AzTrials
AzTrials

X-Linked Retinitis PigmentosaPhase 1/2XIRIUSNCT03116113

A Clinical Trial of Retinal Gene Therapy for X-linked Retinitis Pigmentosa Using BIIB112

A Phase 1/2 study testing BIIB112 in people with X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa, run by Biogen at 8 sites in 2 countries.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The objective of the study is to evaluate the safety, tolerability and efficacy of a single sub-retinal injection of BIIB112 in participants with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 10 years and older, men only
Conditions the study is for
X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa
What is being tested?
BIIB112
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
50 participants
Where
8 sitesin 2 countries
Study dates
8 Mar 2017to 18 Nov 2020
Phase
Phase 1/2
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

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 10 years and older
  • Men only
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Part 1:
  • Participants with genetically confirmed diagnosis of XLRP (with RPGR mutation).
  • Participant with active disease clinically visible within the macular region in both eyes.
  • Part 2:
  • Participant with mean total retinal sensitivity in the study eye as assessed by microperimetry ≥ 0.1 dB and ≤8 dB.

Who cannot join

  • Parts 1 and 2:
  • Participant with history of amblyopia in either eye.
  • Participated in a gene therapy trial previously or a clinical trial with an investigational drug in the past 12 weeks or received a gene/cell-based therapy at any time previously.
  • NOTE: Other protocol defined Inclusion/Exclusion criteria may apply.

Trial locations and contacts

8 sites in 2 countries.

8 sites in 2 countries

United States5 sites
  • Research Site

    Dallas, Texas, 75231

  • Research Site

    Gainesville, Florida, 32607

  • Research Site

    Miami, Florida, 33136

  • Research Site

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104

  • Research Site

    Portland, Oregon, 97239

Other trials in United States

United Kingdom3 sites
  • Research Site

    Manchester

  • Research Site

    Oxford

  • Research Site

    Southampton

Other trials in United Kingdom

About this study

Official title: A Dose Escalation (Phase 1), and Dose Expansion (Phase 2/3) Clinical Trial of Retinal Gene Therapy for X-linked Retinitis Pigmentosa Using an Adeno-Associated Viral Vector (AAV8) Encoding Retinitis Pigmentosa GTPase Regulator (RPGR)

The objective of the study is to evaluate the safety, tolerability and efficacy of a single sub-retinal injection of BIIB112 in participants with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP).

Read the detailed description

This study was previously posted by NightstaRx Ltd. In October 2020, sponsorship of the trial was transferred to Biogen.

Being tested
BIIB112
Keywords
XLRP, Ophthalmology, Gene Therapy, Retinitis Pigmentosa GTPase Regulator (RPGR), AAV8
Medical subject headings
Cone-Rod Dystrophy, X-Linked, Type 1

What participants receive

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

  • BIIB112Biological

    Also called AAV8-RPGR

    Administered as specified in the treatment arm.

Study groups in NCT03116113
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Part 1: BIIB112 Dose 1ExperimentalParticipants will receive a single Dose 1 of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection on Day 0.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 1: BIIB112 Dose 2ExperimentalParticipants will receive a single Dose 2 of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection on Day 0.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 1: BIIB112 Dose 3ExperimentalParticipants will receive a single Dose 3 of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection on Day 0.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 1: BIIB112 Dose 4ExperimentalParticipants will receive a single Dose 4 of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection on Day 0.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 1: BIIB112 Dose 5ExperimentalParticipants will receive a single Dose 5 of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection on Day 0.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 1: BIIB112 Dose 6ExperimentalParticipants will receive a single Dose 6 of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection on Day 0.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 2: BIIB112 High DoseExperimentalParticipants will receive a single high dose of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 2: BIIB112 Low DoseExperimentalParticipants will receive a single low dose of BIIB112 by sub-retinal injection.
Receives: Biological: BIIB112
Part 2: Untreated GroupNo interventionParticipants will receive no intervention to allow for a controlled comparison.

What is being measured

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

  1. Part 1: Number of Participants With Dose-Limiting Toxicities (DLTs)

    DLTs are defined as any of the following events considered to be related to study drug: Sustained decrease in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of ≥30 letters on the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart compared to baseline (sustained is defined as lasting 48 hours or more until recovery, with recovery defined as visual acuity (VA) returning to within 10 letters of baseline VA. An exception is made for surgery-related events occurring in close temporal association {within <24 hours} of the surgery); Vitreous inflammation, vitritis (>Grade 3 using standardized Nussenblatt vitreous inflammation scale grading); Any clinically significant retinal damage observed that is not directly attributed to complications of surgery; Any clinically relevant suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction, with the exception of vision loss or vision threatening.

    Measured: Up to Month 24

  2. Part 1: Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)

    An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product. TEAEs are defined as the AEs starting or worsening on or after the day of the first surgery.

    Measured: Day 0 (surgery) in Part 1 of the study up to 24 months

  3. Part 2: Percentage of Study Eyes With ≥7 Decibels (dB) Improvement From Baseline at ≥5 Points Out of the 16 Central Loci Points of the 10-2 Grid Assessed by Macular Integrity Assessment (MAIA) Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dB using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0', or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' was assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in Retinal Sensitivity in center grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points out of the 16 central points.

    Measured: Month 12

  4. Part 2: Number of Participants With TEAEs

    An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product. TEAEs are defined as AEs starting on or after the day of the first surgery.

    Measured: Day 0 (surgery) in Part 2 of the study up to 12 months

Secondary outcomes (49)
  1. Part 1: Percentage of Study Eyes With ≥7 dB Improvement From Baseline at ≥5 Points Out of the 16 Central Loci Points of the 10-2 Grid Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dB using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' was assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in Retinal Sensitivity in center grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points out of the 16 central points.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  2. Part 1: Percentage of Study Eyes With ≥7 dB Improvement From Baseline at ≥5 Points Out of the 68 Loci Points of the 10-2 Grid Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dB using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' was assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in Retinal Sensitivity in whole grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points of the grid as a whole (68 points).

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  3. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Mean Sensitivity of the 16 Central Loci Points Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dB using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' is assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in mean sensitivity in center grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points out of the 16 central points. Here negative values indicate a decline in retinal sensitivity.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  4. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Mean Sensitivity of the 68 Central Loci Points Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dB using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' is assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in mean sensitivity in whole grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points of the grid as a whole (68 points). Here negative values indicate a decline in retinal sensitivity.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  5. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Mean Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Reported as Letters

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. BCVA was reported as number of letters read correctly by the participants using the ETDRS Scale (ranging from 0 to 100 letters). The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved. Here negative values indicate decline in BCVA.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  6. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Mean Low Luminance Visual Acuity (LLVA) Reported as Letters

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. LLVA was reported as number of letters read correctly by the participant using the ETDRS Scale (ranging from 0 to 100 letters). The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved. Here negative values indicate decline in LLVA.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  7. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letters Increase From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥15 letters increase from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  8. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letters Increase From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥15 letters increase from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  9. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letters Increase From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters increase from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  10. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letters Increase From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters increase from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  11. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letters Increase From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters increase from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  12. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letters Increase From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters increase from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  13. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letters Loss From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥15 letters loss from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  14. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letters Loss From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥15 letters loss from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  15. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letters Loss From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters loss from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  16. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letters Loss From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters loss from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  17. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letters Loss From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters loss from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  18. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letters Loss From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters loss from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  19. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With Change From Baseline > -5 Letters for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved. Percentage of eyes with a change from baseline of ≥ -5 letters for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  20. Part 1: Percentage of Eyes With Change From Baseline > -5 Letters for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved. Percentage of eyes with a change from baseline of ≥ -5 letters for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  21. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Central Ellipsoid Area

    Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography (SD-OCT) was used to assess change in central ellipsoid area. The measurements were taken after dilation of the participant's pupil. A negative change from baseline indicates a decline in central ellipsoid area.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  22. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Central Horizontal Ellipsoid Width

    SD-OCT was used to assess change in central horizontal ellipsoid width. The measurements were taken after dilation of the participant's pupil. A negative change from baseline indicates a decline in central horizontal ellipsoid width.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  23. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Fundus Autofluoroscence- Mean Total Area of Preserved Autofluoroscence

    Fundus Autofluoroscence was used to assess the total area of preserved autofluoroscence. Areas of preserved AF were identified as well-demarcated regions of relative hyper autofluorescence (hyper AF) compared with the background areas of surrounding atrophy. A negative change from baseline indicates a decline in total area of preserved autofluoroscence.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  24. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Fundus Autofluoroscence- Mean Distance From Foveal Center (FC) to Nearest Border of Preserved Autofluoroscence

    Fundus Autofluoroscence was used to assess the distance from FC to nearest border of preserved autofluoroscence. A negative change from baseline indicates a decline in the total area of preserved autofluoroscence.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24

  25. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Mean Volume of 30-Degree Hill of Vision

    Visual field testing was performed to assess the volume of 30-degree hill vision, reported as dBs. Reliability Factor (RF)=number of false positive responses + number of false negative responses/number of false positive presentations + number of false negative presentations*100. If there are 0 responses, then RF value=0. RFpositive=number of false positive responses/number of false positive presentations*100. If RF≤ 20% measurement is considered reliable. If 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive ≤ 10% measurement is also considered reliable. Otherwise if 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive > 10%, or RF > 25%, measurement is not reliable. Only reliable measurements were included for analysis of this outcome measure. Here negative values indicate decline in volume of 30-degree hill vision.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 6, 12, and 24

  26. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Mean Volume of Full Field Hill of Vision

    Visual field testing was performed to assess the volume of full field of hill vision, reported as dBs. RF =number of false positive responses + number of false negative responses/number of false positive presentations + number of false negative presentations*100. If there are 0 responses, then RF value=0. RFpositive=number of false positive responses/number of false positive presentations*100. If RF≤ 20% measurement is considered reliable. If 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive ≤ 10% measurement is also considered reliable. Otherwise if 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive > 10%, or RF > 25%, measurement is not reliable. Only reliable measurements were included for analysis of this outcome measure. Here negative values indicate decline in volume of 30-degree hill vision.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 6, 12, and 24

  27. Part 1: Change From Baseline in Contrast Sensitivity (CS) Score

    Change in CS was assessed by Pelli-Robson chart which uses a single large letter size (20/60 optotype), with contrast varying across groups of letters. Chart uses letters (6 per line), arranged in groups whose contrast varies from high to low. Participants read the letters, starting with the highest contrast, until they were unable to read two or three letters in a single group. Each group had three letters of the same contrast level, so there were three trials per contrast level. Participant is assigned a score based on the contrast of the last group in which two or three letters were correctly read. Score is a measure of the participant's log contrast sensitivity ranging from 0-2.25, with 0 being no letters read, and 2.25 being all letters read. Total CS score = [(total letters correct - 3) x 0.05].

    Measured: Baseline, Months 3, 6, 12, and 24

  28. Part 2: Percentage of Study Eyes With ≥7 dB Improvement From Baseline at ≥5 Points Out of the 16 Central Loci Points of the 10-2 Grid Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dBs using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' is assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in mean sensitivity in center grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points out of the 16 central points.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, and 9

  29. Part 2: Percentage of Study Eyes With ≥7 dB Improvement From Baseline at ≥5 Points Out of the 68 Loci Points of the 10-2 Grid Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dBs using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' was assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in mean sensitivity in whole grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points of the grid as a whole (68 points).

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  30. Part 2: Change From Baseline in Mean Sensitivity of the 16 Central Loci Points of the 10-2 Grid Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dB using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' was assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Mean Sensitivity in center grid was defined as the mean in dB of the 16 points located in the center of the grid. Here negative values indicate a decline in retinal sensitivity.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  31. Part 2: Change From Baseline in Mean Sensitivity of the 68 Central Loci Points of the 10-2 Grid Assessed by MAIA Microperimetry

    MAIA microperimetry assessment was measured in dB using a 10-2 grid of 68 points. Each point was labelled as '< 0', '0' or a positive integer. The point labelled as '< 0' was assigned a value of '-1' by MAIA in the calculation. Improvement in mean ensitivity in whole grid was defined as an increase from baseline of 7 or more dBs in any 5 or more points of the grid as a whole (68 points). Here negative values indicate a decline in retinal sensitivity.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  32. Part 2: Change From Baseline in BCVA Reported as Letters

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. BCVA was reported as number of letters read correctly by the participant, using the ETDRS Scale (ranging from 0 to 100 letters). The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved. Here negative values indicate a decline in BCVA.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  33. Part 2: Change From Baseline in Mean LLVA Reported as Letters

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. LLVA was reported as number of letters read correctly by the participant, using the ETDRS Scale (ranging from 0 to 100 letters). The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved. Here negative values indicate a decline in LLVA.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  34. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letter Increase From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥15 letters increase from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  35. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letter Increase From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥15 letters increase from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  36. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letter Increase From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). An increase in the number of letters read correctly means that vision has improved. Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters increase from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  37. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letter Increase From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters increase from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  38. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letter Increase From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters increase from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  39. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letter Increase From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters increase from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  40. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letters Loss From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters loss from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  41. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥15 Letters Loss From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥15 letters loss from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  42. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letters Loss From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters loss from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  43. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥10 Letters Loss From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥10 letters loss from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  44. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letters Loss From Baseline for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters loss from baseline for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  45. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With a ≥5 Letters Loss From Baseline for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a ≥5 letters loss from baseline for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  46. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With Change From Baseline >-5 Letters for BCVA

    BCVA was assessed for both eyes using the ETDRS VA chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a change from baseline of ≥ -5 letters for BCVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  47. Part 2: Percentage of Eyes With Change From Baseline >-5 Letters for LLVA

    LLVA was measured by placing a 2.0-log-unit neutral density filter over the front of each eye and having the participant read the normally illuminated ETDRS chart. Initially, letters were read at a distance of 4 meters from the chart. If <20 letters were read at 4 meters, testing at 1 meter was performed. The lower the number of letters read correctly on the eye chart, the worse the vision (or VA). Percentage of eyes with a change from baseline of ≥ -5 letters for LLVA were reported for study and non-study eyes.

    Measured: Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

  48. Part 2: Change From Baseline in Volume of 30-Degree Hill of Vision Assessed by Octopus 900

    Visual field testing was performed to assess the volume of 30-degree hill vision, reported as dBs. RF=number of false positive responses + number of false negative responses/number of false positive presentations + number of false negative presentations*100. If there are 0 responses, then RF value=0. RFpositive=number of false positive responses/number of false positive presentations*100. If RF≤ 20% measurement is considered reliable. If 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive ≤ 10% measurement is also considered reliable. Otherwise if 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive > 10%, or RF > 25%, measurement is not reliable. Only reliable measurements were included for analysis of this outcome measure. Here negative values indicate decline in the volume of 30-degree hill vision.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 3, 6, and 12

  49. Part 2: Change From Baseline in Volume of Full Field Hill of Vision Assessed by Octopus 900

    Visual field testing was performed to assess the volume of full field of hill vision, reported as dBs. RF=number of false positive responses + number of false negative responses/number of false positive presentations + number of false negative presentations*100. If there are 0 responses, then RF value=0. RFpositive=number of false positive responses/number of false positive presentations*100. If RF≤ 20% measurement is considered reliable. If 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive ≤ 10% measurement is also considered reliable. Otherwise if 20% < RF ≤ 25% and RFpositive > 10%, or RF > 25%, measurement is not reliable. Only reliable measurements were included for analysis of this outcome measure. Here negative values indicate decline in volume of full field hill vision.

    Measured: Baseline, Months 3, 6, and 12

Timeline

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

  1. First posted14 Apr 2017
  2. Study start8 Mar 2017
  3. Primary completion18 Nov 2020
  4. Study completion18 Nov 2020

Resources

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 1/2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Sequential
Masking
Quadruple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
50 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03116113
Sponsor's protocol ID
274RP101
Other IDs
2016-003852-60, 2016
Acronym
XIRIUS
Status last verified
Dec 2023
First submitted
29 Mar 2017
Last updated
18 Jan 2024
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Yes: In accordance with Biogen's Clinical Trial Transparency and Data Sharing Policy on https://www.biogentrialtransparency.com/

Publications

  • Cehajic-Kapetanovic J, Xue K, Martinez-Fernandez de la Camara C, Nanda A, Davies A, Wood LJ, Salvetti AP, Fischer MD, Aylward JW, Barnard AR, Jolly JK, Luo E, Lujan BJ, Ong T, Girach A, Black GCM, Gregori NZ, Davis JL, Rosa PR, Lotery AJ, Lam BL, Stanga PE, MacLaren RE. Initial results from a first-in-human gene therapy trial on X-linked retinitis pigmentosa caused by mutations in RPGR. Nat Med. 2020 Mar;26(3):354-359. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-0763-1. Epub 2020 Feb 24.

    PubMed 32094925
  • Raji S, Taylor LJ, Josan AS, MacLaren RE, Cehajic-Kapetanovic J. Early-Onset Cone Photoreceptor Degeneration Is Associated With High Myopia in RPGR-Related Retinal Dystrophy. J Ophthalmol. 2025 Jun 11;2025:4244740. doi: 10.1155/joph/4244740. eCollection 2025.

    PubMed 40535564
  • Lam BL, Pennesi ME, Kay CN, Panda S, Gow JA, Zhao G, MacLaren RE; XIRIUS Study Group. Assessment of Visual Function with Cotoretigene Toliparvovec in X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa in the Randomized XIRIUS Phase 2/3 Study. Ophthalmology. 2024 Sep;131(9):1083-1093. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.02.023. Epub 2024 Feb 28.

    PubMed 38423215
  • von Krusenstiern L, Liu J, Liao E, Gow JA, Chen G, Ong T, Lotery AJ, Jalil A, Lam BL, MacLaren RE; XIRIUS Part 1 Study GroupXOLARIS Study Group. Changes in Retinal Sensitivity Associated With Cotoretigene Toliparvovec in X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa With RPGR Gene Variations. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2023 Mar 1;141(3):275-283. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2022.6254.

    PubMed 36757689

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 1/2 study testing BIIB112 in people with X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa, run by Biogen at 8 sites in 2 countries.

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 5 inclusion and 4 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 18 Jan 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 8 sites in United States, United Kingdom. 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 combined phase mean?

Phase 1 studies test a treatment in a small group of people for the first time or in a new way, mainly to check safety and find the right dose.

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 18 Jan 2024). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

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?

Part 1: Number of Participants With Dose-Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) (time frame: Up to Month 24). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT03116113, 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 18 Jan 2024.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in