Visual Fields HemianopsiaNCT04021160
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Post-Stroke Visual Field Defects
A study testing High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in people with Visual Fields Hemianopsia and Stroke, Ischemic, run by Ain Shams University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
Visual field defects (VFD) usually do not show improvement beyond 12 weeks from onset. Plasticity occurs in areas of residual vision (ARV) at the visual field which are the functional counterpart of partially damaged brain regions at the areas around brain lesion. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Visual Fields Hemianopsia, Stroke, Ischemic, Stroke Hemorrhagic
- What is being tested?
- High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 32 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 Jun 2018to 5 Jun 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- 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 18 to 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients with a brain imaging showing vascular lesion involving visual cortical area
- Duration of at least 3 months.
Who cannot join
- Visual field defects of ophthalmologic origin
- Causes of severe visual impairment other than visual field defects
- Drug abuse
- Past history or family history of epilepsy
- Skull bone defects
- Implanted metallic devices
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Egypt1 site
Neuromodulation Research Lab, Neurology Department, Ain Shams University Hospital
Cairo, 11591
About this study
Official title: The Efficacy of Navigated Perilesional Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Post-Stroke Visual Field Defects
Visual field defects (VFD) usually do not show improvement beyond 12 weeks from onset. Plasticity occurs in areas of residual vision (ARV) at the visual field which are the functional counterpart of partially damaged brain regions at the areas around brain lesion. Few treatment options are currently available for post-stroke VFD. In this pilot study, the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to these areas on VFD in patients with cortical infarction will be studied. Patients will be divided into two groups; an active group which will receive active stimulation and a sham group which will receive placebo stimulation through a sham coil.
Read the detailed description
Visual functions are widely distributed over large areas within the cerebrum. Secondary to such wide distribution, visual field defects (VFD) are a common outcome of brain insults especially cerebrovascular stroke whether hemorrhagic or ischemic. Among these, homonymous hemianopia is the most frequently encountered VFD in clinical practice. VFD ranges from 8.3% to 16% in the chronic stage of stroke, while it reaches 25% in acute and subacute stages of stroke. In other studies, it was reported to be even higher. In a database of 11900 stoke patients, VFD was found in 60.5% with homonymous hemianopia accounting for 35%.
These VFDs usually show some degree of improvement within few months from onset secondary to resolution of edema and diaschisis, yet by 3 to 6 months the condition tends to become stationary with no further improvement and only 5% of patients will show full recovery of their visual field. In some studies recovery was mostly along the first 10 days of insult followed by decrease in recovery rate that nearly stops 10-12 weeks after insult. Beyond this time point, very few cases develop spontaneous recovery.
Plasticity occurs in areas of residual vision (ARV) at the visual field borders rather than areas of absolute blindness. These ARVs are the functional counterpart of partially damaged brain regions at the perilesional areas. Recovery of function - both early in life and in adults - is stimulation dependent. This stimulation can be either through visual experience, behavioral training or brain stimulation. To the investigator's knowledge, direct current stimulation (DCS) is the only brain stimulation modality that has been studied in cases of VFDs. Results showed that DCS can expand visual field in stroke patients with the effects being stable over time.
In the current study, it is hypothesized that stimulation of the perilesional seemingly healthy brain tissue close to the visual cortex would result in clinical improvement based on the concept of ARVs. To achieve this precise targeting, navigated rTMS would be the most suitable technique.
The investigators aim to study the effect of navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to perilesional areas on patients with cortical visual field defects (cVFD) due to stroke.
This is a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial that will be conducted in the neuromodulation research lab, neurology department, Ain Shams University. The study is approved by Ain Shams University faculty of medicine local research ethics committee (REC).
Procedures:
3D MRI: An MRI Brain T1WI with 200 cuts of 0.9 mm sections will be obtained. Segmentation of the head model will be done to separate scalp, skull and brain layers. A three-dimensional virtual head model will then be created for each patient.
Target Selection: The target for stimulation will be determined and marked for each patient using a neuronavigation system on his virtual head model. Targets will be selected along the perilesional area in the nearest seemingly healthy tissue to the visual cortex based on the following steps:
- ARV (grey zone) will be identified in the perimetry of the patient.
- Corresponding area in the 3D head model will then be determined based on visuotopy of the primary visual cortex.
- Being tested
- High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), Sham stimulation
- Keywords
- Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
- Medical subject headings
- Hemianopsia, Ischemic Stroke, Hemorrhagic Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)Device
10hz, 20 seconds intertrain interval, 40 pulses per train with a total of 1000 pulse per session given at 100% of motor threshold. A total of 16 sessions will be given to each patient.
Sham stimulationDevice
A sham coil will be used that is shielded so that it produces sounds and sensations similar to the active coil but does not produce therapeutic effects. 10hz, 20 seconds intertrain interval, 40 pulses per train with a total of 1000 pulse per session given at 100% of motor threshold. A total of 16 sessions will be given to each patient.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Active Group | Active comparator | A total of 16, every other day sessions of rTMS at 10 Hz frequency will be applied to 4 locations along the perilesional area (see target selection). Intensity will be 100% of motor threshold, 25 trains - 40 pulses per train with 20 seconds intertrain interval and a total of 1000 pulses per session. The coil handle will be directed downwards at 45º of the sagittal plain to ensure that the induced electric field be perpendicular to the underlying gyrus. Receives: Device: High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) |
| Sham Group | Sham comparator | Sham group will receive the same sessions as above with the exact same parameters yet a sham coil identical in shape and size to the active coil will be used instead. The sham coil produces sounds and sensations very similar to the active one. Receives: Device: Sham stimulation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Mean Deviation (MD) of Automated Perimetry
Change in mean deviation (MD) from baseline will be assessed using automated perimetry's full threshold 30-2 visual field test.
Measured: 6 weeks
Secondary outcomes (2)
Change in Visual Field Index (VFI) of Automated Perimetry
Change in visual field index (VFI) from baseline will be assessed using automated perimetry's full threshold 30-2 visual field test.
Measured: 6 weeks
National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (VFQ-25)
This questionnaire measures the dimensions of self-reported vision-targeted health status that are most important for the daily functioning of patients with visual field defects. It has 12 sub-scale scores each with a 0 to 100 scale. These sub-scale scores are then averaged to produce a 0 to 100 overall score where higher score represents better outcome.
Measured: 6 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Jul 2019
- Study start1 Jun 2018
- Primary completion1 Apr 2020
- Study completion5 Jun 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Visual Fields HemianopsiaStudies 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ain Shams University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Nevine El Nahas, Ain Shams University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04021160
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1801
- Status last verified
- Jul 2021
- First submitted
- 6 Apr 2019
- Last updated
- 21 Jul 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes
Publications
Sabel BA, Henrich-Noack P, Fedorov A, Gall C. Vision restoration after brain and retina damage: the "residual vision activation theory". Prog Brain Res. 2011;192:199-262. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53355-5.00013-0.
PubMed 21763527Rossini PM, Barker AT, Berardelli A, Caramia MD, Caruso G, Cracco RQ, Dimitrijevic MR, Hallett M, Katayama Y, Lucking CH, et al. Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application. Report of an IFCN committee. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1994 Aug;91(2):79-92. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(94)90029-9. No abstract available.
PubMed 7519144Pambakian AL, Kennard C. Can visual function be restored in patients with homonymous hemianopia? Br J Ophthalmol. 1997 Apr;81(4):324-8. doi: 10.1136/bjo.81.4.324. No abstract available.
PubMed 9215064Rowe F, Brand D, Jackson CA, Price A, Walker L, Harrison S, Eccleston C, Scott C, Akerman N, Dodridge C, Howard C, Shipman T, Sperring U, MacDiarmid S, Freeman C. Visual impairment following stroke: do stroke patients require vision assessment? Age Ageing. 2009 Mar;38(2):188-93. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afn230. Epub 2008 Nov 21.
PubMed 19029069Townend BS, Sturm JW, Petsoglou C, O'Leary B, Whyte S, Crimmins D. Perimetric homonymous visual field loss post-stroke. J Clin Neurosci. 2007 Aug;14(8):754-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2006.02.022. Epub 2007 Jan 30.
PubMed 17270447Barker WH, Mullooly JP. Stroke in a defined elderly population, 1967-1985. A less lethal and disabling but no less common disease. Stroke. 1997 Feb;28(2):284-90. doi: 10.1161/01.str.28.2.284.
PubMed 9040676Ali M, Hazelton C, Lyden P, Pollock A, Brady M; VISTA Collaboration. Recovery from poststroke visual impairment: evidence from a clinical trials resource. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013 Feb;27(2):133-41. doi: 10.1177/1545968312454683. Epub 2012 Sep 6.
PubMed 22961263Janssen AM, Oostendorp TF, Stegeman DF. The coil orientation dependency of the electric field induced by TMS for M1 and other brain areas. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 May 17;12:47. doi: 10.1186/s12984-015-0036-2.
PubMed 25981522Perez C, Chokron S. Rehabilitation of homonymous hemianopia: insight into blindsight. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Oct 22;8:82. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00082. eCollection 2014.
PubMed 25374515Urbanski M, Coubard OA, Bourlon C. Visualizing the blind brain: brain imaging of visual field defects from early recovery to rehabilitation techniques. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Sep 30;8:74. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00074. eCollection 2014.
PubMed 25324739
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Jul 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Efficacy of Navigated Perilesional Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Post-Stroke Visual Field Defects
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04021160
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 1801
- Keywords
- Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ain Shams UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jun 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Apr 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 5 Jun 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Jul 2019 (actual)
- 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.
Visual field defects (VFD) usually do not show improvement beyond 12 weeks from onset. Plasticity occurs in areas of residual vision (ARV) at the visual field which are the functional counterpart of partially damaged brain regions at the areas around brain lesion. Few treatment options are currently available for post-stroke VFD. In this pilot study, the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to these areas on VFD in patients with cortical infarction will be studied. Patients will be divided into two groups; an active group which will receive active stimulation and a sham group which will receive placebo stimulation through a sham coil.
Detailed description
Visual functions are widely distributed over large areas within the cerebrum. Secondary to such wide distribution, visual field defects (VFD) are a common outcome of brain insults especially cerebrovascular stroke whether hemorrhagic or ischemic. Among these, homonymous hemianopia is the most frequently encountered VFD in clinical practice. VFD ranges from 8.3% to 16% in the chronic stage of stroke, while it reaches 25% in acute and subacute stages of stroke. In other studies, it was reported to be even higher. In a database of 11900 stoke patients, VFD was found in 60.5% with homonymous hemianopia accounting for 35%.
These VFDs usually show some degree of improvement within few months from onset secondary to resolution of edema and diaschisis, yet by 3 to 6 months the condition tends to become stationary with no further improvement and only 5% of patients will show full recovery of their visual field. In some studies recovery was mostly along the first 10 days of insult followed by decrease in recovery rate that nearly stops 10-12 weeks after insult. Beyond this time point, very few cases develop spontaneous recovery.
Plasticity occurs in areas of residual vision (ARV) at the visual field borders rather than areas of absolute blindness. These ARVs are the functional counterpart of partially damaged brain regions at the perilesional areas. Recovery of function - both early in life and in adults - is stimulation dependent. This stimulation can be either through visual experience, behavioral training or brain stimulation. To the investigator's knowledge, direct current stimulation (DCS) is the only brain stimulation modality that has been studied in cases of VFDs. Results showed that DCS can expand visual field in stroke patients with the effects being stable over time.
In the current study, it is hypothesized that stimulation of the perilesional seemingly healthy brain tissue close to the visual cortex would result in clinical improvement based on the concept of ARVs. To achieve this precise targeting, navigated rTMS would be the most suitable technique.
The investigators aim to study the effect of navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to perilesional areas on patients with cortical visual field defects (cVFD) due to stroke.
This is a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial that will be conducted in the neuromodulation research lab, neurology department, Ain Shams University. The study is approved by Ain Shams University faculty of medicine local research ethics committee (REC).
Procedures:
3D MRI: An MRI Brain T1WI with 200 cuts of 0.9 mm sections will be obtained. Segmentation of the head model will be done to separate scalp, skull and brain layers. A three-dimensional virtual head model will then be created for each patient.
Target Selection: The target for stimulation will be determined and marked for each patient using a neuronavigation system on his virtual head model. Targets will be selected along the perilesional area in the nearest seemingly healthy tissue to the visual cortex based on the following steps:
- ARV (grey zone) will be identified in the perimetry of the patient.
- Corresponding area in the 3D head model will then be determined based on visuotopy of the primary visual cortex.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Active Group | Active comparator | Device: High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)A total of 16, every other day sessions of rTMS at 10 Hz frequency will be applied to 4 locations along the perilesional area (see target selection). Intensity will be 100% of motor threshold, 25 trains - 40 pulses per train with 20 seconds intertrain interval and a total of 1000 pulses per session. The coil handle will be directed downwards at 45º of the sagittal plain to ensure that the induced electric field be perpendicular to the underlying gyrus. |
| Sham Group | Sham comparator | Device: Sham stimulationSham group will receive the same sessions as above with the exact same parameters yet a sham coil identical in shape and size to the active coil will be used instead. The sham coil produces sounds and sensations very similar to the active one. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patients with a brain imaging showing vascular lesion involving visual cortical area
- Duration of at least 3 months.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Visual field defects of ophthalmologic origin
- Causes of severe visual impairment other than visual field defects
- Drug abuse
- Past history or family history of epilepsy
- Skull bone defects
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 |
|---|---|---|
| High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)10hz, 20 seconds intertrain interval, 40 pulses per train with a total of 1000 pulse per session given at 100% of motor threshold. A total of 16 sessions will be given to each patient. | Device | Active Group |
| Sham stimulationA sham coil will be used that is shielded so that it produces sounds and sensations similar to the active coil but does not produce therapeutic effects. 10hz, 20 seconds intertrain interval, 40 pulses per train with a total of 1000 pulse per session given at 100% of motor threshold. A total of 16 sessions will be given to each patient. | Device | Sham Group |
Primary outcome
Change in Mean Deviation (MD) of Automated Perimetry
Time frame: 6 weeks
Change in mean deviation (MD) from baseline will be assessed using automated perimetry's full threshold 30-2 visual field test.
2 secondary outcomes
Change in Visual Field Index (VFI) of Automated Perimetry
Time frame: 6 weeks
National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (VFQ-25)
Time frame: 6 weeks
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 21 Jul 2021.
- Background: PubMed 21763527Sabel BA, Henrich-Noack P, Fedorov A, Gall C. Vision restoration after brain and retina damage: the "residual vision activation theory". Prog Brain Res. 2011;192:199-262. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53355-5.00013-0.
- Background: PubMed 7519144Rossini PM, Barker AT, Berardelli A, Caramia MD, Caruso G, Cracco RQ, Dimitrijevic MR, Hallett M, Katayama Y, Lucking CH, et al. Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application. Report of an IFCN committee. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1994 Aug;91(2):79-92. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(94)90029-9. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 9215064Pambakian AL, Kennard C. Can visual function be restored in patients with homonymous hemianopia? Br J Ophthalmol. 1997 Apr;81(4):324-8. doi: 10.1136/bjo.81.4.324. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 19029069Rowe F, Brand D, Jackson CA, Price A, Walker L, Harrison S, Eccleston C, Scott C, Akerman N, Dodridge C, Howard C, Shipman T, Sperring U, MacDiarmid S, Freeman C. Visual impairment following stroke: do stroke patients require vision assessment? Age Ageing. 2009 Mar;38(2):188-93. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afn230. Epub 2008 Nov 21.
- Background: PubMed 17270447Townend BS, Sturm JW, Petsoglou C, O'Leary B, Whyte S, Crimmins D. Perimetric homonymous visual field loss post-stroke. J Clin Neurosci. 2007 Aug;14(8):754-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2006.02.022. Epub 2007 Jan 30.
- Background: PubMed 9040676Barker WH, Mullooly JP. Stroke in a defined elderly population, 1967-1985. A less lethal and disabling but no less common disease. Stroke. 1997 Feb;28(2):284-90. doi: 10.1161/01.str.28.2.284.
- Background: PubMed 22961263Ali M, Hazelton C, Lyden P, Pollock A, Brady M; VISTA Collaboration. Recovery from poststroke visual impairment: evidence from a clinical trials resource. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013 Feb;27(2):133-41. doi: 10.1177/1545968312454683. Epub 2012 Sep 6.
- Background: PubMed 25981522Janssen AM, Oostendorp TF, Stegeman DF. The coil orientation dependency of the electric field induced by TMS for M1 and other brain areas. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 May 17;12:47. doi: 10.1186/s12984-015-0036-2.
- Background: PubMed 25374515Perez C, Chokron S. Rehabilitation of homonymous hemianopia: insight into blindsight. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Oct 22;8:82. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00082. eCollection 2014.
- Background: PubMed 25324739Urbanski M, Coubard OA, Bourlon C. Visualizing the blind brain: brain imaging of visual field defects from early recovery to rehabilitation techniques. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Sep 30;8:74. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00074. eCollection 2014.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes
Related trials for Visual Fields Hemianopsia
Not yet recruiting
Ameliorating Stroke-induced Hemianopia Via Multisensory Training
Hemianopia, Homonymous, Cortical Blindness, Unspecified Side of Brain
Active, not recruiting
Statistical Learning as a Novel Intervention for Cortical Blindness
Stroke, Ischemic, Hemianopia, Homonymous
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Anatomical and Functional Predictions of Blindsight Capabilities in Patients With Lateral Hemianopsia
Homonymous Hemianopia, Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Optokinetic Stimulation Without a Reading Task in Patients With Hemianopic Alexia
Hemianopia Homonymous, Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Effectiveness of a Visual Telerehabilitation Program on Visual Perception in Children, Adolescents and Young Adults With Hemianopsia Consecutive to a Brain Tumour
Hemianopsia, Virtual Reality
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in people with Visual Fields Hemianopsia and Stroke, Ischemic, run by Ain Shams University at 1 site in Egypt.
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 2 inclusion and 6 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 21 Jul 2021. 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 Egypt. 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. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. 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.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Mean Deviation (MD) of Automated Perimetry (time frame: 6 weeks). 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 NCT04021160, which also lists 10 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 21 Jul 2021.