evidence has identified an inherent limitation in this approach – one rooted in biology.

Current anti-VEGF therapies are designed for bolus delivery via intravitreal (IVT) injection, resulting in a high initial drug concentration that declines over time based on its intraocular half-life.^4,5 What began as fixed monthly dosing evolved into individualized treatment approaches, including treatment intervals of 4, 8, 12, and in some cases, 16 weeks.^6-8 These advances matter, but disease activity and retinal fluid recurrence may still occur in many patients as treatment intervals are extended.⁶ In fact, while 90% of patients continue to require frequent injections every 1 to 3 months, many still fail to achieve a durable effect and sustained disease control.^9-11

As treatment intervals are extended, some patients experience recurrent disease activity and retinal fluid recurrence, requiring additional treatment to maintain disease control.^10,12 Greater variability in retinal fluid and retinal thickness has been associated with atrophy, fibrosis, and poorer vision outcomes over time.¹¹

What Wet AMD Fluid Fluctuations Reveal About the Limitations of Drug Half-Life

Real-world evidence (RWE) is critical to our understanding of long-term wet AMD management because it provides pragmatic insights outside the rigid structure of randomized, controlled clinical trials.

In particular, RWE has shown that recurrent retinal fluid and other signs of disease activity may occur during treatment, even among patients receiving currently available anti-VEGF therapies.¹¹ RWE suggests that retinal fluid fluctuations and disease activity may occur before patients notice subjective vision changes.¹³ These fluctuations often precede identifiable visual acuity loss and represent recurrent disease activity, even when short-term vision appears stable.¹³

Additionally, because the half-life of a drug impacts the limit of its duration of action, most patients require repeated, frequent injections to maintain suppression of disease activity.^4,14 In real-world practice, missed or delayed visits may contribute to undertreatment and poorer visual outcomes.¹⁵

When recurrent retinal fluid fluctuations and disease activity persist over time, they may contribute to disease progression, including irreversible fibrosis and atrophy, photoreceptor loss, and progressive visual decline.^11,12,15

These findings from RWE reinforce an important reality: early visual gains from anti-VEGF therapy do not guarantee long-term vision preservation.¹⁶ Long-term outcomes are shaped by sustained disease control over years, not just months.¹⁶

This is where half-life meets real life.

The Burden of Wet AMD Treatment and Consequences of Missed Visits

Treatment burden in wet AMD is often framed as an inconvenience. But the deeper issue is what this burden produces in practice: undertreatment and challenges in maintaining disease control.^17-20

Delays or missed injections of anti-VEGF therapy may be associated with recurrent retinal fluid and disease activity and increases in central subfield thickness (CST).^21,22 Repeated fluctuations in retinal fluid and retinal thickness have also been associated with adverse anatomic changes over time, suggesting that recurrent disease activity may contribute to cumulative structural changes.^21,22 As time goes on, this cycle can affect disease progression.^21,22

Patients with wet AMD are typically over the age of 60 and often managing multiple comorbidities.^15,23 Transportation barriers, health-related challenges, and caregiver limitations can cause even the most motivated patients to miss visits.^15,23

One of my highly adherent patients describes the cadence of injections as deeply disruptive. She shared with me that she has “a life full of people,” and that the constant need for appointments reshapes her routine. Progressively, her visits became such a priority that “everything else fell into the background.” Her experience reflects a broader truth: even if adherence is strong, the burden is still significant.

Continuous Control as a New Paradigm

For decades, innovation in wet AMD has focused on maximizing durability within a bolus framework. The question, therefore, is whether extending treatment intervals alone is the optimal design for a lifelong disease.

An alternative paradigm is a continuous drug delivery approach, one that is designed to maintain consistent intracellular VEGF inhibition over longer periods of time. This approach seeks to minimize recurrent disease activity, reduce retinal fluid fluctuations, and lessen the cumulative structural consequences associated with repeated instability.

The goal is two-fold: deliver unmatched durability compared to current bolus therapies and provide sustained disease control – not simply extending time between injections.

How Real-World Evidence Informed the SOL Clinical Program

Ocular Therapeutix’s Phase 3 SOL clinical program for OTX-TKI, an investigational axitinib hydrogel administered by intravitreal injection, including SOL-1 and SOL-R in wet AMD, was developed with these real-world insights in mind.^24,25 Axitinib, a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is a highly selective, potent pan-VEGFR inhibitor that has demonstrated strong activity targeting VEGF signaling pathways.^26-29

The comprehensive program is designed to more closely reflect how clinicians are managing wet AMD in day-to-day practice – and the tradeoffs between durability and the true burden of care that patients experience outside of a controlled study environment. The SOL-1 clinical trial is intended to evaluate whether a single intravitreal injection of OTX-TKI can deliver on the potential of unmatched durability and sustained disease control.^24,25

Aiming to reach the durability goal, OTX-TKI leverages Ocular’s proprietary, fully bioresorbable ELUTYX™ technology that has demonstrated sustained drug-delivery capabilities in real-world applications.^30,31 This fully bioresorbable hydrogel is designed to provide prolonged, targeted drug delivery.^32-34 The ELUTYX technology is also used in Ocular’s FDA-approved dexamethasone ophthalmic insert which has been used in more than 700,000 eyes.^32-34

Moving Forward: Redefining Long-Term Success in Wet AMD

The therapeutic objective in wet AMD should be to evolve beyond merely extending the dosing schedule of anti-VEGF intravitreal injections. Instead, clinical innovation needs to prioritize approaches that significantly improve treatment durability and offer sustained disease control over the long-term – without being constrained by the inherent limitations of the biological half-life of bolus therapies.

RWE confirms that extending intervals of intermittent bolus therapy may not fully overcome the structural consequences of repeated fluid fluctuations due to the inherent limitations of intraocular half-life. If we aim to transform the long-term outcomes for patients with wet AMD, we need to design therapies and clinical programs that reflect real-world practice.

By aligning biological insight, real-world evidence, and innovative drug delivery technologies, we can move toward a future where sustained disease control and long-term durability define success.

As of publication in September 2026, OTX-TKI is currently undergoing clinical evaluation. This content is not intended to convey any conclusion of safety or efficacy, and there is no guarantee that OTX-TKI will successfully complete development or gain FDA approval or other regulatory authority approval.

References

1. Ferrara N, et al. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2016;15(6):385-403.
2. Rosenfeld PJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1419-1431
3. Brown DM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1432-1444
4. Rowe LW, et al. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2024;24(8):799-814.
5. García-Quintanilla L, et al. Pharmaceutics. 2019;11(8):365.
6. Khanani AM, et al. Ophthalmol. 2024;131(8):914-926.
7. Khanna S, et al. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2019;4:e000398.
8. Heier JS, et al. Lancet. 2022;399(10326):729-740. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00010-1.
9. Market Scope. Ophthalmic Market Trends: Quarterly US Retina Edition. St. Louis, MO: Market Scope, LLC. 2025.
10. Dans KC, et al. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019;257(4):741-748.
11. Evans RN, et al. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2020;138(10):1109.
12. Armendariz BG, et al. Eye (Lond). 2024;38(17):3243-3251.
13. Hanson RLW, et al. Eye (Lond). 2023;37:2438-2453.
14. Gualino V, et al. J Fr Ophthalmol. 2020;43:1047-1053.
15. Zur D, et al. Br J Ophthalmol. 2025;109(3):307-315.
16. Maguire MG, et al. Ophthalmol. 2016;123(8):1751-1761.
17. Westborg I, et al. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2018;25(2):176-182.
18. Wykoff CC, et al. Ophthalmol Sci. 2024;4(2):100421.
19. Hsu J, Regillo CD. Ophthalmol. 2020;127(9):1189-1190.
20. Spooner K, et al. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2025;53:773-790.
21. Navarrete A, et al. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;260:2201-2208.
22. Ehlers JP, et al. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2022;63(6):17.
23. Gale RP, et al. Acta Ophthalmol. 2023;101(1):e26-e42.
24. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal OTX-TKI (Ocular Therapeutix) (Axitinib Implant) in Subjects With Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06223958. Updated April 18, 2025. Accessed April 16, 2026. clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06223958.
25. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal OTX-TKI (Axitinib Implant) in Subjects With Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06495918. Updated June 17, 2025. Accessed August 25, 2026. clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06495918.
26. Zhao Y, et al. Oncologist. 2015;20(6):660-673.
27. Gross-Goupil M, et al. Clin Med Insights Oncol. 2013;7:269-277.
28. Liang C, et al. Mol Ther Oncolytics. 2022;24:577-584.
29. INLYTA (axitinib) [package insert]. New York, NY: Pfizer Inc; 2024.
30. Walters T, et al. J Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2016;7(4):1-11.
31. Tyson SL, et al. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019;45(2):204-212.
32. Data on file 039. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. Bedford, MA.
33. Moshfeghi AA, et al. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2023;64(8):936.
34. Sawhney AS, et al., Inventors, Incept, LLC, Assignee. Drug delivery through hydrogel plugs. US Patent 8,409,606 B2. April 2, 2013.