A Study of the Criteria Establishing the Need for Re-treatment With Ranibizumab Upon Relapse in Patients With Visual Impairment Due to Choroidal Neovascularization Secondary to Pathologic Myopia.

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 18 years and older
• All sexes
• No healthy volunteers
• Adult, Older adult

Trial locations and contacts

31 sites in 1 country.

About this study

Official title: A 12-month, Open-label, Interventional, Multicentre Study to Investigate the Current Criteria Driving Re-treatment With Ranibizumab Upon Relapse in Patients With Visual Impairment Due to Choroidal Neovascularization Secondary to Pathologic Myopia

Conditions

Choroidal Neovascularization Secondary to Pathologic Myopia

Being tested

Ranibizumab

Keywords

pathological myopia, choroidal neovascularization, ranibizumab, mono-bilateral, poor visual acuity, retinal disease, eye disease, Angiogenesis Inhibitors, Angiogenesis Modulating Agents

Medical subject headings

Myopia, Degenerative, Choroidal Neovascularization, Retinal Diseases, Eye Diseases

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

• RanibizumabDrug

  Also called RFB002

  All patients received a single initial intravitreal injection of ranibizumab 0.5 mg/0.05 ml as per Committee for Human Medicinal Products (CHMP)approval. Further injections might have been required when monitoring reveals disease activity. Disease activity, defined as reduced visual acuity and/or signs of lesion activity, was evaluated based on clinical examination (BCVA, fundus), and/or optical coherence tomography (OCT), and/or fluorescein angiography (FAG). Bilateral treatment was allowed provided at least 14 days of intercurrence.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

1. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Presence/Absence of Active Leakage

   Presence of active leakage on fluorescein angiography (FAG) was assessed at screening (14 to 3 days before baseline visit), month 2 and month 6. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of presence of active leakage (Yes/No). For retreated patients, the presence/absence of active leakage was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis. *NE = Not evaluable

   Measured: Screening, Month 2, Month 6

2. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Presence/Absence of Macular Edema

   Presence of macular edema from optical coherence tomography (OCT) was assessed at screening (14 to 3 days before baseline visit), month 2, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of presence of macular edema (Yes/No). For retreated patients, the presence/absence of macular edema was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis. *NE = Not evaluable

   Measured: Screening, Month 2, Month 6, Month 12

3. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Presence/Absence of Cysts

   Presence of cysts from optical coherence tomography (OCT) was assessed at screening (14 to 3 days before baseline visit), month 2, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of presence of cysts (Yes/No). For retreated patients, the presence/absence of cysts was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis. *NE = Not evaluable

   Measured: Screening, Month 2, Month 6, Month 12

4. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Presence/Absence of Intra-retinal Fluid

   Presence of Intra-retinal fluid from optical coherence tomography (OCT) was assessed at screening (14 to 3 days before baseline visit), month 2, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of presence of Intra-retinal fluid (Yes/No). For retreated patients, the presence/absence of Intra-retinal fluid was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis. *NE = Not evaluable

   Measured: Screening, Month 2, Month 6, Month 12

5. Change in Central Subfield Thickness (CSFT)

   Central subfield thickness (CSFT) from optical coherence tomography (OCT) was assessed at screening (14 to 3 days before baseline visit), month 2, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of change in CSFT versus previous visit. For retreated patients, the change in CSFT was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis.

   Measured: Screening, Month 2, Month 6, Month 12

6. Change in Central Subfield Volume (CSV)

   Central subfield volume (CSV) from optical coherence tomography (OCT) was assessed at screening (14 to 3 days before baseline visit), month 2, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of change in CSV versus previous visit. For retreated patients, the change in CSV was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis.

   Measured: Screening, Month 2, Month 6, Month 12

7. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Presence/Absence of Sub-retinal Fluid

   Presence of sub-retinal fluid from optical coherence tomography (OCT) was assessed at screening (14 to 3 days before baseline visit), month 2, month 6 and month 12. The regression model for sub-retinal fluid was not valid because "Yes" was reported in almost all subjects causing a quasi-complete separation of data points. *NE = Not evaluable

   Measured: Screening, Month 2, Month 6, Month 12

8. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Presence/Absence of Clinically Significant Abnormalities

   Presence of clinically significant abnormalities was assessed at baseline, month 1, month 2, month 3, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of presence of clinically significant abnormalities (Yes/No). For retreated patients, the presence/absence of clinically significant abnormalities was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis.

   Measured: Baseline, Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, Month 6, Month 12

9. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Improvement in Best Corrective Visual Acuity (BCVA) < 5 Letters

   Improvement in BCVA < 5 letters (Yes/No) was assessed at month1, month 2, month 3, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of improvement in BCVA < 5 letters (Yes/No) which was reported as Gain >= 5 letters versus Gain < 5 letters. For retreated patients, Gain >= 5 letters and Gain < 5 letters were considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis.

   Measured: Baseline, Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, Month 6, Month 12

10. Number of Patients Treated and Re-treated Based on Improvement in Best Corrective Visual Acuity (BCVA) < 10 Letters

    Improvement in BCVA < 10 letters (Yes/No) was assessed at month1, month 2, month 3, month 6 and month 12. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of improvement in BCVA < 10 letters (Yes/No) which was reported as Gain >= 10 letters versus Gain < 10 letters. For retreated patients, Gain >= 10 letters and Gain < 10 letters were considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, Month 6, Month 12

11. Number of Patients in Different Categories of Changes From Baseline in BCVA

    Changes from baseline in BCVA are described for the ETDRS parameter considering the following categories at each assessment: "no change" if the change was equal to 0 letter, "worsening" if change < 0 letter , "improvement" if change > 0 letter. A univariate logistic regression model was applied expressing the presence/absence of the first retreatment in function of change from baseline in BCVA (improved/worsened/stable) which was reported as Improved versus no change and worsened versus no change. For retreated patients, this variable was considered at the closest time-point to the first re-treatment: the last scheduled assessment immediately before the first re-treatment was considered. For treated patients, the last scheduled assessment available was considered. In case of missing value on the scheduled assessment, the value was considered as missing for this analysis.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 1, Month 2, Month 3, Month 6, Month 12

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

1. First posted13 Jan 2014 (estimated)
2. Study start10 Jun 2014
3. Primary completion15 Jul 2016
4. Study completion15 Jul 2016

Resources

• Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
• Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
• Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
• Other trials for Choroidal Neovascularization Secondary to Pathologic MyopiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
• More trials run by Novartis PharmaceuticalsThe 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.