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
20 Years of AMD Leadership
Related Eye Disease
NEI researchers concluded their first
five-year clinical Age Related Eye Disease
Study participants ages 55
to 80 years, with and
Reduced risk of moderate
vision loss after five years.
Reduction in risk of AMD
progression in those with
moderate to advanced
continued effects at
study follow-up in 2006.
2nd Age Related Eye
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
Study participants ages 50
to 85, with AMD.
Clinical centers across the
Length of AREDS2 study.
Reduced risk of
progressing to advanced
AMD, compared to
patients taking the
- No clinically statistically significant differences in AEs between treatment groups. Post-hoc subgroup analysis
- 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
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|
|Vitamin C||500 mg||556%|
|Vitamin E||180 mg||1200%|
* Percent Daily Values (DV) Based on a 2000-calorie diet
**Daily value not established
No side effects were observed in patients who received a formula with 80 mg zinc per day.
No significant correlation was established for EPA + DHA supplementation with the progression of AMD.
- The Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) Research Group. JAMA. 2013;309(19):2005–2015. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.4997
- In this post hoc analysis risk reduction was based on a hazard ratio of 0.78 (P=.01).