GlaucomaRAPiDNCT01462526
The Detection of Glaucoma Using Pupillography
An observational study of Glaucoma, run by Johns Hopkins University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Current screening methods for glaucoma detection are not perfect and nearly half of those in the United States with glaucoma go undiagnosed. Minority populations are even less likely to be diagnosed. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 40 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Glaucoma
- How many people
- 798 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Mar 2011to 31 Mar 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 40 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients with glaucoma, glaucoma suspects, or ocular hypertension who present to the glaucoma service at the Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute. We will also recruit normal subjects from the accompanying persons of patients attending examinations who are not blood relatives of the patient.
Who may be able to join
- Age 40 years or older at enrollment
- Presenting visual acuity better than 20/100 in both eyes
- Spherical equivalent refractive error within the range of 4.0 and -6.0 diopters in both eyes
Who cannot join
- Ocular surgery in either eye within 3 months
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Wilmer Eye Institute Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Maryland, 21287
About this study
Current screening methods for glaucoma detection are not perfect and nearly half of those in the United States with glaucoma go undiagnosed. Minority populations are even less likely to be diagnosed. Better screening methods are needed to identify the undiagnosed and to provide them care that can help them retain good vision.
Glaucoma is often more severe in one eye and this fact can be exploited in screening tests. The investigators plan to use a novel screening device that very accurately records the pupillary response from each eye. It is likely that patients with glaucoma will have abnormal responses when measured, and by comparing responses between the two eyes the investigators will be able to determine who has glaucoma. If this test works well, it will provide a low-cost way to screen populations at risk for glaucoma. Furthermore, this research will expand the knowledge base regarding how pupil responses to light differ between persons with and without glaucoma. Insights gained from this study will be useful in the development of an effective screening tool in the detection of glaucoma.
Read the detailed description
Glaucoma is often asymmetric in nature, and an afferent pupillary defect (APD) is frequently present in persons with glaucoma. The investigators propose to conduct a clinic-based prospective study to assess the accuracy of using a binocular pupillographic device (RAPiD, Konan Medical, USA) to detect people with glaucoma. This device is designed to record and analyze pupil responses at multiple, controlled stimulus intensities, while using varied patterns and color stimuli.
The asymmetric nature of glaucoma suggests that a high proportion of persons with glaucoma will have an APD (although many may be subtle and would be missed with less refined testing methods). When glaucoma patients have severe nerve damage or when field loss is bilateral and symmetric, an APD may not be present or may be too small to detect. Noting this limitation, the investigators will compare pupillary responses to stimuli at different locations (for example the superior compared to the inferior hemifield) to determine whether the investigators can detect asymmetric glaucoma damage within the same eye. In addition, it is likely that the pupil response in glaucoma will be diminished when compared to normal, which will also help with detection.
Aim1: To examine the amplitude, latency and velocity of the pupil light reflex by optimizing its measurement to stimuli of various intensities and colors, and to characterize the variability of this response in normal subjects.
Aim2: To quantify the amount of structural loss (retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and optic nerve head parameters) and functional loss (visual field mean deviation) necessary for an APD (as detected by RAPiD) to manifest.
Aim3a: To develop an algorithm that best discriminates those with and without glaucoma by individual or combined use of 1) detecting an APD between the two eyes, 2) comparing pupil responses in different parts of the visual field within the same eye, and 3) comparing responses of diseased eyes to responses of "normal" eyes.
Aim 3b: To assess the validity of this algorithm in glaucoma detection and to assess the reproducibility of the pupil response measurements at a follow-up visit within 7 months.
- Conditions
- Glaucoma
- Medical subject headings
- Glaucoma
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control | Participants who do not have glaucoma in either eye | |
| Glaucoma | Participants who have glaucoma in one or both eyes |
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted31 Oct 2011 (estimated)
- Study startMar 2011
- Primary completion31 Mar 2016
- Study completion31 Mar 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for GlaucomaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Johns Hopkins UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 798 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- David S Friedman, MD, Principal investigator, Johns Hopkins University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01462526
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NA_00044899
- Acronym
- RAPiD
- Status last verified
- Oct 2017
- First submitted
- 27 Oct 2011
- Last updated
- 12 Oct 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 Oct 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Detection of Glaucoma Using Pupillography
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01462526
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RAPiD / NA_00044899
- Conditions
- Glaucoma
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 798 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Mar 2011
- Primary completion
- 31 Mar 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Mar 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 31 Oct 2011 (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.
Current screening methods for glaucoma detection are not perfect and nearly half of those in the United States with glaucoma go undiagnosed. Minority populations are even less likely to be diagnosed. Better screening methods are needed to identify the undiagnosed and to provide them care that can help them retain good vision.
Glaucoma is often more severe in one eye and this fact can be exploited in screening tests. The investigators plan to use a novel screening device that very accurately records the pupillary response from each eye. It is likely that patients with glaucoma will have abnormal responses when measured, and by comparing responses between the two eyes the investigators will be able to determine who has glaucoma. If this test works well, it will provide a low-cost way to screen populations at risk for glaucoma. Furthermore, this research will expand the knowledge base regarding how pupil responses to light differ between persons with and without glaucoma. Insights gained from this study will be useful in the development of an effective screening tool in the detection of glaucoma.
Detailed description
Glaucoma is often asymmetric in nature, and an afferent pupillary defect (APD) is frequently present in persons with glaucoma. The investigators propose to conduct a clinic-based prospective study to assess the accuracy of using a binocular pupillographic device (RAPiD, Konan Medical, USA) to detect people with glaucoma. This device is designed to record and analyze pupil responses at multiple, controlled stimulus intensities, while using varied patterns and color stimuli.
The asymmetric nature of glaucoma suggests that a high proportion of persons with glaucoma will have an APD (although many may be subtle and would be missed with less refined testing methods). When glaucoma patients have severe nerve damage or when field loss is bilateral and symmetric, an APD may not be present or may be too small to detect. Noting this limitation, the investigators will compare pupillary responses to stimuli at different locations (for example the superior compared to the inferior hemifield) to determine whether the investigators can detect asymmetric glaucoma damage within the same eye. In addition, it is likely that the pupil response in glaucoma will be diminished when compared to normal, which will also help with detection.
Aim1: To examine the amplitude, latency and velocity of the pupil light reflex by optimizing its measurement to stimuli of various intensities and colors, and to characterize the variability of this response in normal subjects.
Aim2: To quantify the amount of structural loss (retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and optic nerve head parameters) and functional loss (visual field mean deviation) necessary for an APD (as detected by RAPiD) to manifest.
Aim3a: To develop an algorithm that best discriminates those with and without glaucoma by individual or combined use of 1) detecting an APD between the two eyes, 2) comparing pupil responses in different parts of the visual field within the same eye, and 3) comparing responses of diseased eyes to responses of "normal" eyes.
Aim 3b: To assess the validity of this algorithm in glaucoma detection and to assess the reproducibility of the pupil response measurements at a follow-up visit within 7 months.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control | – | –Participants who do not have glaucoma in either eye |
| Glaucoma | – | –Participants who have glaucoma in one or both eyes |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 40 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients with glaucoma, glaucoma suspects, or ocular hypertension who present to the glaucoma service at the Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute. We will also recruit normal subjects from the accompanying persons of patients attending examinations who are not blood relatives of the patient.
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Age 40 years or older at enrollment
- Presenting visual acuity better than 20/100 in both eyes
- Spherical equivalent refractive error within the range of 4.0 and -6.0 diopters in both eyes
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Ocular surgery in either eye within 3 months
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Not reported in the source record.
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 12 Oct 2017.
Related trials for Glaucoma
Recruiting
Automated Applanation Tonometry - Updated
Glaucoma, Glaucoma, Suspect
Recruiting
Brain Stimulation Effects on Orientation and Mobility Skills in Adults With Vision Impairment
Retinitis Pigmentosa (RP), Rod Cone Dystrophy
RecruitingPhase 2
A Phase 2a Study Comparing the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Pregabalin Eye Drops Comparing With Timolol Eye Drops in Adults With Glaucoma or High Eye Pressure.
Primary Open - Angle Glaucoma (POAG), Ocular Hypertension (OHT)
Recruiting
Effects of Balance Training in Individuals With Glaucoma
Glaucoma
Not yet recruiting
PAUL® Glaucoma Implant Safety and Effectiveness Study
Refractory Glaucoma
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.
David S Friedman, MD principal investigator
Johns Hopkins University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Glaucoma, run by Johns Hopkins University 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 3 inclusion and 1 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 12 Oct 2017. 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.
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.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 12 Oct 2017.