KeratoconusKCXL-1YNCT07194538
One-Year Outcomes After Conventional vs Accelerated Epi-Off Corneal Cross-Linking in Progressive Keratoconus (Observational Cohort)
An observational study of Keratoconus, run by Clinical Hospital Centre Zagreb at 1 site in Croatia.
Trial summary
Prospective, observational (consecutive eligible eyes) continuation of a previously published 6-month cohort from the same center, extending follow-up to 12 months. Patients with progressive keratoconus received either conventional (CXL30: 3 mW/cm² × 30 min) or accelerated (CXL10: 9 mW/cm² × 10 min) epi-off CXL as… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Keratoconus
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCroatia
- Study dates
- 9 May 2021to 12 Jan 2023
- 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 Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients with progressive keratoconus treated at University Hospital Centre Zagreb (Croatia).
Who may be able to join
- Progressive keratoconus documented on serial Scheimpflug tomography within the prior 12 months (ABCD/K-metrics and/or pachymetry).
- Clear corneal axis (no visually significant scarring).
- Corneal thickness 370 μm or more
Who cannot join
- No central corneal scars, prior chemical burns, severe corneal infection, or ocular surface disease.
- No pregnancy and lactation during treatment.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: One-Year Follow-Up of Clinical and Tomographic Parameters After Conventional (3 mW/cm² × 30 Min) Versus Accelerated (9-10 mW/cm² × 10 Min) Epi-Off Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking
Prospective, observational (consecutive eligible eyes) continuation of a previously published 6-month cohort from the same center, extending follow-up to 12 months. Patients with progressive keratoconus received either conventional (CXL30: 3 mW/cm² × 30 min) or accelerated (CXL10: 9 mW/cm² × 10 min) epi-off CXL as part of routine clinical care. Assignment to CXL30 or CXL10 was at the discretion of the treating surgeon; no prospective allocation or randomization was performed. Outcomes included ABCD grading metrics (ABCD-A/B), Kmax, anterior/posterior radii of curvature (ARC/PRC), thinnest pachymetry, and visual acuity at 12 months. The primary objective was to evaluate one-year stabilization/remodeling and compare anterior/posterior responses between protocols.
Read the detailed description
This prospective, single-center observational cohort extends the follow-up of a previously reported 6-month series from the same center to a 12-month horizon. The study population comprises consecutive patients with progressive keratoconus managed with standard-of-care, epi-off corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) at the University Hospital Centre Zagreb. Patients were treated according to routine clinical decision-making by the attending surgeon; no prospective allocation or randomization to a protocol was performed. In routine care, some eyes underwent conventional CXL30 (Dresden-type; UVA 370 nm, 3 mW/cm² for 30 min) and others underwent CXL10 (accelerated; UVA 370 nm, 9 mW/cm² for 10 min). Riboflavin 0.1% solution was used per institutional practice. All procedures were epi-off.
Rationale. While both conventional and accelerated CXL are widely used in daily practice, comparative one-year data that integrate tomographic metrics from the ABCD grading system with traditional surrogates (e.g., Kmax) help clarify the balance between anterior corneal flattening, posterior remodeling, and pachymetric behavior under real-world conditions. This observational design captures effectiveness and safety without altering clinical decision pathways.
Design and cohorts. Consecutive eligible eyes were enrolled at the time of surgery and followed prospectively at baseline (day of surgery) and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Two observational cohorts are defined post hoc by the protocol actually received in standard care:
CXL30 (Conventional): continuous UVA 3 mW/cm² × 30 min (Dresden-type).
CXL10 (Accelerated): continuous UVA 9 mW/cm² × 10 min.
Assignment to CXL30 vs CXL10 was at the surgeon's discretion based on routine clinical considerations; the study did not prospectively assign interventions.
Eligibility. Inclusion required progressive keratoconus documented on serial Scheimpflug tomography within the prior 12 months; a clear corneal axis (no visually significant scarring); and corneal thickness 370 µm or more per institutional safety protocol. Exclusions comprised no central corneal scars, prior chemical burns, severe corneal infection, or ocular surface disease. Pregnancy and lactation during treatment were also contraindications.
Examinations and outcomes. Outcomes were assessed using Scheimpflug tomography (e.g., Pentacam or equivalent) and standard visual testing. The primary outcome was change in ABCD-A (anterior corneal curvature metric) from baseline to 12 months. Secondary outcomes included Kmax, anterior and posterior radii of curvature (ARC/PRC), thinnest pachymetry, and UDVA/BCVA at 12 months. Safety endpoints encompassed delayed epithelial healing (>7 days), infectious keratitis, clinically significant corneal haze, endothelial decompensation, and need for re-treatment.
Follow-up timeline. Enrollment/treatment occurred May 2021-December 2021; 12-month follow-up was completed by January 2023. Of the 28 eyes in the previously reported 6-month cohort, 22 completed the 12-month visit and were included in this analysis.
Data handling and oversight. Data were collected prospectively in a standardized fashion and analyzed as observational (no masking, no allocation). The protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional Ethics Committee; all analyses used de-identified data. No data monitoring committee was required given the non-interventional, standard-of-care nature of the study.
Statistical approach (summary). Effectiveness outcomes are summarized descriptively; within-cohort change from baseline to 12 months is evaluated with paired tests on continuous variables as appropriate to distributional assumptions. Between-cohort comparisons (CXL30 vs CXL10) at 12 months and for change scores are explored with two-sample tests or generalized linear models with adjustment for prespecified covariates (e.g., baseline severity indices) where applicable. Statistical significance is assessed at a two-sided α = 0.05, with corresponding confidence intervals to aid interpretation.
- Conditions
- Keratoconus
- Keywords
- keratoconus, corneal crosslinking, conventional CXL, accelerated CXL, ABCD grading system, one-year outcome, Scheimpflug tomography
- Medical subject headings
- Keratoconus
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Cohort 1 - CXL30 (Conventional) | Conventional Dresden protocol; irradiance 3 mW/cm² for 30 minutes; epi-off; riboflavin 0.1%. Assignment was per treating surgeon's standard-of-care decision (no prospective allocation). | |
| Cohort 2 - CXL10 (Accelerated) | Accelerated protocol; irradiance 9 mW/cm² for 10 minutes; epi-off; riboflavin 0.1%. Assignment was per treating surgeon's standard-of-care decision (no prospective allocation). |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in ABCD-A from baseline to 12 months
Belin ABCD parameter A = A stage (ordinal severity stage); Belin ABCD keratoconus grading system (A = anterior corneal radius of curvature at the thinnest point; B = posterior corneal radius of curvature at the thinnest point; C = thinnest corneal pachymetry; D = distance best-corrected visual acuity).
minimum value 0, maximum value 4 (ordinal scale 0-4) higher score means worse outcome
Measured: 12 months
Secondary outcomes (5)
Change in ARC from baseline to 12 months
ABCD A = ARC; mm ARC - anterior radius curvature calculated from a 3.0 mm optical zone centered on the thinnest point of the cornea higher = flatter (better); mm
Measured: 12 months
Change in PRC from baseline to 12 months
PRC; mm PRC - posterior radius curvature calculated from a 3.0 mm optical zone centered on the thinnest point of the cornea higher = flatter (better); mm Time Frame: 12 months
Measured: 12 months
Change in Kmax from baseline to 12 months
Measured: 12 months
Change in UDVA and BCVA from baseline to 12 months
UDVA = uncorrected visual acuity ; BVCA = best corrected visual acuity
Measured: 12 months
Change in thinnest pachymetry from baseline to 12 months
Measured: 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Sep 2025
- Study start9 May 2021
- Primary completion12 Jan 2023
- Study completion12 Jan 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for KeratoconusStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Clinical Hospital Centre Zagreb
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Iva Bešlić, Clinical Hospital Centre Zagreb
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07194538
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 8.1-25/223-2 02/013 AG
- Acronym
- KCXL-1Y
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 18 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 1 Oct 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant datasets will not be shared. The informed consent and IRB approval did not include permission for public sharing of participant-level data, and the small, single-center cohort with imaging-derived variables carries a residual re-identification risk. De-identified aggregate results and summary tables will be available in the published article and can be provided upon reasonable request to the corresponding author, subject to institutional approvals.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 Oct 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- One-Year Follow-Up of Clinical and Tomographic Parameters After Conventional (3 mW/cm² × 30 Min) Versus Accelerated (9-10 mW/cm² × 10 Min) Epi-Off Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07194538
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- KCXL-1Y / 8.1-25/223-2 02/013 AG
- Conditions
- Keratoconus
- Keywords
- keratoconus, corneal crosslinking, conventional CXL, accelerated CXL, ABCD grading system, one-year outcome, Scheimpflug tomography
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Clinical Hospital Centre ZagrebUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 9 May 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 12 Jan 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 12 Jan 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Sep 2025 (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.
Prospective, observational (consecutive eligible eyes) continuation of a previously published 6-month cohort from the same center, extending follow-up to 12 months. Patients with progressive keratoconus received either conventional (CXL30: 3 mW/cm² × 30 min) or accelerated (CXL10: 9 mW/cm² × 10 min) epi-off CXL as part of routine clinical care. Assignment to CXL30 or CXL10 was at the discretion of the treating surgeon; no prospective allocation or randomization was performed. Outcomes included ABCD grading metrics (ABCD-A/B), Kmax, anterior/posterior radii of curvature (ARC/PRC), thinnest pachymetry, and visual acuity at 12 months. The primary objective was to evaluate one-year stabilization/remodeling and compare anterior/posterior responses between protocols.
Detailed description
This prospective, single-center observational cohort extends the follow-up of a previously reported 6-month series from the same center to a 12-month horizon. The study population comprises consecutive patients with progressive keratoconus managed with standard-of-care, epi-off corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) at the University Hospital Centre Zagreb. Patients were treated according to routine clinical decision-making by the attending surgeon; no prospective allocation or randomization to a protocol was performed. In routine care, some eyes underwent conventional CXL30 (Dresden-type; UVA 370 nm, 3 mW/cm² for 30 min) and others underwent CXL10 (accelerated; UVA 370 nm, 9 mW/cm² for 10 min). Riboflavin 0.1% solution was used per institutional practice. All procedures were epi-off.
Rationale. While both conventional and accelerated CXL are widely used in daily practice, comparative one-year data that integrate tomographic metrics from the ABCD grading system with traditional surrogates (e.g., Kmax) help clarify the balance between anterior corneal flattening, posterior remodeling, and pachymetric behavior under real-world conditions. This observational design captures effectiveness and safety without altering clinical decision pathways.
Design and cohorts. Consecutive eligible eyes were enrolled at the time of surgery and followed prospectively at baseline (day of surgery) and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Two observational cohorts are defined post hoc by the protocol actually received in standard care:
CXL30 (Conventional): continuous UVA 3 mW/cm² × 30 min (Dresden-type).
CXL10 (Accelerated): continuous UVA 9 mW/cm² × 10 min.
Assignment to CXL30 vs CXL10 was at the surgeon's discretion based on routine clinical considerations; the study did not prospectively assign interventions.
Eligibility. Inclusion required progressive keratoconus documented on serial Scheimpflug tomography within the prior 12 months; a clear corneal axis (no visually significant scarring); and corneal thickness 370 µm or more per institutional safety protocol. Exclusions comprised no central corneal scars, prior chemical burns, severe corneal infection, or ocular surface disease. Pregnancy and lactation during treatment were also contraindications.
Examinations and outcomes. Outcomes were assessed using Scheimpflug tomography (e.g., Pentacam or equivalent) and standard visual testing. The primary outcome was change in ABCD-A (anterior corneal curvature metric) from baseline to 12 months. Secondary outcomes included Kmax, anterior and posterior radii of curvature (ARC/PRC), thinnest pachymetry, and UDVA/BCVA at 12 months. Safety endpoints encompassed delayed epithelial healing (>7 days), infectious keratitis, clinically significant corneal haze, endothelial decompensation, and need for re-treatment.
Follow-up timeline. Enrollment/treatment occurred May 2021-December 2021; 12-month follow-up was completed by January 2023. Of the 28 eyes in the previously reported 6-month cohort, 22 completed the 12-month visit and were included in this analysis.
Data handling and oversight. Data were collected prospectively in a standardized fashion and analyzed as observational (no masking, no allocation). The protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional Ethics Committee; all analyses used de-identified data. No data monitoring committee was required given the non-interventional, standard-of-care nature of the study.
Statistical approach (summary). Effectiveness outcomes are summarized descriptively; within-cohort change from baseline to 12 months is evaluated with paired tests on continuous variables as appropriate to distributional assumptions. Between-cohort comparisons (CXL30 vs CXL10) at 12 months and for change scores are explored with two-sample tests or generalized linear models with adjustment for prespecified covariates (e.g., baseline severity indices) where applicable. Statistical significance is assessed at a two-sided α = 0.05, with corresponding confidence intervals to aid interpretation.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Cohort 1 - CXL30 (Conventional) | – | –Conventional Dresden protocol; irradiance 3 mW/cm² for 30 minutes; epi-off; riboflavin 0.1%. Assignment was per treating surgeon's standard-of-care decision (no prospective allocation). |
| Cohort 2 - CXL10 (Accelerated) | – | –Accelerated protocol; irradiance 9 mW/cm² for 10 minutes; epi-off; riboflavin 0.1%. Assignment was per treating surgeon's standard-of-care decision (no prospective allocation). |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients with progressive keratoconus treated at University Hospital Centre Zagreb (Croatia).
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Progressive keratoconus documented on serial Scheimpflug tomography within the prior 12 months (ABCD/K-metrics and/or pachymetry).
- Clear corneal axis (no visually significant scarring).
- Corneal thickness 370 μm or more
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- No central corneal scars, prior chemical burns, severe corneal infection, or ocular surface disease.
- No pregnancy and lactation during treatment.
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
Change in ABCD-A from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 12 months
Belin ABCD parameter A = A stage (ordinal severity stage); Belin ABCD keratoconus grading system (A = anterior corneal radius of curvature at the thinnest point; B = posterior corneal radius of curvature at the thinnest point; C = thinnest corneal pachymetry; D = distance best-corrected visual acuity). minimum value 0, maximum value 4 (ordinal scale 0-4) higher score means worse outcome
5 secondary outcomes
Change in ARC from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 12 months
Change in PRC from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 12 months
Change in Kmax from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 12 months
Change in UDVA and BCVA from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 12 months
Change in thinnest pachymetry from baseline to 12 months
Time frame: 12 months
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 1 Oct 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant datasets will not be shared. The informed consent and IRB approval did not include permission for public sharing of participant-level data, and the small, single-center cohort with imaging-derived variables carries a residual re-identification risk. De-identified aggregate results and summary tables will be available in the published article and can be provided upon reasonable request to the corresponding author, subject to institutional approvals.
Related trials for Keratoconus
RecruitingObservational study
UNITY DX Cornea Study
Tomography
Not yet recruiting
Performance Evaluation of the OCUTOP Hand-held Corneal Topographer
Corneal Topography, Dry Eye Syndromes
Recruiting
Proof-of-Concept for a Novel Optical Aperture Contact Lens in Presbyopia and Keratoconus
Keratoconus, Presbyopia
RecruitingObservational study
A Study to Test the Diagnostic Potential of Brillouin Microscopy for Corneal Ectasia
Keratoconus, Ectasia
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Corneal Biomechanical Analysis Using Brillouin Microscopy
Keratoconus, Keratoconus, Unstable
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?
An observational study of Keratoconus, run by Clinical Hospital Centre Zagreb at 1 site in Croatia.
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 2 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 1 Oct 2025. 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 Croatia. 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.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in ABCD-A from baseline to 12 months (time frame: 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
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 1 Oct 2025.