20 Years of AMD Leadership

2001: The First Age
Related Eye Disease
Study (AREDS)

NEI researchers concluded their first
five-year clinical Age Related Eye Disease
Study (AREDS).

4,757

Study participants ages 55
to 80 years, with and
without AMD.

19%

Reduced risk of moderate
vision loss after five years.

25%

Reduction in risk of AMD
progression in those with
moderate to advanced
AMD.

10Years

Participants showed
continued effects at
study follow-up in 2006.

2013: AREDS2, the
2nd Age Related Eye
Disease Study

Based on new learnings around AMD, the
NEI researchers sought to improve the
original AREDS formula.

The result was an updated formula that replaced beta-carotene with lutein and zeaxanthin, since new research suggested an association between beta-carotene and an increase in the risk of lung cancer among those with a history of smoking.2

4,203

Study participants ages 50
to 85, with AMD.

82

Clinical centers across the
U.S.

5Years

Length of AREDS2 study.

18%

Reduced risk of
progressing to advanced
AMD, compared to
patients taking the
original AREDS
formulation.1

  1. No clinically statistically significant differences in AEs between treatment groups. Post-hoc subgroup analysis
  2. Johnson EJ. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2010;13(1):28-33

1. No clinically statistically significant differences in AEs between treatment groups. Post-hoc subgroup analysis
2. Johnson EJ. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2010;13(1):28-33

Today

The NEI recommends taking a vitamin formula that contains the exact nutrients based on the AREDS2 study for helping to reduce the risk of progression in moderate to advanced AMD.

Nutrient Amount (per day) Percent Daily Value
Zinc 80 mg 727%
Lutein 10 mg **
Zeaxanthin 2 mg **
Vitamin C 500 mg 556%
Vitamin E 180 mg 1200%
Copper 2 mg 222%

* Percent Daily Values (DV) Based on a 2000-calorie diet
**Daily value not established

Stay Tuned

The National Eye Institute is working on its report on the AREDS2 10-year
follow-up study, and the results will be announced.

Findings

Lutein + Zeaxanthin Vs. Beta-Carotene

No clinically or statistically significant AEs between treatment groups,1 but eliminating beta-carotene was associated with reduced risk of lung cancer in patients with a history of smoking (P=.04).2

High Zinc Vs. Low Zinc

No side effects were observed in patients who received a formula with 80 mg zinc per day.

EPA + DHA Vs. No Fatty Acid Supplementation

No significant correlation was established for EPA + DHA supplementation with the progression of AMD.

  1. In this post-hoc analysis risk reduction was based on a hazard ratio of 0.82 (P=.02)
  2. In this post-hoc analysis risk reduction was based on a hazard ratio of 0.78 (P=.01)

PreserVision® Samples
for Your Appropriate Patients

Request Samples

*These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.
This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Compared to original PreserVision® AREDS 2 Soft Gel

*These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Text Size:A−A+