The Course of Response to Focal Photocoagulation for DME
NCT ID: NCT00442156
Last Updated: 2016-08-26
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
122 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2007-01-31
2008-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
All subjects will have follow-up visits 8 weeks and 16 weeks post treatment. At the 16-week visit, study eyes are evaluated for change in retinal thickness and visual acuity from baseline.
* Treatment is to be deferred and follow up continued if visual acuity letter score has improved by \>5 or OCT central subfield thickness has decreased by \>10% compared with baseline.
* If visual acuity letter score has not improved by at least 5 and OCT central subfield thickness has not decreased by at least 10%, then the eye is classified as 'not improved' and the investigator may provide additional treatment. Follow up ends for eyes that receive additional treatment at this visit. However, if the investigator and participant elect to defer additional treatment (even if deferral criteria are not met), then follow up will continue until the study eye receives additional treatment for DME.
* Eyes continuing in follow up have visits every 8 weeks (+1week) as long as there has been continued improvement in visual acuity (letter score improved \>5 ) or retinal thickness (central subfield thickness decreased by \>10%) compared with the visit 16 weeks earlier. The longest follow-up time will be 48 weeks.
By providing information on the length of time during which clinically meaningful improvement occurs following focal photocoagulation, clinicians will be better able to determine when further photocoagulation or other treatments should be considered for persistent DME. Depending on the results of this study, a future randomized clinical trial will be considered comparing the more aggressive retreatment photocoagulation regimen currently serving as the standard DRCR Network approach to focal photocoagulation for macular edema with the less aggressive regimen evaluated in this protocol.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Observational Study of DME Following Scatter Laser Photocoagulation
NCT00687154
Visual Function, Center Point Thickness and Macular Volume After Photocoagulation
NCT00906659
Evaluation of Vitrectomy for Diabetic Macular Edema
NCT00709319
Evaluation of the Effects of Selective Photocoagulation for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema
NCT01355692
Diabetic Retinopathy and Visual Function Study
NCT00001346
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
In the ETDRS, focal photocoagulation treatment for diabetic macular edema involved direct treatment to discrete lesions between 500 microns and 3000 microns from the center of the macula that were thought to be causing retinal thickening or hard exudates with or without "grid" treatment to other macular areas of retinal thickening or non-perfusion. The lesions treated directly included microaneurysms, identified on fluorescein angiography, that either filled or leaked, intraretinal microvascular abnormalities (IRMA), or pruned capillaries that leaked fluorescein. Grid treatment was applied in the ETDRS to areas of thickened retina that showed diffuse fluorescein leakage or areas of non-perfusion identified as capillary dropout on fluorescein angiography. Areas of non-perfusion in the macula could be treated with grid at the discretion of the treating ophthalmologist. Areas that had both discrete lesions and diffuse leakage or capillary dropout would receive a combination of direct and grid treatment. Re-treatment was applied at four month intervals if clinically significant macular edema persisted, one or more treatable lesions were identified, and the investigator believed these lesions were responsible for the edema. The median number of focal laser treatments applied in the ETDRS was 3.8.
The mechanism of action of focal photocoagulation is not fully understood; however, it is clear that the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) absorbs the majority of the laser energy and thermal injury occurs at the level of the RPE. Studies have shown that photocoagulation can eventually result in retinal and apparent RPE atrophy 200-300% larger than the original laser spot size. These areas of expanded atrophy can lead to loss of central vision, central scotomata, and decreased color vision. Consequently, many retinal specialists today tend to treat with lighter, less intense laser burns than originally specified in the ETDRS.
In addition to the concern regarding the spread of intense laser burns, there are a number of other reasons that retinal specialists today have modified the treatment procedures originally specified in the ETDRS protocol. These reasons include the advent of new lasers and the clinical observation that different techniques, such as focal photocoagulation with lighter burns or grid treatment alone, may be similar in beneficial effect as the original ETDRS treatment protocol. A modified ETDRS focal photocoagulation protocol adapted from the original ETDRS approach, has been adopted as the standard laser technique for DME used in DRCRnet studies.
There are limited data on the course of visual acuity and central retinal thickness after a single focal photocoagulation session for DME. In prior DRCRnet DME treatment protocols that included a laser arm, according to the re-treatment protocol eyes received a second focal photocoagulation session at 3.5- 4 months (which was the first follow-up visit) unless there was substantial improvement defined as at least a 50% decrease in retinal thickening of the central subfield measurement on OCT. As a result, it is unknown what proportion of eyes with lesser degrees of improvement would have continued to improve and the time course for further improvement following the initial photocoagulation session given additional time. In one study conducted by DRCRnet of eyes that had not been previously treated for DME, among 113 eyes in the modified ETDRS laser treatment group with baseline OCT central subfield \>250 microns, a 50% or more reduction in OCT central subfield thickening was present at 3.5 months in only 28 (25%). The table below categorizes the 85 eyes that did not meet this measure of improvement at 3.5 months with regard to improvement in visual acuity of at least 5 letters and/or reduction in central subfield thickness of at least 10%. The 5 letter reduction was selected based on the 95% confidence interval for change determined in a study that evaluated the validity and reliability of the electronic ETDRS visual acuity testing procedure that is used in DRCRnet protocols. The 10% threshold was selected based on the DRCRnet OCT reproducibility study which found that a 10% change in central subfield thickness was likely to be real. Forty-seven (42%) eyes that met the protocol requirement for repeat photocoagulation at the first follow-up visit had an improvement in either visual acuity (of at least 5 letters), central subfield (of at least a 10% reduction), or both at this follow-up visit.
Other DRCRnet protocols provide data on the course following a single photocoagulation session through 4 months of follow up. In a pilot study designed to evaluate peribulbar corticosteroids for mild DME (OCT central subfield thickness = 250 microns and visual acuity 20/40 or better at baseline), modified ETDRS focal photocoagulation was the treatment given to the control group. Follow-up visits occurred after 1, 2, and 4 months before the eye was eligible to be retreated. Twenty-one of the 37 eyes in the laser group had not been previously treated with focal photocoagulation for DME and 17 eyes had been previously treated with focal photocoagulation. A 50% or more reduction in OCT central subfield thickening occurred in 11 (30%) of the 37 eyes at 17 weeks. Fourteen (38%) eyes that would have met the criteria for re-treatment had an improvement in either visual acuity (of at least 5 letters), central subfield (of at least 10%), or both at 17 weeks.
In another pilot study evaluating intravitreal bevacizumab for DME (OCT central subfield thickness = 275 microns and visual acuity 20/32 or worse at baseline), modified ETDRS focal photocoagulation was the treatment given to the control group. Follow-up visits occurred after 3, 6, 9, and 12 weeks before the eye was eligible to be retreated. There were 7 eyes in the laser group that had not been previously treated with focal photocoagulation for DME and 12 eyes that had been previously treated with focal photocoagulation. Among these 19 eyes, a 50% or more reduction in OCT central subfield thickening occurred in 3 (16%) at 12 weeks. Ten (53%) eyes that would have met criteria for re-treatment had an improvement in either visual acuity (of at least 5 letters), central subfield (of at least 10%), or both at 12 weeks.
The data from these three protocols indicate that a substantial number of eyes receiving focal photocoagulation (either an initial course or repeat application) will show improvement in central retinal thickness after 3-4 months that is at least 10% but is less than 50% of the baseline thickening. It is for these eyes that further knowledge of the course of retinal thickening and visual acuity without additional interventions is needed to assess whether the present requirements for re-treatment are more aggressive than they need to be.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Laser
People with diabetic macular edema involving the center of the macula (OCT central subfield thickness \>250 microns), who were already intended to receive focal photocoagulation
Laser photocoagulation
modified ETDRS focal photocoagulation generally completed in a single sitting on the day of enrollment, but if little or no improvement, may be repeated at 16 weeks
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Laser photocoagulation
modified ETDRS focal photocoagulation generally completed in a single sitting on the day of enrollment, but if little or no improvement, may be repeated at 16 weeks
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2.
* At least one eye meets the study eye criteria.
* Able and willing to provide informed consent.
* Best corrected E-ETDRS visual acuity letter score \>= 24 (i.e., 20/320 or better) within 8 days of enrollment.
* On clinical exam, definite retinal thickening due to diabetic macular edema involving the center of the macula.
* OCT central subfield \>=250 microns within 8 days of enrollment.
* Media clarity, pupillary dilation, and subject cooperation sufficient for adequate OCT.
* Investigator believes that focal photocoagulation is the most appropriate treatment for the DME.
Exclusion Criteria
* A condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, would preclude participation in the study (e.g., unstable medical status including blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and glycemic control).
* Blood pressure \> 180/110 (systolic above 180 OR diastolic above 110).
* Participation in an investigational trial within 30 days of enrollment that involved treatment with any drug that has not received regulatory approval at the time of study entry.
* Subject is expecting to move out of the area of the clinical center to an area not covered by another clinical center during the next 6 months.
The following exclusions apply to the study eye only (i.e., they may be present for the nonstudy eye):
* Macular edema is considered to be due to a cause other than diabetic macular edema.
* An ocular condition is present such that, in the opinion of the investigator, visual acuity loss would not improve from resolution of macular edema (e.g., foveal atrophy, pigment abnormalities, dense subfoveal hard exudates, significant macular ischemia, nonretinal condition).
* An ocular condition is present (other than diabetes) that, in the opinion of the investigator, might affect macular edema or alter visual acuity during the course of the study (e.g., vein occlusion, uveitis or other ocular inflammatory disease, neovascular glaucoma, etc.).
* Substantial cataract that, in the opinion of the investigator, is likely to be decreasing visual acuity by 3 lines or more (i.e., cataract would be reducing acuity to 20/40 or worse if eye was otherwise normal).
* History of treatment for DME at any time in the past 4 months (such as focal/grid macular photocoagulation, intravitreal or peribulbar corticosteroids, anti-VEGF drugs, or any other treatment).
* History of panretinal (scatter) photocoagulation (PRP) within 4 months prior to enrollment or anticipated to be performed within next 6 months.
* History of major ocular surgery (including vitrectomy, cataract extraction, scleral buckle, any intraocular surgery, etc.) within prior 4 months or anticipated within the next 6 months.
* History of YAG capsulotomy performed within 2 months prior to enrollment
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Eye Institute (NEI)
NIH
Jaeb Center for Health Research
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Jaeb Center for Health Research (DRCR.net)
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
David Browning, M.D.
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Charlotte Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat Assoc., PA
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Southern California Desert Retina Consultants, MC
Palm Springs, California, United States
Retina Vitreous Consultants
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, United States
Retina Consultants of Southwest Florida
Fort Myers, Florida, United States
Central Florida Retina Institute
Lakeland, Florida, United States
Southeast Retina Center, P.C.
Augusta, Georgia, United States
Retina Associates of Hawaii, Inc.
Honolulu, Hawaii, United States
Raj K. Maturi, M.D., P.C.
Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
American Eye Institute
New Albany, Indiana, United States
Retina and Vitreous Associates of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky, United States
Paducah Retinal Center
Paducah, Kentucky, United States
Maine Vitreoretinal Consultants
Bangor, Maine, United States
Elman Retina Group, P.A.
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
Southern New England Retina Associates
Attleboro, Massachusetts, United States
Ophthalmic Consultants of Boston
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Joslin Diabetes Center
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Vitreo-Retinal Associates
Grand Rapids, Michigan, United States
Associated Retina Consultants
Williamsburg, Michigan, United States
Delaware Valley Retina Associates
Lawrenceville, New Jersey, United States
University of Rochester
Rochester, New York, United States
Retina-Vitreous Surgeons of Central New York, PC
Syracuse, New York, United States
University of North Carolina, Dept. of Ophthalmology
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
Charlotte Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat Assoc., PA
Charlotte, North Carolina, United States
Retina Associates of Cleveland, Inc.
Beachwood, Ohio, United States
Casey Eye Institute
Portland, Oregon, United States
Palmetto Retina Center
Columbia, South Carolina, United States
Carolina Retina Center
Columbia, South Carolina, United States
Retina Research Center
Austin, Texas, United States
Texas Retina Associates
Dallas, Texas, United States
Charles A. Garcia, PA & Associates
Houston, Texas, United States
Retina and Vitreous of Texas
Houston, Texas, United States
Texas Retina Associates
Lubbock, Texas, United States
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Dept. of Ophthalmology
Madison, Wisconsin, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network. The course of response to focal/grid photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema. Retina. 2009 Nov-Dec;29(10):1436-43. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0b013e3181bcef6b.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.