Study Overview
Official Title:
Three Arm, Prospective, Single-blind, Randomized Study Comparing Ranibizumab Plus Green Diode Laser Versus Ranibizumab Plus Pattern Scan Laser (Pascal) Versus Ranibizumab (Monotherapy) for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.
Status:
UNKNOWN
Status Verified Date:
2013-12
Last Known Status:
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Brief Summary:
Objectives:
Primary objective:
To evaluate the effects on retinal morphophysiology of full scatter single target panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) versus full scatter multiple target panretinal photocoagulation (both combined with intravitreous injections of ranibizumab) versus intravitreous ranibizumab (IVR) alone in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).
Primary outcome:
The primary endpoint for this study is the mean change in the total area of active retinal neovessels, as measured by fluorescein angiography leakage area, in mm2, from baseline to week 48.
Secondary objectives:
* To assess the mean changes in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the mean changes in central subfield foveal thickness (CSFT), the mean changes in wave B amplitude and oscillatory potentials on a full-field electroretinogram (ERG), and the mean changes on the peripheral visual field by static perimetry (30:2 strategy), from baseline to week 48.
* To assess the incidence of adverse events during the study.
Strategic goal:
In the era of anti-VEGF treatment for retinal neovascularization 1, 2, 3, 4 , it is time to determine what would be the best association of PRP + anti-VEGF for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), or still, if just intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment would be even better regarding morphologic (new vessels area and CSFT) and functional parameters (BCVA, ERG response and visual field).
Detailed Description:
Photocoagulation (thermal laser) was the first modality to be described for the treatment of PDR. Different types of laser such as xenon, krypton, argon, red diode and green diode can be used for this treatment. The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) showed the benefit of early treatment of PDR and of macular edema with laser photocoagulation.
However, several studies have reported loss of visual field after laser photocoagulation of the bilateral full-scatter type (PRP) due to the expansion of the thermal injury, possibly even compromising the ability to drive automotive vehicles according to the standards of the transit authorities of some countries. Thus, this implies a greater impact on the quality of life of the patient, especially if he is a young diabetic.6
The objective of new laser photocoagulation technologies is to provide a treatment that will permit the development of a regenerative response of photoreceptors and of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) with the minimum loss of photoreceptors and the minimum cicatricial expansion of the thermal injury on the targeted RPE.7
The PASCAL photocoagulator (OptiMedica, Santa Clara, California) (a standard scanning laser) was introduced in 2005 for retinal photocoagulation. The device functions as if it partially automated the procedure by means of a shorter laser pulse (short pulse strategy) combined with multiple simultaneous firings in a pattern, performing the procedure within a shorter period of time and with less damage to the outer retina or the RPE, in addition to providing better patient comfort.8
Regarding combined therapy, the combination of intravitreous injection of ranibizumab with PRP (ETDRS) proved to be more promising in terms of improved visual acuity, stability of macular thickness and a greater regression rate of neovessel areas than the use of PRP alone (ETDRS) in patients with high risk PDR.1
Thus, in the present study we would like to determine which would be the best therapeutic combination of laser and an anti-VEGF drug for our patients, or whether treatment with an anti-VEGF drug alone would be better in terms of the anatomical and functional parameters proposed.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: