Study to Evaluate Faricimab (RO6867461; RG7716) for Extended Durability in the Treatment of Neovascular Age Related Macular Degeneration

Macular Degeneration, Age-Related Clinical Trial

— STAIRWAY  

Official title:

STAIRWAY: Simultaneous Blockade of Angiopoietin-2 and VEGF-A With the Bispecific Antibody RO6867461 (RG7716) for Extended Durability in the Treatment of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03038880
• Other study ID #: CR39521
• Status: Completed
• Phase: Phase 2
• Start date: January 27, 2017
• Est. completion date: March 29, 2018

Study information

• Verified date: December 2020
• Source: Hoffmann-La Roche
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

This was a Phase II, multicenter, randomized, active comparator-controlled, 52-week study to investigate the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of faricimab (RO6867461; RG7716) administered with extended dosing regimens in treatment-naive participants with neovascular age related macular degeneration (nAMD). Only one eye was chosen as the study eye.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 76
• Est. completion date: March 29, 2018
• Est. primary completion date: January 11, 2018
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 50 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria

• Treatment-naive CNV secondary to AMD (nAMD)

• Subfoveal or juxtafoveal CNV with a subfoveal component related to the CNV activity by fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) or spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT; as evidenced by subretinal fluid, subretinal hyperreflective material, evidence of leakage, or hemorrhage)

• CNV lesion of all types with: total lesion size (including blood, atrophy, fibrosis, and neovascularization) of 6 disc areas or less by FFA; and CNV component area of at least 50% of total lesion size by FFA; and active CNV confirmed by FFA (evidence of leakage); and CNV exudation confirmed by SD-OCT (presence of fluid)

• BCVA letter score of 73 to 24 letters (inclusive) on ETDRS-like charts (20/40-20/320 Snellen equivalent) on day 1

• Clear ocular media and adequate pupillary dilatation to allow acquisition of good-quality retinal images to confirm diagnosis

Exclusion Criteria:

• CNV due to causes other than AMD, such as ocular histoplasmosis, trauma, pathological myopia, angioid streaks, choroidal rupture, or uveitis

• Central serous chorioretinopathy at screening

• Retinal pigment epithelial tear involving the macula

• On FFA: subretinal hemorrhage, fibrosis, or atrophy of more than (>)50% of the total lesion area and/or that involves the fovea

• Any prior or concomitant treatment for CNV including (but not restricted to) IVT treatment (steroids, anti-VEGF, tissue plasminogen activator, ocriplasmin, C3F8 gas, air), periocular pharmacological intervention, argon laser photocoagulation, verteporfin photodynamic therapy, diode laser, transpupillary thermotherapy, or surgical intervention

• Cataract surgery within 3 months of baseline assessments

• Any other intraocular surgery (pars plana vitrectomy, glaucoma surgery, corneal transplant, radiotherapy)

• Prior IVT treatment (including anti-VEGF medication) except for management of cataract complication with steroid IVT treatment

• Prior periocular pharmacological intervention for other retinal diseases

• Any concurrent intraocular condition in the study eye (eg, amblyopia, aphakia, retinal detachment, cataract, diabetic retinopathy or maculopathy, or epiretinal membrane with traction) that, in the opinion of the investigator, could either reduce the potential for visual improvement or require medical or surgical intervention during the course of the study

• Active intraocular inflammation (grade trace or above) in the study eye on day 1 (before randomization)

• Current vitreous hemorrhage in the study eye

• Uncontrolled glaucoma (eg, progressive loss of visual fields or defined as IOP =25 mm Hg despite treatment with antiglaucoma medication) in the study eye

• Spherical equivalent of refractive error demonstrating more than 8 diopters of myopia in the study eye

• History of idiopathic or autoimmune-associated uveitis in either eye

• Active infectious conjunctivitis, keratitis, scleritis, or endophthalmitis in either eye on day 1 (before randomization)

• Any major illness or major surgical procedure within 1 month before screening

• Uncontrolled blood pressure (defined as systolic >180 mm Hg and/or diastolic >100 mm Hg while participant at rest). If a participant's initial reading exceeded these values, a second reading was taken later on the same day, or on another day during the screening period. If the participant's blood pressure was controlled by antihypertensive medication, the participant was taking the same medication continuously for at least 30 days before day 1

• Stroke or myocardial infarction within 3 months before day 1

• History of other disease, metabolic dysfunction, physical examination finding, or clinical laboratory findings giving reasonable suspicion of a condition that contraindicated the use of the investigational drug or that might affect interpretation of the results of the study or renders the participant at high risk for treatment complications in the opinion of the investigator

• Pregnant or breastfeeding, or intended to become pregnant during the study

• Known hypersensitivity to ranibizumab, fluorescein, any ingredients of the formulation used, dilating eye drops, or any of the anesthetic and antimicrobial drops used

• Treatment with investigational therapy within 3 months before initiation of study treatment

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Choroidal Neovascularization
• Macular Degeneration
• Macular Degeneration, Age-Related
• Neovascularization, Choroidal
• Neovascularization, Pathologic

Intervention

Drug:
• Faricimab
Faricimab was administered via IVT injections as specified during the treatment period.
• Ranibizumab
Ranibizumab was administered via IVT injections as specified during the treatment period.
• Sham Procedure
The sham was a procedure that mimicked an IVT injection and involved the blunt end of an empty syringe (without a needle) being pressed against the anesthetized eye. It was administered to participants in the faricimab treatments arms at applicable visits to maintain masking among treatment arms.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	Retina Res Institute of Texas	Abilene	Texas
United States	Eye Associates of New Mexico	Albuquerque	New Mexico
United States	Texas Retina Associates	Arlington	Texas
United States	Southeast Retina Center	Augusta	Georgia
United States	Retina Research Center	Austin	Texas
United States	California Retina Consultants	Bakersfield	California
United States	The Retina Care Center	Baltimore	Maryland
United States	Retinal Diagnostic Center	Campbell	California
United States	Retina Consultants of Southern Colorado PC; Clinical Research Department	Colorado Springs	Colorado
United States	Rand Eye	Deerfield Beach	Florida
United States	Oregon Retina, LLP	Eugene	Oregon
United States	Charles Retina Institute	Germantown	Tennessee
United States	Vitreoretinal Consultants	Great Neck	New York
United States	Midwest Eye Institute	Indianapolis	Indiana
United States	Florida Eye Associates	Melbourne	Florida
United States	Vitreo Retinal Surgery	Minneapolis	Minnesota
United States	Retinal Consultants of Arizona	Phoenix	Arizona
United States	Retina Northwest	Portland	Oregon
United States	Sierra Eye Associates	Reno	Nevada
United States	Retina Vitreous Assoc of FL	Saint Petersburg	Florida
United States	Retina Associates of Utah	Salt Lake City	Utah
United States	Southern Vitreoretinal Assoc	Tallahassee	Florida
United States	Retina Associates Southwest PC	Tucson	Arizona
United States	Wolfe Eye Clinic	West Des Moines	Iowa
United States	Strategic Clinical Research Group, LLC	Willow Park	Texas

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Hoffmann-La Roche

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Mean Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) at Week 40, Using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) BCVA Charts	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The analysis was performed using a Mixed Model for Repeated Measurement (MMRM) model, which included an unstructured covariance and the categorical covariates of treatment group, visit, and visit by treatment group interaction and the continuous covariate of baseline BCVA.	Baseline, Week 40
Secondary	Mean Change From Baseline in BCVA at Specified Timepoints, Using the ETDRS BCVA Charts	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The analysis was performed using a Mixed Model for Repeated Measurement (MMRM) model, which included an unstructured covariance and the categorical covariates of treatment group, visit, and visit by treatment group interaction and the continuous covariate of baseline BCVA.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Number and Percentage of Participants Gaining Greater Than or Equal to (=)15, =10, =5, or =0 Letters From Baseline in BCVA at Specified Timepoints	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. This analysis was performed on observed data.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants Gaining =15 Letters From Baseline in BCVA at Specified Timepoints	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Number and Percentage of Participants Not Losing =15, =10, =5, or =0 Letters From Baseline in BCVA at Specified Timepoints	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a loss in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates worsening in visual acuity. This analysis was performed on observed data.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants Not Losing =15 Letters From Baseline in BCVA at Specified Timepoints	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better at Specified Timepoints	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse at Specified Timepoints	Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at a starting test distance of 4 meters was measured using a set of three Precision VisionTM or Lighthouse distance acuity charts (modified ETDRS Charts 1, 2, and R) prior to dilating eyes by a trained and certified visual acuity examiner. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the refraction data from previous visits. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Mean Change From Baseline in Central Foveal Thickness (CFT) at Specified Timepoints	Central foveal thickness (CFT) was defined as the thickness from the inner limiting membrane to the retinal pigment epithelial at the horizontal slice closest to the center of the fovea, and it was measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). The analysis was performed using a Mixed Model for Repeated Measurement (MMRM) model, which included an unstructured covariance and the categorical covariates of treatment group, visit, and visit by treatment group interaction and the continuous covariate of baseline CFT.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Mean Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness (CST) at Specified Timepoints	Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the mean thickness from the inner limiting membrane to the retinal pigment epithelial over the 1 millimetre (mm) central subfield, and it was measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). The analysis was performed using a Mixed Model for Repeated Measurement (MMRM) model, which included an unstructured covariance and the categorical covariates of treatment group, visit, and visit by treatment group interaction and the continuous covariate of baseline CST.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants With No Intraretinal Fluid at Specified Timepoints	The absence of intraretinal fluid, subretinal fluid, cysts, or pigment epithelial detachment, as per the study's dry retina definition, were evaluated as individual dry retina outcomes. Intraretinal fluid was defined as the presence of fluid within the retina. All parameters were measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants With No Subretinal Fluid at Specified Timepoints	The absence of intraretinal fluid, subretinal fluid, cysts, or pigment epithelial detachment, as per the study's dry retina definition, were evaluated as individual dry retina outcomes. Subretinal fluid was defined as the presence of fluid between the retina and the retinal pigment epithelium. All parameters were measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants With No Cysts at Specified Timepoints	The absence of intraretinal fluid, subretinal fluid, cysts, or pigment epithelial detachment, as per the study's dry retina definition, were evaluated as individual dry retina outcomes. Cysts were defined as the presence of cystoid space (fluid) in the retina. All parameters were measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Percentage of Participants With No Pigment Epithelial Detachment at Specified Timepoints	The absence of intraretinal fluid, subretinal fluid, cysts, or pigment epithelial detachment, as per the study's dry retina definition, were evaluated as individual dry retina outcomes. Pigment epithelial detachment was defined as the presence of a detachment of the pigment epithelium from the Bruch's membrane. All parameters were measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis was performed on observed data. The 80% confidence intervals were calculated using the Wald method.	Baseline, Day 7, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Secondary	Mean Baseline Value and Mean Change From Baseline of Total Area of Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) at Week 40 and Week 52	The total area of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) was evaluated by a central reading center using fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA).	Baseline, Week 40, Week 52
Secondary	Mean Baseline Value and Mean Change From Baseline of Total Area of CNV Component at Week 40 and Week 52	The total area of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) component (i.e., total area of CNV membrane) was evaluated by a central reading center using fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA).	Baseline, Week 40, Week 52
Secondary	Mean Baseline Value and Mean Change From Baseline of Total Area of Leakage at Week 40 and Week 52	The total area of leakage was evaluated by a central reading center using fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA).	Baseline, Week 40, Week 52
Secondary	Change From Baseline in the Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADA) to Faricimab at Anytime Post-Baseline	Blood samples were obtained for measurement of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) to faricimab by a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).	Predose at Baseline (Day 1), Weeks 16, 24, 28, 44, and 52
Secondary	Safety Summary: Number and Percentage of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event	This safety summary reports the number and percentage of participants who experienced at least one adverse event (AE) during the study. The investigator independently assessed the seriousness and severity for each AE. Severity was graded according to the following grading scale: Mild = Discomfort noticed, but no disruption of normal daily activity; Moderate = Discomfort sufficient to reduce or affect normal daily activity; Severe = Incapacitating with inability to work or to perform normal daily activity. Severity and seriousness are not synonymous; regardless of severity, some AEs may have also met seriousness criteria.	From Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study drug (up to 52 weeks)