AzTrials
AzTrials

Choroidal NeovascularizationPhase 2AVENUENCT02484690

A Proof-of-Concept Study of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Participants With Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) Secondary to Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD)

A Phase 2 study testing Faricimab and Ranibizumab in people with Choroidal Neovascularization, run by Hoffmann-La Roche at 52 sites in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This multiple-center, multiple-dose and regimen, randomized, double-masked active comparator-controlled, double-masked, five parallel group, 36-week study will evaluate the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of faricimab (RO6867461) in participants with choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 50 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Choroidal Neovascularization
What is being tested?
Faricimab and Ranibizumab
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
273 participants
Where
52 sitesUnited States
Study dates
11 Aug 2015to 26 Sep 2017
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

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 50 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Treatment-naive with CNV secondary to AMD, with subfoveal CNV or juxtafoveal CNV with a subfoveal component related to the CNV activity by FFA or SD-OCT
  • Active CNV

Who cannot join

  • CNV due to causes other than AMD
  • Subretinal hemorrhage, fibrosis, or atrophy involving either the fovea or more than 50% of the total lesion area
  • Cataract surgery within 3 months of baseline, or any other previous intraocular surgery
  • Major illness or surgery within 1 month prior to Screening
  • Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) above 7.5%
  • Uncontrolled blood pressure

Trial locations and contacts

52 sites in 1 country.

52 sites in 1 country

United States52 sites
  • W Texas Retina Consultants PA

    Abilene, Texas, 79606

  • Eye Associates of New Mexico

    Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102

  • Western Carolina Retinal Associate PA

    Asheville, North Carolina, 28803

  • Southeast Retina Center

    Augusta, Georgia, 30909

  • Austin Retina Associates

    Austin, Texas, 78705

  • Retina Research Center

    Austin, Texas, 78705

  • California Retina Consultants

    Bakersfield, California, 93309

  • Retina-Vitreous Associates Medical Group

    Beverly Hills, California, 90211

  • Char Eye Ear &Throat Assoc

    Charlotte, North Carolina, 28210

  • Univ of Virginia Ophthalmology

    Charlottesville, Virginia, 22903

  • Southeastern Retina Associates Chattanooga

    Chattanooga, Tennessee, 37421

  • Retina Group of Washington

    Chevy Chase, Maryland, 20815

  • Retina Consultants of Southern

    Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80909

  • OSU Eye Physicians & Surgeons

    Columbus, Ohio, 43212

  • Vitreoretinal Surgery

    Edina, Minnesota, 55435

  • The Retina Partners

    Encino, California, 91436

  • Oregon Retina, LLP

    Eugene, Oregon, 97401

  • Retina Health Center

    Fort Myers, Florida, 33907

  • National Ophthalmic Research Institute

    Fort Myers, Florida, 33912

  • Charles Retina Institute

    Germantown, Tennessee, 38138

  • Colorado Retina Associates, PC

    Golden, Colorado, 80401

  • Long Is. Vitreoretinal Consult

    Great Neck, New York, 11021

  • New England Retina Associates

    Hamden, Connecticut, 06518

  • Retina Consultants of Houston

    Houston, Texas, 77030

  • Midwest Eye Institute Northside

    Indianapolis, Indiana, 46290

  • Opthalmic Consultants of LI

    Lynbrook, New York, 11563

  • Georgia Retina PC

    Marietta, Georgia, 30060

  • Oregon Retina institute

    Medford, Oregon, 97504

  • Florida Eye Associates

    Melbourne, Florida, 32901

  • Tennessee Retina PC.

    Nashville, Tennessee, 37203

  • Central Florida Retina

    Orlando, Florida, 32806

  • Paducah Retinal Center

    Paducah, Kentucky, 42001

  • Retina Care Specialists

    Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, 33410

  • Mid Atlantic Retina

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107

  • Associated Retina Consultants

    Phoenix, Arizona, 85020

  • Retinal Consultants of Arizona

    Phoenix, Arizona, 85053

  • Retina Northwest

    Portland, Oregon, 97221

  • Retina Consultants, San Diego

    Poway, California, 92064

  • Retina Assoc of Western NY

    Rochester, New York, 14620

  • Retina Associates of Utah

    Salt Lake City, Utah, 84107

  • Orange County Retina Med Group

    Santa Ana, California, 92705

  • The Retina Consultants

    Slingerlands, New York, 12159

  • Spokane Eye Clinical Research

    Spokane, Washington, 99204

  • Retina Vitreous Assoc of FL

    St. Petersburg, Florida, 33711

  • Southern Vitreoretinal Assoc

    Tallahassee, Florida, 32308

  • Retina Associates of NJ

    Toms River, New Jersey, 08755

  • National Retina Institute

    Towson, Maryland, 21204

  • Bay Area Retina Associates

    Walnut Creek, California, 94598

  • Palmetto Retina Center

    West Columbia, South Carolina, 29169

  • American Institute of Research

    Whittier, California, 90603

  • Strategic Clinical Research Group, LLC

    Willow Park, Texas, 76087

  • Vitreo-Retinal Associates, PC

    Worcester, Massachusetts, 01605

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: A Multiple-Center, Multiple-Dose and Regimen, Randomized, Active Comparator Controlled, Double-Masked, Parallel Group, 36 Week Study to Investigate the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy of RO6867461 Administered Intravitreally in Patients With Choroidal Neovascularization Secondary to Age-Related Macular Degeneration

This multiple-center, multiple-dose and regimen, randomized, double-masked active comparator-controlled, double-masked, five parallel group, 36-week study will evaluate the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of faricimab (RO6867461) in participants with choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

The study was designed to allow the evaluation of RO6867461 in a treatment-naive population (comparison of Arms A, B, C, and D) and an anti-VEGF-incomplete responder population that met a predefined criterion at Week 12 (comparison between Arms A and E). Only one eye per participant was chosen as the study eye.

Being tested
Faricimab, Ranibizumab, Sham Procedure
Medical subject headings
Choroidal Neovascularization

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • FaricimabDrug

    Also called RO6867461, RG7716

    Faricimab will be administered as per the regimen specified in the individual arm.

  • RanibizumabDrug

    Also called Lucentis

    Ranibizumab will be administered as per the regimen specified in the individual arm.

  • Sham ProcedureDrug

    The sham is a procedure that mimics an intravitreal injection, but involves the blunt end of an empty syringe (without a needle) being pressed against the anesthetized eye. It will be administered to participants in treatment arm D at applicable visits to maintain masking.

Study groups in NCT02484690
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Arm A: Ranibizumab, 0.5 mg Every 4 Weeks (Q4W)Active comparatorParticipants will receive ranibizumab, 0.5 milligrams (mg) intravitreal (IVT) Q4W up to Week 32 (total 9 injections). The final study visit will take place at Week 36.
Receives: Drug: Ranibizumab
Arm B: Faricimab, 1.5 mg Q4WExperimentalParticipants will receive faricimab 1.5 mg IVT Q4W up to Week 32 (total 9 injections). The final study visit will take place at Week 36.
Receives: Drug: Faricimab
Arm C: Faricimab, 6 mg Q4WExperimentalParticipants will receive faricimab 6 mg IVT Q4W up to Week 32 (9 injections). The final study visit will take place at Week 36.
Receives: Drug: Faricimab
Arm D: Faricimab, 6 mg Every 4-8 weeksExperimentalParticipants will receive faricimab, 6 mg IVT Q4W up to Week 12 (4 injections), followed by 6 mg IVT every 8 weeks up to Week 28 (2 injections). On Weeks 16, 24, and 32, participants received the sham procedure in order to maintain masking. The final study visit will take place at Week 36.
Receives: Drug: Faricimab; Drug: Sham Procedure
Arm E: Ranibizumab 0.5 mg + Faricimab 6 mg Q4WExperimentalParticipants will receive ranibizumab, 0.5 mg IVT Q4W up to Week 8 (3 injections), followed by faricimab, 6 mg IVT Q4W up to Week 32 (6 injections). The final study visit will take place at Week 36.
Receives: Drug: Faricimab; Drug: Ranibizumab

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Mean Change From Baseline in BCVA Letter Score at Week 36, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. 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 primary analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  2. Mean Change From Week 12 in BCVA Letter Score at Week 36, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. 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 primary analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

Secondary outcomes (33)
  1. Percentage of Participants Gaining Greater Than or Equal to (≥) 15 Letters From Baseline in BCVA Letter Score at Week 36, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the participant's 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 outcome measure was analyzed using a Generalized Estimating Equations Model. Missing values were not imputed; it was assumed that the data were missing at random.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  2. Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters From Week 12 in BCVA Letter Score at Week 36, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the participant's 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. Missing values were not imputed; it was assumed that the data were missing at random.

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

  3. Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better at Week 36, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the participant's 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 outcome measure was analyzed using a Generalized Estimating Equations Model. Missing values were not imputed; it was assumed that the data were missing at random.

    Measured: Week 36

  4. Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better at Week 36, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the participant's 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. Missing values were not imputed; it was assumed that the data were missing at random.

    Measured: Week 36

  5. Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse at Week 36, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the participant's 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 outcome measure was analyzed using a Generalized Estimating Equations Model. Missing values were not imputed; it was assumed that the data were missing at random.

    Measured: Week 36

  6. Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse at Week 36, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    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 masked to study drug arm assignment. The BCVA examiner was masked to study eye and treatment assignment and only performed the refraction and BCVA assessment, but was not allowed to perform any other tasks involving direct care. The BCVA examiner was also masked to the BCVA letter scores of a participant's previous visits and could only know the participant's 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. Missing values were not imputed; it was assumed that the data were missing at random.

    Measured: Week 36

  7. Mean Change From Baseline in Foveal Center Point Thickness at Week 36, as Measured by Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography (SD-OCT), in Treatment-Naive Participants

    Foveal center point thickness (FCPT) is 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. Foveal center point thickness was measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  8. Mean Change From Week 12 in Foveal Center Point Thickness at Week 36, as Measured by SD-OCT, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    Foveal center point thickness (FCPT) is 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. Foveal center point thickness was measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

  9. Mean Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness at Week 36, as Measured by SD-OCT, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    Central subfield thickness (CST) is defined as the mean thickness from the inner limiting membrane to the retinal pigment epithelial over the 1 millimetre (mm) central subfield. Central subfield thickness was measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  10. Mean Change From Week 12 in Central Subfield Thickness at Week 36, as Measured by SD-OCT in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    Central subfield thickness (CST) is defined as the mean thickness from the inner limiting membrane to the retinal pigment epithelial over the 1 millimetre (mm) central subfield. Central subfield thickness was measured using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Anatomic outcome measures were based on results from a central reading center. This analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

  11. Number of Participants With Resolution of Dry Retina at Week 36, Defined as Absence of Cysts, Intraretinal Fluid, Pigment Epithelial Detachment, or Subretinal Fluid as Measured by SD-OCT, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    The presence of cysts, intraretinal fluid, pigment epithelial detachment, or subretinal fluid, 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. Intraretinal fluid was defined as the presence of fluid within the retina. Pigment epithelial detachment was defined as the presence of a detachment of the pigment epithelium from the Bruch's membrane. 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.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  12. Number of Participants With Resolution of Dry Retina at Week 36, Defined as Absence of Cysts, Intraretinal Fluid, Pigment Epithelial Detachment, or Subretinal Fluid as Measured by SD-OCT, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    The presence of cysts, intraretinal fluid, pigment epithelial detachment, or subretinal fluid, 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. Intraretinal fluid was defined as the presence of fluid within the retina. Pigment epithelial detachment was defined as the presence of a detachment of the pigment epithelium from the Bruch's membrane. 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.

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

  13. Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) at Week 36, as Measured by Fundus Fluorescein Angiography (FFA), in Treatment-Naive Participants

    The total area of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) was evaluated by a central reading center using fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA). This analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  14. Mean Change From Week 12 in Total Area of Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) at Week 36, as Measured by FFA, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    The total area of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) was evaluated by a central reading center using fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA).

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

  15. Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) Component at Week 36, as Measured by FFA, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    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). This analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  16. Mean Change From Week 12 in Total Area of Choroidal Neovascularization (CNV) Component at Week 36, as Measured by FFA, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    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).

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

  17. Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of Leakage at Week 36, as Measured by FFA, in Treatment-Naive Participants

    The total area of leakage was evaluated by a central reading center using fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA). This analysis used a Mixed Effects Model for Repeated Measurements (MMRM). Missing data were implicitly imputed by the MMRM, assuming a missing-at-random mechanism.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 36

  18. Mean Change From Week 12 in Total Area of Leakage at Week 36, as Measured by FFA, in Anti-VEGF Incomplete Responders

    The total area of leakage was evaluated by a central reading center using fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA).

    Measured: Weeks 12 and 36

  19. Safety Summary of the Overall Number of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event by Event Type, in All Participants

    This safety summary reports the number and percentage of participants who experienced at least one adverse event (AE) during the study. AEs are categorized as any AEs, ocular AEs occurring in the study eye or fellow eye, systemic AEs, serious AEs, AEs related to treatment with study drug, AEs leading to discontinuation (withdrawal) of treatment with study drug, and AEs with fatal outcome. 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.

    Measured: From Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 36 weeks)

  20. Number of Participants With at Least One Ocular Adverse Event in the Study Eye or the Fellow Eye by Highest Intensity, in All Participants

    The investigator assessed adverse event severity 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. Only the most severe intensity was counted for multiple occurrences of the same adverse event per participant at the preferred term level. Severity and seriousness are not synonymous; regardless of severity, some adverse events may have also met seriousness criteria.

    Measured: From Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 36 weeks)

  21. Number of Participants With at Least One Systemic Adverse Event by Highest Intensity, in All Participants

    The investigator assessed adverse event severity 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. Only the most severe intensity was counted for multiple occurrences of the same adverse event per participant at the preferred term level. Severity and seriousness are not synonymous; regardless of severity, some adverse events may have also met seriousness criteria.

    Measured: From Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 36 weeks)

  22. Number of Participants With Abnormal Systolic Blood Pressure, in All Participants

    Abnormal systolic blood pressure (supine) was defined as any value outside of the standard reference range, from <70 (low) to >140 (high) millimetres of mercury (mmHg). Baseline was defined as the last non-missing predose assessment. Not every abnormal vital sign qualified as an adverse event, only if it met any of the following criteria: clinically significant (per investigator); accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment; or required a change in concomitant therapy.

    Measured: Assessed at each study visit from Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 36 weeks)

  23. Number of Participants With Abnormal Diastolic Blood Pressure, in All Participants

    Abnormal diastolic blood pressure (supine) was defined as any value outside of the standard reference range, from <40 (low) to >90 (high) millimetres of mercury (mmHg). Baseline was defined as the last non-missing predose assessment. Not every abnormal vital sign qualified as an adverse event, only if it met any of the following criteria: clinically significant (per investigator); accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment; or required a change in concomitant therapy.

    Measured: Assessed at each study visit from Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 36 weeks)

  24. Number of Participants With Abnormal Heart Rate, in All Participants

    Abnormal heart rate (supine) was defined as any value outside of the standard reference range, from <40 (low) to >100 (high) beats per minute. Baseline was defined as the last non-missing predose assessment. Not every abnormal vital sign qualified as an adverse event, only if it met any of the following criteria: clinically significant (per investigator); accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment; or required a change in concomitant therapy.

    Measured: Assessed at each study visit from Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 36 weeks)

  25. Number of Participants With Abnormal Body Temperature, in All Participants

    Abnormal body temperature (supine) was defined as any value outside of the standard reference range, from <36.5 (low) to >37.5 (high) degrees Celsius. Baseline was defined as the last non-missing predose assessment. Not every abnormal vital sign qualified as an adverse event, only if it met any of the following criteria: clinically significant (per investigator); accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment; or required a change in concomitant therapy.

    Measured: Assessed at each study visit from Baseline until 28 days after the last dose of study treatment (up to 36 weeks)

  26. Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Hematology and Coagulation Tests, in All Participants

    Clinical laboratory tests for hematology and coagulation parameters were performed and any marked abnormal values (High or Low) were based on Roche's predefined standard reference ranges. Marked laboratory abnormalities are presented according to COG3007 abnormality criteria: Single, Not Last = abnormality detected at a single assessment, but not at the last assessment; Last or Replicated = abnormality detected at the last assessment or replicated at one or more assessments. Not every laboratory abnormality qualified as an adverse event, only if it met any of the following criteria: clinically significant (per investigator); accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment; or required a change in concomitant therapy. Abs. = absolute count; Corp. = corpuscular; Ery. = erythrocyte; INR = International Normalized Ratio

    Measured: Predose at Baseline, Weeks 12 and 36, and at Early Termination and Unscheduled Visits (up to 36 weeks)

  27. Number of Participants With Marked Laboratory Abnormalities in Blood Chemistry Tests, in All Participants

    Clinical laboratory tests for blood chemistry parameters were performed and any marked abnormal values (High or Low) were based on Roche's predefined standard reference ranges. Marked laboratory abnormalities are presented according to COG3007 abnormality criteria: Single, Not Last = abnormality detected at a single assessment, but not at the last assessment; Last or Replicated = abnormality detected at the last assessment or replicated at one or more assessments. Not every laboratory abnormality qualified as an adverse event, only if it met any of the following criteria: clinically significant (per investigator); accompanied by clinical symptoms; resulted in a change in study treatment; or required a change in concomitant therapy. GGT = gamma-glutamyltransferase; SGOT/AST = serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase / aspartate aminotransferase; SGPT/ALT = serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase / alanine aminotransferase

    Measured: Predose at Baseline, Weeks 12 and 36, and at Early Termination and Unscheduled Visits (up to 36 weeks)

  28. Mean Change From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure in the Study Eye Over Time, in All Participants

    Intraocular pressure is the fluid pressure inside the eye. The method used to measure intraocular pressure (e.g., Goldmann tonometry) for each participant was to be applied consistently by the investigator throughout the study. On the day of dosing, intraocular pressure was monitored at 30 minutes post-treatment administration, and if intraocular pressure was ≥30 mmHg in the study eye, it was reassessed at 1 hour post-treatment administration.

    Measured: Baseline, 0.5 hours postdose on Day 1, predose and 0.5 hours postdose at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, and 32, and at Weeks 1, 13, and 36

  29. Change From Baseline in the Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies to Faricimab at Any Post-Baseline Timepoint

    Blood samples were obtained for measurement of anti-faricimab antibodies by a validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

    Measured: Baseline, Predose (0 hour) on Days 1, 28, 84, 112, 168, and 252 or early termination (up to 36 weeks)

  30. Mean Plasma Concentration of Faricimab Over Time, in All Participants

    Plasma concentrations of faricimab were measured by a specific validated enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay (ELISA) only from samples of participants randomized to receive faricimab. Baseline was defined as the last non-missing predose assessment. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) for the faricimab assay was 0.800 nanograms per millilitre (ng/mL). Values below the limit of quantification were imputed as LLOQ divided by 2.

    Measured: Predose (on days when treatment was administered) at Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, 13, 16, 24, and 36

  31. Mean Change From Baseline in Free Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-A (VEGF-A) Plasma Concentrations Over Time, in All Participants

    The concentration of free VEGF was determined in plasma samples using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of the assay was 15.6 picograms per millilitre (pg/mL). Plasma free VEGF concentrations below the limit of quantification were imputed as LLOQ divided by 2.

    Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 12, 13, 16, 24, and 36

  32. Mean Change From Baseline in Total Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) Plasma Concentrations Over Time, in All Participants

    Total Ang-2 concentrations were determined in plasma samples using an appropriate assay method. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of the assay was 0.09 nanograms per millilitre (ng/mL). Plasma total Ang-2 concentrations below the limit of quantification were imputed as LLOQ divided by 2.

    Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 12, 13, 16, 24, and 36

  33. Mean Change From Baseline in Free Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) Plasma Concentrations Over Time, in All Participants

    Free Ang-2 concentrations were determined in plasma samples using an appropriate assay method. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of the assay was 0.9 nanograms per millilitre (ng/mL). Plasma free Ang-2 concentrations below the limit of quantification were imputed as LLOQ divided by 2.

    Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 12, 13, 16, 24, and 36

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted30 Jun 2015 (estimated)
  2. Study start11 Aug 2015
  3. Primary completion26 Sep 2017
  4. Study completion26 Sep 2017

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Investigator
Enrolment
273 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02484690
Sponsor's protocol ID
BP29647
Acronym
AVENUE
Status last verified
Oct 2020
First submitted
12 Jun 2015
Last updated
12 Nov 2020
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No

Publications

  • Kikuchi Y, Kawczynski MG, Anegondi N, Neubert A, Dai J, Ferrara D, Quezada-Ruiz C. Machine Learning to Predict Faricimab Treatment Outcome in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Ophthalmol Sci. 2023 Aug 18;4(2):100385. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2023.100385. eCollection 2024 Mar-Apr.

    PubMed 37868796
  • Yu S, Bachmeier I, Hernandez-Sanchez J, Garcia Armendariz B, Ebneter A, Pauleikhoff D, Chakravarthy U, Fauser S. Hyperreflective Material Boundary Remodeling in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Post Hoc Analysis of the AVENUE Trial. Ophthalmol Retina. 2023 Nov;7(11):990-998. doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2023.06.024. Epub 2023 Jul 6.

    PubMed 37422192
  • Maunz A, Benmansour F, Li Y, Albrecht T, Zhang YP, Arcadu F, Zheng Y, Madhusudhan S, Sahni J. Accuracy of a Machine-Learning Algorithm for Detecting and Classifying Choroidal Neovascularization on Spectral-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography. J Pers Med. 2021 Jun 8;11(6):524. doi: 10.3390/jpm11060524.

    PubMed 34201045
  • Sahni J, Dugel PU, Patel SS, Chittum ME, Berger B, Del Valle Rubido M, Sadikhov S, Szczesny P, Schwab D, Nogoceke E, Weikert R, Fauser S. Safety and Efficacy of Different Doses and Regimens of Faricimab vs Ranibizumab in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: The AVENUE Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2020 Sep 1;138(9):955-963. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2020.2685.

    PubMed 32729888

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing Faricimab and Ranibizumab in people with Choroidal Neovascularization, run by Hoffmann-La Roche at 52 sites in United States.

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 2 inclusion and 6 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 12 Nov 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 52 sites in United States. 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.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 9 Oct 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

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?

Mean Change From Baseline in BCVA Letter Score at Week 36, in Treatment-Naive Participants (time frame: Baseline, Week 36). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02484690, which also lists 4 linked publications.

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 12 Nov 2020.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in