Clinical trial shows 27% of patients with advanced macular degeneration improved vision — Evidence Review

A new phase 2b clinical trial led by the USC Roski Eye Institute is investigating whether stem cell-derived retinal implants can restore vision in patients with advanced dry age-related macular degeneration, with early results suggesting vision improvement in over a quarter of participants. Related studies generally support the potential of retinal implants and prostheses for partial vision restoration in degenerative eye diseases.

• Multiple studies have demonstrated that various types of retinal implants, including subretinal and epiretinal prostheses, can restore limited visual function in patients with severe vision loss due to retinal degenerations, aligning with the encouraging outcomes of the new stem cell-based implant trial 1 2 4 5 6 8.
• While most previous implants focused on electronic devices for inherited retinal diseases like retinitis pigmentosa, recent trials have extended the approach to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), with evidence that implants can restore central vision and improve daily functioning in patients with geographic atrophy 4.
• Systematic reviews and multicenter studies indicate that safety and long-term biocompatibility remain important considerations, but the new trial's finding of implant stability and vision gains in 27% of participants is consistent with the best outcomes reported in the retinal prosthesis literature 1 2 4 5 6 9.

Study Overview and Key Findings

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a leading cause of irreversible vision loss in older adults, particularly in its dry form, which currently lacks effective restorative treatments. This new study is significant as it targets advanced dry AMD—specifically, patients with geographic atrophy—using a novel approach: stem cell-derived retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) cells delivered via an ultra-thin implant. The research builds on earlier safety trials and aims not only to halt vision decline but to potentially reverse some vision loss, a goal that has remained elusive in ophthalmology.

Property	Value
Organization	USC Roski Eye Institute, Keck Medicine of USC, Regenerative Patch Technologies LLC
Authors	Sun Young Lee, Rodrigo Antonio Brant Fernandes, Mark S. Humayun
Population	Patients with advanced dry age-related macular degeneration
Sample Size	24 patients
Methods	Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)
Outcome	Vision improvement, safety of the retinal implant
Results	27% of participants experienced some level of vision improvement.

Literature Review: Related Studies

To situate this study within the broader scientific context, we searched the Consensus database, which indexes over 200 million research papers. The following search queries were used:

1. eye implant vision restoration outcomes
2. visual improvement tiny implant study
3. sight restoration devices clinical trials

Summary Table of Related Studies

Topic	Key Findings
What is the effectiveness of retinal implants in restoring vision in degenerative diseases?	- Subretinal and epiretinal implants can restore limited visual function, including light perception and object recognition, in patients with end-stage retinal degenerations 1 2 5 6 8 9. - Retinal implants show measurable improvements in daily activities and mobility, with some patients achieving functional vision sufficient for basic tasks 1 2 5 6.
How do retinal implants perform specifically in age-related macular degeneration (AMD)?	- Photovoltaic retinal implants have been shown to restore central vision in patients with geographic atrophy due to AMD, with preserved peripheral vision 4. - The present stem cell-derived RPE implant study extends the use of implants to dry AMD, with early results of vision improvement in 27% of participants, consistent with initial success in other AMD implant trials 4.
What are the safety and biocompatibility outcomes of retinal implants?	- Most studies report that subretinal and epiretinal implants are generally safe, with the majority of devices remaining functional up to 2–3 years, though adverse events (e.g., device-related complications, surgical challenges) can occur and require monitoring 2 5 6 8 9. - Systematic reviews identify long-term biocompatibility as a major determinant of success, with some devices (e.g., Alpha-IMS) showing promising profiles 9.
How do patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction compare across vision restoration devices?	- Extended range intraocular lenses and corneal inlays for presbyopia and cataract patients show high patient satisfaction and functional vision restoration, though these are used for different indications than retinal implants 3 7. - Retinal implant recipients report improvements in vision-related activities of daily living, though satisfaction varies based on the degree of restored vision and device limitations 1 2 5 6.

---

What is the effectiveness of retinal implants in restoring vision in degenerative diseases?

Studies using subretinal and epiretinal prostheses have consistently found that implants can restore limited but significant visual function in patients with severe retinal degenerations, such as retinitis pigmentosa. These improvements range from basic light perception to object recognition and mobility gains, with a subset of patients achieving restored vision that is usable in daily life. The current stem cell-derived retinal implant trial for dry AMD aligns with these findings, showing that 27% of participants experienced some vision improvement.

• Subretinal implants (e.g., Alpha IMS, Alpha AMS) enabled light perception, motion detection, and object identification in blind patients, with up to 72% of recipients achieving primary endpoints related to daily living activities 1 5 6.
• The Argus II epiretinal prosthesis demonstrated long-term safety and measurable visual benefits in patients blind from retinitis pigmentosa, with improved performance on objective visual function tests 2.
• Suprachoroidal implant approaches have also shown promise in early human trials, indicating flexibility in implant location and technique 8.
• Systematic reviews highlight Alpha-IMS as especially promising due to its natural eye-movement tracking and relatively high visual acuity restoration 9.

How do retinal implants perform specifically in age-related macular degeneration (AMD)?

Recent research has started to extend retinal implant technology to address vision loss from AMD, particularly in patients with geographic atrophy. The new phase 2b trial's approach—using stem cell-derived RPE implants—represents a biological alternative to electronic prostheses, aiming to restore lost function in central vision. Prior studies, such as those on the PRIMA wireless photovoltaic retinal implant, have demonstrated the feasibility of restoring central vision without adversely affecting residual peripheral vision in AMD patients.

• The PRIMA implant restored central vision in patients with geographic atrophy, achieving visual acuity of 20/460 to 20/550 in some cases 4.
• Both the PRIMA and the new stem cell-based RPE implant trials report vision improvement in a minority but meaningful proportion of participants, indicating incremental but clinically relevant progress 4.
• The ability to target central vision loss in AMD without harming peripheral vision is a key advantage of these approaches 4.
• The new study's outcome—vision improvement in 27% of advanced dry AMD patients—parallels the initial success rates observed in other emerging AMD implant technologies 4.

What are the safety and biocompatibility outcomes of retinal implants?

Safety and implant biocompatibility remain central concerns in vision restoration research. Most studies report that retinal implants are generally well tolerated, though complications such as device malfunction, surgical challenges, and adverse events do occur. The new RPE cell implant trial reports that the device remained securely positioned, was safely absorbed into retinal tissue, and did not lead to major complications over the initial follow-up period.

• The Argus II and Alpha-IMS/AMS implants demonstrated sustained safety profiles over 2–3 years, though some serious device- or surgery-related adverse events were noted and managed 2 5 6.
• The new stem cell-based implant study builds on earlier trials that established initial safety and secure device placement, now focusing on efficacy 4 5.
• Systematic reviews emphasize the importance of long-term biocompatibility for the widespread adoption of retinal implants, with Alpha-IMS identified as particularly promising in this regard 9.
• Suprachoroidal and subretinal implant studies suggest that surgical approach may influence both safety and the preservation of residual vision 8.

How do patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction compare across vision restoration devices?

Patient satisfaction and quality of life improvements are important metrics for assessing the impact of vision restoration devices. While much of the literature on intraocular lenses and corneal inlays addresses refractive indications like presbyopia and cataract, retinal implant recipients—typically with more profound vision loss—often report meaningful, though variable, improvements in daily activities and independence.

• Extended range intraocular lenses and corneal inlays report high levels of patient satisfaction and spectacle independence in presbyopic and cataract patients, with minimal adverse visual phenomena 3 7.
• Among recipients of retinal implants for degenerative retinal diseases, improvements in daily living and object recognition are frequently reported, though functional gains are generally modest compared to those achieved with lens-based technologies in less severe vision loss 1 2 5 6.
• Patient satisfaction with retinal implants tends to correlate with the degree of restored function and the individual's baseline vision loss 1 2 5.
• The new RPE implant study's focus on advanced dry AMD addresses an unmet need for patients with few remaining treatment options, potentially expanding satisfaction and quality-of-life benefits to a broader population.

Future Research Questions

While recent advances show potential for restoring vision in patients with advanced retinal degenerations, several important questions remain. Future research is needed to clarify long-term efficacy, optimize patient selection, and further improve both safety and the degree of vision restoration.

Research Question	Relevance
What are the long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of stem cell-derived retinal implants for AMD?	Long-term data are needed to determine whether initial vision improvements are sustained and to monitor for delayed complications 2 5 9.
Which patient characteristics predict the greatest benefit from retinal implant therapy in AMD?	Identifying which subgroups are most likely to benefit could improve patient selection and optimize outcomes 1 4 5.
How does the vision restoration from stem cell-based implants compare to electronic prostheses in AMD patients?	Direct comparisons could inform clinical decision-making and guide future implant development 4 5 6 9.
What are the functional and quality-of-life impacts of vision restoration in advanced dry AMD?	Understanding real-world benefits, including daily living and mobility, is essential for evaluating treatment value 1 2 5 6.
Can combining stem cell therapy with other approaches (e.g. gene therapy, visual prostheses) further improve outcomes in AMD?	Combination strategies may address multiple mechanisms of vision loss and enhance restoration potential 4 5 6.