Trial Outcomes & Findings for Evaluation of a Daily Disposable Silicone Hydrogel Multifocal Contact Lens in Myopes and Hyperopes (NCT NCT05222880)

NCT ID: NCT05222880

Last Updated: 2023-04-13

Results Overview

Binocular visual acuity was measured on a logMAR (Logarithm of Minimal Angle of Resolution) scale under high luminance high contrast condition. At distance (4 meters), VA is assessed using ETDRS (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study) charts; while near (40 cm) and intermediate (64 cm) assessments were made using reduced Guillon-Poling charts. Letter-by-letter results calculated the visual performance score for each chart read. LogMAR scores closer to zero, or below zero, indicate a better visual acuity. A logMAR visual performance score of 0.0 is equivalent to Snellen visual acuity of 20/20.

Recruitment status

COMPLETED

Study phase

NA

Target enrollment

140 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

1-Week Follow-up

Results posted on

2023-04-13

Participant Flow

A total of 140 subjects were enrolled in this study. Of those enrolled, 139 subjects were dispensed at least one study lens, while 1 subject failed to meet all eligibility criteria. Of those dispensed, 136 subjects completed the study while 3 subjects were discontinued.

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
Subjects randomized to receive the Test lens during the study
Overall Study
STARTED
139
Overall Study
COMPLETED
136
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
3

Reasons for withdrawal

Reasons for withdrawal
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
Subjects randomized to receive the Test lens during the study
Overall Study
Unsatisfactory Visual Response due to Test Article
1
Overall Study
Withdrew Consent during Study
1
Overall Study
COVID-19 Related
1

Baseline Characteristics

Evaluation of a Daily Disposable Silicone Hydrogel Multifocal Contact Lens in Myopes and Hyperopes

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
Hyperopes
n=50 Participants
Subjects were classified as Hyperopic if the distance spherical equivalent refraction was in the range of +0.75 D to +3.25 D.
Myopes
n=89 Participants
Subjects were classified as Myopic if the distance spherical equivalent refraction was in the range of -5.75 D to -1.25 D.
Total
n=139 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
Age, Continuous
54.1 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.20 • n=5 Participants
50.4 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.14 • n=7 Participants
51.7 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.76 • n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
45 Participants
n=5 Participants
66 Participants
n=7 Participants
111 Participants
n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
5 Participants
n=5 Participants
23 Participants
n=7 Participants
28 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
3 Participants
n=7 Participants
5 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
9 Participants
n=7 Participants
11 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
44 Participants
n=5 Participants
75 Participants
n=7 Participants
119 Participants
n=5 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
50 Participants
n=5 Participants
89 Participants
n=7 Participants
139 Participants
n=5 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of deviation from protocol with data collected at the 1-week follow-up.

Binocular visual acuity was measured on a logMAR (Logarithm of Minimal Angle of Resolution) scale under high luminance high contrast condition. At distance (4 meters), VA is assessed using ETDRS (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study) charts; while near (40 cm) and intermediate (64 cm) assessments were made using reduced Guillon-Poling charts. Letter-by-letter results calculated the visual performance score for each chart read. LogMAR scores closer to zero, or below zero, indicate a better visual acuity. A logMAR visual performance score of 0.0 is equivalent to Snellen visual acuity of 20/20.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=136 Participants
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
Binocular logMAR Visual Acuity
Distance(4m)
-0.098 LogMAR
Standard Deviation 0.0854
Binocular logMAR Visual Acuity
Intermediate (64cm)
-0.043 LogMAR
Standard Deviation 0.0797
Binocular logMAR Visual Acuity
Near (40cm)
0.0797 LogMAR
Standard Deviation 0.1077

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of deviation from protocol with data collected at the 1-week follow-up.

Subjective vision was assessed using the Contact Lens User Experience™ (CLUE) questionnaire. CLUE is a validated patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Derived CLUE scores using Item Response Theory (IRT) follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0-120. The average CLUE vision score for each sphere stratum (Hyperope and Myope) was reported.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=136 Participants
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
CLUE Vision Score
Hyperopes
52.30 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.121
CLUE Vision Score
Myopes
63.27 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.031

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Up to 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of subsequent withdrawal from study or deviation from protocol.

Contact lens fitting acceptance was assessed for each subject eye using a biomicroscope post lens insertion, the 1-week follow-up and any unscheduled visits. Lens fit was a binary variable where acceptable lens fit=1 and unacceptable lens fit=0. The proportion of eyes with unacceptable lens fit was reported.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=278 Eyes
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
Proportion of Eyes With Unacceptable Lens Fitting
0 Proportion of eyes

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Up to 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of subsequent withdrawal from study or deviation from protocol.

Slit Lamp Findings (SLF) were assessed using a biomicroscope and was graded using the FDA grading scale (Grade: 0, 1,2, 3 and 4) with grade 0 represents the absence of findings and 1 to 4 representing successively worse findings (i.e. Grade 1 = trace, Grade 2 = Mild, Grade 3 = moderate and Grade 4 = severe). This was performed on each subject eye at every study visit (baseline, unscheduled visits and 1-week follow-up). The data was then dichotomized into two groups. Those with grade 3 or higher and those with grade 2 or lower. The proportion of eyes with SLF with grade 3 or higher was reported.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=278 Eyes
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
Proportion of Eyes With Grade 3 or Higher Slit Lamp Findings
0 Porportion of eyes

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of deviation from protocol with data collected at the 1-week follow-up.

Subjective vision was assessed using the Contact Lens User Experience™ (CLUE) questionnaire. CLUE is a validated patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Derived CLUE scores using Item Response Theory (IRT) follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0-120. The average CLUE vision score for each sphere stratum (Hyperope and Myope) was reported.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=136 Participants
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
CLUE Vision Score
Hyperopes
52.30 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.121
CLUE Vision Score
Myopes
63.27 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.031

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of deviation from protocol with data collected at the 1-week follow-up.

Subjective comfort was assessed using the Contact Lens User Experience™ (CLUE) questionnaire. CLUE is a validated patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Derived CLUE scores using Item Response Theory (IRT) follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0-120. The average CLUE comfort score was reported. The pre-specified aim was not to compare comfort between the hyperope and myope subgroups, therefore, comfort scores were reported for both groups combined.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=136 Participants
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
CLUE Comfort Score
72.60 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.696

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of deviation from protocol with data collected at the 1-week follow-up.

Subjective Handling was assessed using the Contact Lens User Experience™ (CLUE) questionnaire. CLUE is a validated patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire to assess patient-experience attributes of soft contact lenses (comfort, vision, handling, and packaging) in a contact-lens wearing population in the US, ages 18-65. Derived CLUE scores using Item Response Theory (IRT) follow a normal distribution with a population average score of 60 (SD 20), where higher scores indicate a more favorable/positive response with a range of 0-120. The average CLUE handling score was reported. The pre-specified aim was not to compare comfort between the hyperope and myope subgroups, therefore, comfort scores were reported for both groups combined.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=136 Participants
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
CLUE Handling Score
67.56 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.619

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Up to 1-Week Follow-up

Population: All dispensed subjects regardless of subsequent withdrawal from study or deviation from protocol.

The number of lenses to achieve the optimal pair for each subject was calculated as the original pair (2) plus all the required modifications to reach the optimal pair. In this study the minimum number of lenses per subject used was 2 where the maximum possible number of lenses used was 10. The data was dichotomized as Y=1 if the subject was able to achieve optimal lens pair in 4 lenses or lenses or less and 0 otherwise. A lens modification was performed if the subject reports unsatisfactory vision or was unable to obtain 20/30 distance visual acuity in both eyes. If the subject reported satisfactory vision with the lenses a modification was not required. However, based upon the investigator's findings on the measured visual acuity and/or over- refraction a modification may have been performed.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Test (Senofilcon A C3)
n=139 Participants
Subjects that wore the Test lens during the study.
Proportion of Subject Achieving Optimal Lens Pair in 4 Lenses or Less
1 Proportion of subjects

Adverse Events

Test (Senofilcon A C3)

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Additional Information

Thomas R. Karkkainen

Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc. (JJVC)

Phone: (904)254-0152

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
  • Publication restrictions are in place

Restriction type: GT60