How do different drug classes work in treating Geographic Atrophy?

Overview of Geographic Atrophy 
Geographic Atrophy (GA) is an advanced, atrophic form of dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD). It is characterized by well-demarcated areas of retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) loss, accompanied by photoreceptor degeneration and choriocapillaris attenuation. These structural changes lead to a progressive decline in central visual function. GA lesions enlarge over time, gradually encroaching on the foveal center, which is responsible for high-resolution central vision, ultimately causing irreversible vision loss. The underlying pathophysiology of GA is complex, involving multiple interconnected mechanisms including oxidative stress, chronic inflammation, dysregulation of complement activity, genetic predisposition, and metabolic alterations. Excessive activation of the complement cascade, particularly the central components such as C3 and C5, is hypothesized to drive inflammatory injury resulting in cell death of the RPE and adjacent retinal structures. Oxidative stress further compounds the damage by accumulating reactive oxygen species (ROS), which damage lipids, proteins, and DNA within retinal cells. Overall, GA is a multifactorial disease where both intrinsic genetic factors and environmental stresses converge to disturb retinal homeostasis, leading to irreversible degeneration.

Current Treatment Landscape 
For decades, no medical therapy had been approved for GA, leaving clinicians to rely primarily on low-vision rehabilitation to manage the burden of visual impairment. However, advances in our understanding of the disease’s biology have spurred development of targeted pharmacotherapies. Recently, investigational approaches – such as complement inhibitors (for example, pegcetacoplan, which targets C3, and avacincaptad pegol, a C5 inhibitor) – have emerged and advanced into late-phase clinical trials. In parallel, antioxidant and neuroprotective strategies have been investigated with the goal of mitigating oxidative stress and preserving retinal cell integrity. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents, the mainstay for neovascular AMD, have also been explored in the context of GA mainly because some GA lesions may co-exist with or be complicated by choroidal neovascularization, though their role in purely atrophic disease remains controversial. Overall, the treatment landscape is now moving from supportive care towards targeted therapies that directly address the underlying pathogenic mechanisms of GA while also grappling with the challenge that anatomical improvements do not always translate into functional vision gains.

Drug Classes Used in Treating Geographic Atrophy

Antioxidants and Neuroprotective Agents 
Antioxidants and neuroprotective agents form one class of drugs that focus on attenuating the oxidative stress implicated in GA pathogenesis. These agents work to neutralize ROS and bolster the endogenous antioxidant defense systems of the retina. Nutraceuticals – such as vitamins C and E, β-carotene, and zinc – have long been considered in the context of AMD, with several large-scale studies and clinical trials investigating their efficacy in slowing disease progression. In addition, polyphenolic compounds such as resveratrol have been explored given their known ability to scavenge free radicals and modulate inflammatory pathways simultaneously. Neuroprotective agents, which may include compounds that support mitochondrial function and promote cell survival, are also being investigated to preserve photoreceptor and RPE function. Although clinical results with antioxidants have been mixed, the rationale remains that by reducing oxidative damage and supporting cellular homeostasis, overall retinal degeneration and subsequent lesion expansion may be slowed. These compounds are often administered either through dietary supplementation or locally via ocular delivery to directly target retinal tissues.

Complement Inhibitors 
Complement inhibitors target the dysregulated immune response at the heart of GA’s inflammatory cascade. Overactivation of the complement system, particularly through central components like C3 and C5, leads to an excessive production of inflammatory mediators that accelerate retinal cell damage. Agents such as pegcetacoplan inhibit the cleavage of complement component C3, thereby reducing the formation of downstream pro-inflammatory fragments and the membrane attack complex. On the other hand, drugs like avacincaptad pegol work by targeting C5 to interfere with the terminal complement pathway. By modulating complement activity, these drugs aim to slow the expansion of GA lesions by reducing chronic inflammation and subsequent cell death. Complement inhibition has been under intense clinical investigation, with several Phase III trials (e.g., DERBY, OAKS, GATHER1, and GATHER2) evaluating their impact on lesion growth and visual function, albeit with modest anatomical benefits so far.

Anti-VEGF Therapies 
Anti-VEGF agents are most commonly associated with the treatment of neovascular AMD, where they inhibit pathological angiogenesis by neutralizing vascular endothelial growth factor. VEGF not only drives abnormal blood vessel formation but also has non-vascular functions, including neurotrophic support for retinal cells. In the context of GA, anti-VEGF therapy has a more controversial role. Although GA is classically non-neovascular, anti-VEGF agents have been investigated for their potential to mitigate secondary choroidal neovascularization that can occur in some GA patients. There is, however, ongoing debate regarding whether the suppression of VEGF, which is necessary for maintaining the health of retinal neurons and supporting choroidal vasculature, might inadvertently accelerate atrophic changes in some cases. Thus, while anti-VEGF therapies offer clear benefits in treating exudative complications, their role in treating purely atrophic GA remains less defined due to the delicate balance between inhibiting pathological neovascularization and preserving the beneficial trophic effects of VEGF.

Mechanisms of Action

How Antioxidants and Neuroprotective Agents Work 
Antioxidants and neuroprotective drugs primarily work by mitigating the damaging effects of oxidative stress in the retina – a key driver of GA progression. At the molecular level, antioxidants neutralize ROS by donating electrons, thus preventing the chain reaction of lipid peroxidation that leads to cellular membrane damage. They also upregulate endogenous defense pathways, including the enhancement of enzymes like superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase, and glutathione peroxidase. Agents such as resveratrol not only scavenge free radicals but also modulate intracellular signaling pathways, including the activation of sirtuin-1 and the Keap1-Nrf2-ARE axis, which are vital for promoting cell survival and regulating inflammatory responses in the retina. Neuroprotective mechanisms may also involve the stabilization of mitochondrial membranes and the prevention of apoptotic cell death, ensuring that photoreceptors and RPE cells maintain their function despite chronic stress. Through these multiple mechanisms, antioxidant and neuroprotective therapies attempt to preserve retinal structure and function, albeit with variable success in clinical trials.

Mechanism of Complement Inhibitors 
Complement inhibitors work by targeting critical steps in the complement cascade, thereby alleviating the inflammatory milieu responsible for retinal degeneration in GA. The complement system, an essential part of innate immunity, is normally tightly regulated to prevent collateral damage. However, in GA, genetic variants and environmental stresses appear to tip the balance toward overactivation. Inhibitors such as pegcetacoplan bind to C3, preventing its cleavage into C3a and C3b, which in turn stops the amplification loop that would normally propagate inflammation. Similarly, avacincaptad pegol binds to C5, inhibiting its cleavage and thus blocking the generation of potent inflammatory mediators like C5a and the formation of the membrane attack complex (C5b-9). By dampening this pathway, complement inhibitors reduce the chronic inflammation and immune-mediated damage which contribute to lesion expansion, thereby slowing the structural progression of GA. Despite the encouraging anatomical endpoints – such as reduced lesion growth – the translation of these benefits into functional vision improvement remains an area of active investigation.

Role of Anti-VEGF in Geographic Atrophy 
Anti-VEGF therapies are classically used to manage neovascular complications in AMD, given their ability to neutralize VEGF and inhibit the formation of abnormal blood vessels. In the context of GA, however, their role is somewhat dual-faceted. On one hand, they address secondary complications. A subset of GA patients may develop choroidal neovascularization (CNV) or other exudative features, and in these cases, anti-VEGF agents can suppress neovascular activity and reduce retinal fluid accumulation. On the other hand, VEGF is known to have protective roles in the retina by supporting neuronal survival and regulating choroidal blood flow. Hence, it is hypothesized that indiscriminate blockade of VEGF in the absence of neovascular stimulus might disrupt these supportive mechanisms. This has led to concerns that anti-VEGF therapy might contribute to the progression of atrophic changes in patients with dry AMD by depriving retinal tissues of vital trophic factors. Therefore, while anti-VEGF drugs are indispensable in neovascular AMD, their application in GA remains controversial. Current investigations focus on optimizing dosing strategies or combining anti-VEGF therapy with other agents to strike a balance between preventing pathological angiogenesis and preserving neurotrophic support.

Efficacy and Clinical Trials

Comparative Effectiveness of Drug Classes 
When evaluating the different drug classes, each works along a distinct pathogenic axis:
• Antioxidants and neuroprotective agents aim to mitigate oxidative damage and support retinal cell survival. Although their biochemical rationale is well-founded, clinical outcomes have been heterogenous. While some trials have shown that antioxidant supplementation may reduce the rate of GA progression, others have not demonstrated a statistically significant benefit in visual acuity or lesion growth. 
• Complement inhibitors directly target the inflammatory cascade thought to be a major driver of GA. Trials involving pegcetacoplan and avacincaptad pegol have consistently demonstrated a reduction in GA lesion growth, typically in the range of 14–22% over 12–24 months. However, these anatomical improvements have not yet translated into clear functional (visual acuity) benefits, leaving an important efficacy question unresolved. 
• Anti-VEGF therapies, while highly effective in treating exudative forms of AMD, have a more nuanced and debated role in GA. Studies suggest that although anti-VEGF agents may be beneficial in controlling neovascular complications in patients with mixed pathology, they do not significantly alter the progression of GA per se. In some observational reports, long-term anti-VEGF treatment has even been associated with increased atrophic changes, possibly due to the suppression of endogenous VEGF’s protective functions. 

Overall, while each drug class offers theoretical and sometimes early clinical promise, comparative effectiveness remains challenging. The choice of therapy often depends on the specific clinical circumstances: whether the patient presents with purely atrophic disease, or has mixed phenotypes with components of neovascular activity.

Key Findings from Clinical Trials 
Clinical trials have provided valuable insights into the potential of these therapies: 
• Complement inhibitors have been the most extensively studied in Phase III trials. In the DERBY and OAKS studies involving pegcetacoplan, a statistically significant reduction in GA lesion growth was observed compared to sham treatment. Similarly, the GATHER studies with avacincaptad pegol have also met primary endpoints focused on lesion size reduction even though the trials have not consistently demonstrated improvements in visual acuity. 
• In the realm of antioxidants, clinical trials have examined formulations combining vitamins and trace elements. Despite some encouraging epidemiological and early-phase data, conclusive evidence of consistent benefit in slowing GA progression remains elusive. This variability might be attributed to differences in study designs, patient populations, dosage regimens, genetic backgrounds, or even differences in baseline oxidative stress levels. 
• Regarding anti-VEGF agents, trials such as those observing patients with mixed exudative and atrophic disease have provided important data. Although anti-VEGF treatments have robust efficacy in neovascular AMD, their application for GA-specific endpoints has generally fallen short of demonstrating a robust impact on lesion size reduction or improvement in visual function. Some studies even caution about the potential for exacerbating atrophy with prolonged anti-VEGF therapy. 
• Moreover, even when drugs achieve anatomical benefits (i.e., reduced lesion growth), translating these outcomes into meaningful functional improvements – such as better visual acuity or lower rates of legal blindness – remains a critical unmet challenge that all drug classes face.

Future Directions and Challenges

Emerging Therapies 
The future for GA treatment is likely to involve a multipronged strategy that may combine the strengths of several drug classes while addressing each of their limitations. Emerging approaches include: 
• Refined complement inhibitors that might more selectively target the detrimental components of the complement cascade without compromising physiological immune functions. Newer molecules that are optimized for better tissue penetration and sustained inhibition are in development. 
• Advanced formulations of antioxidant and neuroprotective agents designed for enhanced ocular bioavailability. Nanoparticle-based delivery, sustained-release implants, or gene therapies that upregulate endogenous antioxidant pathways (such as those involving Nrf2) are promising avenues. 
• Cell-based and gene therapies – classified as advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) – are being explored to regenerate or replace damaged RPE and photoreceptor cells. Although these therapies are in earlier stages, they offer the potential for durable or even one-time treatments that may restore vision. 
• Exploratory strategies also include combination therapies where, for instance, a complement inhibitor might be combined with an antioxidant agent, thereby attenuating both chronic inflammation and oxidative injury simultaneously. In some cases, low-dose anti-VEGF agents may be incorporated to manage secondary neovascular complications without unduly suppressing the protective roles of VEGF. 

Challenges in Treatment Development 
Despite these promising developments, several challenges remain: 
• A major clinical challenge is the disconnect between anatomical endpoints (reduction in GA lesion growth) and functional outcomes (improvements in visual acuity). Most current trials have shown modest anatomical benefit without corresponding improvement in vision, raising questions about the clinical meaningfulness of these endpoints. 
• Safety remains a concern. For complement inhibitors and anti-VEGF therapies, repeated intravitreal injections over long periods can be associated with complications such as endophthalmitis, intraocular inflammation, or transient increases in intraocular pressure. 
• Patient adherence and treatment burden are significant challenges, particularly given that many therapies require frequent injections or follow-up visits. New sustained-release formulations and less invasive delivery methods are needed to improve real-world efficacy. 
• Moreover, genetic heterogeneity among patients with GA may influence drug response. Pharmacogenetic studies have begun to unravel how individual genetic differences affect treatment outcomes, suggesting that future therapies may need to be personalized to optimize efficacy and minimize adverse reactions. 
• Another challenge is the complex interplay of multiple pathogenic mechanisms in GA. While targeting one pathway (e.g., complement activation) may provide some benefit, it is unlikely that a single approach will address all aspects of the disease. This multifactorial nature necessitates a combinatorial or sequential treatment strategy that can be tailored to disease stage and individual patient characteristics. 
• Finally, regulatory challenges persist since novel endpoints and surrogate markers must be validated to ensure that anatomical improvements reliably predict visual function, making the design of clinical trials more complex and resource-intensive.

Conclusion 
In summary, treating Geographic Atrophy involves a multifaceted approach addressing the core pathogenic drivers of the disease. At a general level, the therapeutic strategies target oxidative stress, chronic complement-mediated inflammation, and aberrant angiogenesis – factors that together lead to RPE degeneration, photoreceptor loss, and ultimately, vision impairment. Specifically, antioxidants and neuroprotective agents aim to scavenge ROS and bolster intrinsic cell survival pathways, though their clinical effectiveness has been variable. Complement inhibitors, by directly modulating key components such as C3 and C5, have shown promise in reducing GA lesion growth, yet the translation of these anatomical improvements into meaningful visual outcomes remains a work in progress. Anti-VEGF therapies, while very effective in neovascular AMD, have a controversial and limited role in GA due to concerns about potential adverse effects on the neurotrophic functions of VEGF.

Looking from a broader perspective, the current clinical trial landscape suggests that while anatomical endpoints can be modulated with certain therapeutic agents, more research is needed to convert these benefits into functional improvements that impact patient quality of life. Future treatment paradigms may involve combining or sequentially administering different classes of drugs – for example, pairing complement inhibitors with antioxidants or even using advanced cell and gene therapies – to comprehensively address the multifactorial nature of GA.

From a specific standpoint, emerging therapies targeting complement factors with optimized drug delivery systems and pharmacogenetic insights are promising. However, challenges related to safety, long-term efficacy, treatment burden, and the validation of clinical endpoints remain formidable obstacles that researchers and clinicians must overcome. Finally, as our understanding of the disease mechanisms in GA deepens, it becomes increasingly evident that a personalized approach – one that integrates detailed patient profiles, genetic predispositions, and multimodal imaging – could ultimately lead to a more effective management strategy.

In conclusion, the different drug classes used in treating Geographic Atrophy work along distinct mechanistic pathways yet share the common goal of halting or slowing the progression of retinal degeneration. Antioxidants mitigate oxidative stress; complement inhibitors suppress chronic inflammation by interfering with key immune pathways; and anti-VEGF agents, though more relevant for neovascular complications, exhibit a nuanced role in maintaining retinal homeostasis. Combining these successes while addressing their individual shortcomings – through emerging therapies, improved delivery mechanisms, and personalized medicine approaches – represents a promising horizon for patients affected by this blinding disease.

Discover Eureka LS: AI Agents Built for Biopharma Efficiency

Stop wasting time on biopharma busywork. Meet Eureka LS - your AI agent squad for drug discovery.

▶ See how 50+ research teams saved 300+ hours/month

From reducing screening time to simplifying Markush drafting, our AI Agents are ready to deliver immediate value. Explore Eureka LS today and unlock powerful capabilities that help you innovate with confidence.