C3-R results

[dplees]

Just found this and thought it was very interesting, i wasn't aware that C3-R could make such a visual improvement

C3-R, developed at the Technische Universität Dresden, has been shown to slow or arrest the progression of keratoconus, and in some cases even reverse it, particularly when applied in combination with intracorneal ring segments. A recent study showed that when C3-R was combined with Intacs, twice as much improvement occurred compared to Intacs alone.[54

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keratoconus

[GarethB]

I have a couple of papers from Dresden and I asked for clarification of some of the results.

The populations of people tested in the ones I have were small between 10 to 25 people depending on the study. UK KC population is estimated at 30,000. There selection criteria was very strict on the level of KC treated, more often than not it was the milder cases.

C3R certainly has a place in the milder cases, but I am reserving judgement until these studies use a sample populations used are much larger.

When I contact any of these researchers and ask if C3R will need to be repeated, none of them know but they are looing at the long term results as they come in.

[Andrew MacLean]

Just a word of warning about wikipedia articles: they are not presented as authoritative. They can be changed by anyone and are not monitored nor are they peer reviewed.

Andrew

[John Smith]

Indeed, I myself have posted some corrections to that very article on occasion!

[Sajeev]

Some sections have to be discussed with them before they can go up on there, others have references to go with them, which is always nice to see, with some topics there aren't any to note. If there was much difference of opinion it soon settles down. Its not complete, it's on going, thats the point of it. It's probably the best concise joint piece on KC out there. And the quote first posted is only part of the topic and needs to be read in full.

[Andrew MacLean]

C3R is proving more and more controversial; the Keratoconus Centre in Los Angeles seems to advise against its use for Keratoconus:

Keratoconus Centre

Patients who are over age 35 should also be aware that it is highly unlikely that their disease will progress so in such patients the procedure would be homeopathic at best and possibly harmful at worst.

I am currently advising my patients against having ... [C3R] until enough new and long term data are available. If they feel compelled to do something which might halt their progression they might want to consider INTACS as a better and safer alternative. Although no one has claimed that INTACS halt the progression of keratoconus there is some preliminary data which suggest that patients who have had INTACS and have had at least 8 years of follow up have demonstrated no significant progression of their disease.

[Sajeev]

Well, No FDA approved over there... no animal testing done with the experimental way its used over there ...it's not surprising he feels that way.

[Andrew MacLean]

You are of course right, Sajeev that C3R is not covered by FDA approval, but it ican be available in the United States under IRB supervision. Nonetheless, many practitioners in the United States, and some even in Europe (as well as many if not most ethics committees in the UK) still have their reservations about this treatment for Keratoconus.

Keratoconus Centre again:

This treatment claims to reverse keratoconus and stop its progression. Laboratory evidence performed to date by European investigators indicating that the collagen strength of the cornea is increased is quite good. The clinical evidence that it actually stops progression and reverses the disease is questionable at best. Clinical studies to date fail to convince me that there is any evidence that it retards the progression of the disease.

Long term longitudinal studies are required in which patients with the disease are followed over a long period of time compared to another group that has actively progressive disease to prove that this works. There is also currently lack of standardization as to how the treatment should be performed. My major concern is that if not correctly performed this procedure could result in long term damage to the retina resulting in irreversible visual loss.

We would run into serious dangers if the precautionary principle was not applied to the development of new and experimental therapies.

Andrew

[Sajeev]

There was a patient here only a few days a go telling us of the reversal of their KC, and thats been known to happen many years ago to many lucky patients. There will be a variety of opinion as some have no experience/knowledge but think they know all of a sudden about everything, what has been used for years by others with-in the approvals routinely, and at the same time he likes to talk up what he has to offer ...Laser, a piece of plastic can hold back KC... etc

The controversy is over there, they can't decide between them self's, there is no animal testing done on the modified way its done there, and with no approval.

Reference this:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3388

[Andrew MacLean]

Sajeev

Science needs a healthy and sceptical approach; it is the task of the scientist to test a hypothesis as vigorously as possible.

I hope that scientists never stop questioning hypotheses, never stop doubting rash claims and never stop putting their trust in research rather than anecdotes.

I share the joy of those who have had good results so far, and I hope that their good results continue, but do not forget that in many jurisdictions the assessment so far has been that C3R remains an unproven therapy for keratoconus.

Andrew