AmblyopiaPhase 4NCT00094614
Trial Comparing Daily Atropine Versus Weekend Atropine
A Phase 4 study testing Atropine in people with Amblyopia, run by Jaeb Center for Health Research at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The goals of this study are: To compare the visual acuity outcome in the amblyopic eye after 17 weeks of daily use of atropine versus weekend-only use of atropine. To compare the proportion of patients achieving a complete treatment response (defined as amblyopic eye acuity >20/25 or equal to that of the sound eye in… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 3 to 7 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Amblyopia
- What is being tested?
- Atropine
- How many people
- 168 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Jun 2002to Apr 2003
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 3 to 7 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Age < 7 years
- Able to measure surrounded single optotype visual acuity using the ATS single-surround HOTV protocol (this will in effect exclude all patients <2 years old and many <3 years old)
- Amblyopia associated with strabismus, anisometropia, or both
- If anisometropia is present (as per protocol definition), refractive error corrected with spectacles for a minimum of 4 weeks
- Visual acuity in the amblyopic eye < 20/40 and >20/80
- Visual acuity in the sound eye > 20/40 and inter-eye acuity difference >3 logMAR lines
Who cannot join
- Amblyopia treatment (other than spectacles) in the past month and no more than one month of amblyopia treatment in the past 6 months
- Myopia more than a spherical equivalent of -6.00 D in the amblyopic eye
- Myopia more than a spherical equivalent of -0.50 D in the sound eye
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Wilmer Eye Institute
Baltimore, Maryland, 21287-9028
About this study
Official title: A Randomized Trial Comparing Daily Atropine Versus Weekend Atropine
The goals of this study are:
- To compare the visual acuity outcome in the amblyopic eye after 17 weeks of daily use of atropine versus weekend-only use of atropine.
- To compare the proportion of patients achieving a complete treatment response (defined as amblyopic eye acuity >20/25 or equal to that of the sound eye in the absence of a reduction in the sound eye acuity from baseline) with daily atropine versus weekend-only atropine.
Read the detailed description
Amblyopia is the most common cause of monocular visual impairment in both children and young and middle-aged adults. Patching has been the mainstay of amblyopia therapy. It is generally held that the response to treatment is best when it is instituted at an early age and is poor when attempted after eight years of age.
The study 'Occlusion versus Pharmacologic Therapy for Moderate Amblyopia', a randomized trial of 419 children meeting entry criteria similar to the current study, found that both atropine 1% (one drop daily) and patching (6 hours to full time daily) produced visual acuity improvement of similar magnitude and that both are appropriate treatment modalities for the management of moderate amblyopia in children. Patching has the potential advantage of a more rapid improvement in visual acuity and possibly a slightly better acuity outcome, whereas atropine has the potential advantage of easier administration and lower cost.
Through its cycloplegic effect, atropine prevents accommodation, blurring the sound eye at near fixation. The blurring effect can be augmented by reducing the spectacle correction of hyperopia in the sound eye. The cycloplegic effect lasts at least partially for a week or longer. Therefore, some pediatric eye care providers believe that daily use of atropine is unnecessary and treatment may be effective at a dosage of as little as once a week. One advantage of less frequent dosing is a potential reduction in side effects, including any potential adverse effect on the vision in the sound eye (reverse amblyopia), on ocular alignment, and on binocularity. The current study will assess whether prescribing atropine once a day produces a better visual outcome than does atropine used only on the two weekend days.
In the 'Occlusion versus Pharmacologic Therapy for Moderate Amblyopia' study, the 6-month outcome data showed that more patients treated with atropine had a reduction in visual acuity of 1 or more lines in the sound eye than did patients treated with patching. Visual acuity was decreased from baseline by 1 line in 15% of the atropine group compared with 7% of the patching group and by 2 or more lines in 9% of the atropine group and 1% of the patching group. Only one patient (in the atropine group) was actively treated for a presumed treatment-related decrease in sound eye acuity, with return of acuity to its baseline level. Some of the cases of reduced acuity were unequivocally due to the use of improper refractive correction for the sound eye testing (including nine cases in which the testing was done with a plano lens prescribed for therapeutic effect rather than the proper corrective lens). In other cases, we speculated that there was a residual cycloplegic effect of atropine combined with improper refractive correction related to previously latent hyperopia becoming manifest hyperopia during the period of atropine treatment, although there were not data to fully document this in all cases. All 47 atropine group patients with a decrease of one or more lines at six months have had subsequent follow-up exams. Acuity on the subsequent testing was the same or better than that at baseline in 42 of the 47 patients: 22 while still on atropine treatment (11 with the same refractive correction and 11 with a different refractive correction) and 20 after atropine was discontinued (6 with the same refractive correction and 14 with a different refractive correction). In the other five patients, acuity on subsequent testing was decreased from baseline by one line (3 on atropine, 2 off atropine). Thus, there did not appear to be a long-term safety concern for atropine, but the data were inconclusive as to whether atropine caused an actual, though transient, treatment-related decrease in sound eye acuity. One of the objectives of the current study will be to provide additional data on the effect of atropine on the sound eye.
The study is a randomized trial comparing atropine regimes for children with moderate amblyopia. It will consist of about 160 children. Patients in the daily atropine group receive atropine 1% one drop daily in the sound eye. Patients in the weekend atropine group will receive atropine 1% twice a week (Saturday and Sunday) in the sound eye. Visual acuity is the major study outcome. It is measured after 17 weeks of treatment with either daily or weekend atropine.
- Conditions
- Amblyopia
- Being tested
- Atropine
- Medical subject headings
- Amblyopia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
AtropineDrug
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Visual acuity
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Oct 2004 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2002
- Study completionApr 2003
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for AmblyopiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 168 participants
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Jaeb Center for Health Research
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Eye Institute (NEI)
- Investigators
- Michael X Repka, MD, Study chair, Wilmer Eye InstituteJonathan M Holmes, MD, Study chair, Mayo Clinic Department of Ophthalmology
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00094614
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NEI-94
- Other IDs
- 2U10EY011751
- Status last verified
- Apr 2006
- First submitted
- 21 Oct 2004
- Last updated
- 25 Mar 2010
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Repka MX, Cotter SA, Beck RW, Kraker RT, Birch EE, Everett DF, Hertle RW, Holmes JM, Quinn GE, Sala NA, Scheiman MM, Stager DR Sr, Wallace DK; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of atropine regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2004 Nov;111(11):2076-85. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.04.032.
PubMed 15522375Wallace DK, Lazar EL, Melia M, Birch EE, Holmes JM, Hopkins KB, Kraker RT, Kulp MT, Pang Y, Repka MX, Tamkins SM, Weise KK; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Stereoacuity in children with anisometropic amblyopia. J AAPOS. 2011 Oct;15(5):455-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2011.06.007.
PubMed 22108357Christoff A, Repka MX, Kaminski BM, Holmes JM; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Distance versus near visual acuity in amblyopia. J AAPOS. 2011 Aug;15(4):342-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2011.05.004.
PubMed 21907115Repka M, Simons K, Kraker R; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Laterality of amblyopia. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010 Aug;150(2):270-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.01.040. Epub 2010 May 8.
PubMed 20451898
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Mar 2010. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized Trial Comparing Daily Atropine Versus Weekend Atropine
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00094614
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NEI-94
- Conditions
- Amblyopia
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 168 participants
- Lead sponsor
- Jaeb Center for Health ResearchUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Eye Institute (NEI)
- Study start
- Jun 2002
- Study completion
- Apr 2003
- First posted
- 22 Oct 2004 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goals of this study are:
- To compare the visual acuity outcome in the amblyopic eye after 17 weeks of daily use of atropine versus weekend-only use of atropine.
- To compare the proportion of patients achieving a complete treatment response (defined as amblyopic eye acuity >20/25 or equal to that of the sound eye in the absence of a reduction in the sound eye acuity from baseline) with daily atropine versus weekend-only atropine.
Detailed description
Amblyopia is the most common cause of monocular visual impairment in both children and young and middle-aged adults. Patching has been the mainstay of amblyopia therapy. It is generally held that the response to treatment is best when it is instituted at an early age and is poor when attempted after eight years of age.
The study 'Occlusion versus Pharmacologic Therapy for Moderate Amblyopia', a randomized trial of 419 children meeting entry criteria similar to the current study, found that both atropine 1% (one drop daily) and patching (6 hours to full time daily) produced visual acuity improvement of similar magnitude and that both are appropriate treatment modalities for the management of moderate amblyopia in children. Patching has the potential advantage of a more rapid improvement in visual acuity and possibly a slightly better acuity outcome, whereas atropine has the potential advantage of easier administration and lower cost.
Through its cycloplegic effect, atropine prevents accommodation, blurring the sound eye at near fixation. The blurring effect can be augmented by reducing the spectacle correction of hyperopia in the sound eye. The cycloplegic effect lasts at least partially for a week or longer. Therefore, some pediatric eye care providers believe that daily use of atropine is unnecessary and treatment may be effective at a dosage of as little as once a week. One advantage of less frequent dosing is a potential reduction in side effects, including any potential adverse effect on the vision in the sound eye (reverse amblyopia), on ocular alignment, and on binocularity. The current study will assess whether prescribing atropine once a day produces a better visual outcome than does atropine used only on the two weekend days.
In the 'Occlusion versus Pharmacologic Therapy for Moderate Amblyopia' study, the 6-month outcome data showed that more patients treated with atropine had a reduction in visual acuity of 1 or more lines in the sound eye than did patients treated with patching. Visual acuity was decreased from baseline by 1 line in 15% of the atropine group compared with 7% of the patching group and by 2 or more lines in 9% of the atropine group and 1% of the patching group. Only one patient (in the atropine group) was actively treated for a presumed treatment-related decrease in sound eye acuity, with return of acuity to its baseline level. Some of the cases of reduced acuity were unequivocally due to the use of improper refractive correction for the sound eye testing (including nine cases in which the testing was done with a plano lens prescribed for therapeutic effect rather than the proper corrective lens). In other cases, we speculated that there was a residual cycloplegic effect of atropine combined with improper refractive correction related to previously latent hyperopia becoming manifest hyperopia during the period of atropine treatment, although there were not data to fully document this in all cases. All 47 atropine group patients with a decrease of one or more lines at six months have had subsequent follow-up exams. Acuity on the subsequent testing was the same or better than that at baseline in 42 of the 47 patients: 22 while still on atropine treatment (11 with the same refractive correction and 11 with a different refractive correction) and 20 after atropine was discontinued (6 with the same refractive correction and 14 with a different refractive correction). In the other five patients, acuity on subsequent testing was decreased from baseline by one line (3 on atropine, 2 off atropine). Thus, there did not appear to be a long-term safety concern for atropine, but the data were inconclusive as to whether atropine caused an actual, though transient, treatment-related decrease in sound eye acuity. One of the objectives of the current study will be to provide additional data on the effect of atropine on the sound eye.
The study is a randomized trial comparing atropine regimes for children with moderate amblyopia. It will consist of about 160 children. Patients in the daily atropine group receive atropine 1% one drop daily in the sound eye. Patients in the weekend atropine group will receive atropine 1% twice a week (Saturday and Sunday) in the sound eye. Visual acuity is the major study outcome. It is measured after 17 weeks of treatment with either daily or weekend atropine.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 3 to 7 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Age < 7 years
- Able to measure surrounded single optotype visual acuity using the ATS single-surround HOTV protocol (this will in effect exclude all patients <2 years old and many <3 years old)
- Amblyopia associated with strabismus, anisometropia, or both
- If anisometropia is present (as per protocol definition), refractive error corrected with spectacles for a minimum of 4 weeks
- Visual acuity in the amblyopic eye < 20/40 and >20/80
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Amblyopia treatment (other than spectacles) in the past month and no more than one month of amblyopia treatment in the past 6 months
- Myopia more than a spherical equivalent of -6.00 D in the amblyopic eye
- Myopia more than a spherical equivalent of -0.50 D in the sound eye
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Atropine | Drug | – |
Primary outcome
Visual acuity
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Mar 2010.
- Results publication: PubMed 15522375Repka MX, Cotter SA, Beck RW, Kraker RT, Birch EE, Everett DF, Hertle RW, Holmes JM, Quinn GE, Sala NA, Scheiman MM, Stager DR Sr, Wallace DK; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of atropine regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2004 Nov;111(11):2076-85. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.04.032.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 22108357Wallace DK, Lazar EL, Melia M, Birch EE, Holmes JM, Hopkins KB, Kraker RT, Kulp MT, Pang Y, Repka MX, Tamkins SM, Weise KK; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Stereoacuity in children with anisometropic amblyopia. J AAPOS. 2011 Oct;15(5):455-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2011.06.007.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 21907115Christoff A, Repka MX, Kaminski BM, Holmes JM; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Distance versus near visual acuity in amblyopia. J AAPOS. 2011 Aug;15(4):342-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2011.05.004.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 20451898Repka M, Simons K, Kraker R; Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. Laterality of amblyopia. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010 Aug;150(2):270-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.01.040. Epub 2010 May 8.
Related trials for Amblyopia
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Psilocybin for Amblyopia - Targeting Critical Periods in Humans
Amblyopia
RecruitingPhase 3
Dichoptic Treatment for Amblyopia in Children 4 to 7 Years of Age
Amblyopia
RecruitingPhase 3
Dichoptic Treatment for Amblyopia in Children 8 to 12 Years of Age
Amblyopia
Recruiting
OCT Eccentric Fixation and Amblyopia in Children
Amblyopia
Not yet recruiting
Non-invasive Induction of Metaplasticity for Amblyopia
Amblyopia, Amblyopia Unilateral
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Michael X Repka, MD study chair
Wilmer Eye Institute
Jonathan M Holmes, MD study chair
Mayo Clinic Department of Ophthalmology
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Atropine in people with Amblyopia, run by Jaeb Center for Health Research at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Mar 2010. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Visual acuity. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00094614, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Mar 2010.