Diabetic Macular EdemaPhase 3RHINENCT03622593
A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Participants With Diabetic Macular Edema
A Phase 3 study testing Aflibercept and Faricimab in people with Diabetic Macular Edema, run by Hoffmann-La Roche at 188 sites in 24 countries.
Trial summary
This study will evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of faricimab administered at 8-week intervals or as specified in the protocol following treatment initiation, compared with aflibercept once every 8 weeks (Q8W), in participants with diabetic macular edema (DME). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Diabetic Macular Edema
- What is being tested?
- Aflibercept and Faricimab
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 951 participants
- Where
- 188 sitesin 24 countries
- Study dates
- 9 Oct 2018to 31 May 2023
- Phase
- Phase 3
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Documented diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (Type 1 or Type 2)
- Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of less than or equal to (≤)10% within 2 months prior to Day 1
- Macular thickening secondary to diabetic macular edema (DME) involving the center of the fovea
- Decreased visual acuity attributable primarily to DME
- Ability and willingness to undertake all scheduled visits and assessments
- For women of childbearing potential: agreement to remain abstinent or use acceptable contraceptive methods that result in a failure rate of <1% per year during the treatment period and for at least 3 months after the final dose of study treatment
Who cannot join
- Currently untreated diabetes mellitus or previously untreated patients who initiated oral or injectable anti-diabetic medication within 3 months prior to Day 1
- Uncontrolled blood pressure, defined as a systolic value greater than (>)180 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) and/or a diastolic value >100 mmHg while a patient is at rest
- Currently pregnant or breastfeeding, or intend to become pregnant during the study
- Treatment with panretinal photocoagulation or macular laser within 3 months prior to Day 1 to the study eye
- Any intraocular or periocular corticosteroid treatment within 6 months prior to Day 1 to the study eye
- Prior administration of IVT faricimab in either eye
Show all 10Show fewer
- Active intraocular or periocular infection or active intraocular inflammation in the study eye
- Any current or history of ocular disease other than DME that may confound assessment of the macula or affect central vision in the study eye
- Any current ocular condition which, in the opinion of the investigator, is currently causing or could be expected to contribute to irreversible vision loss due to a cause other than DME in the study eye
- Other protocol-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria may apply
Trial locations and contacts
188 sites in 24 countries.
188 sites in 24 countries
United States50 sites
Southeast Retina Center
Augusta, Georgia, 30909
University of Colorado
Aurora, Colorado, 80045
Austin Retina Associates
Austin, Texas, 78705
California Retina Consultants
Bakersfield, California, 93309
Retina Specialists
Baltimore, Maryland, 21204
Retina Consultants of Texas
Bellaire, Texas, 77401
Retina-Vitreous Associates Medical Group
Beverly Hills, California, 90211
Envision Ocular, LLC
Bloomfield, New Jersey, 07003
Tufts Medical Center
Boston, Massachusetts, 02111
Univ of Virginia Ophthalmology
Charlottesville, Virginia, 22903
Southeastern Retina Associates Chattanooga
Chattanooga, Tennessee, 37421
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
Cleveland, Ohio, 44195
Retina Consultants of Southern
Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80909
The Retina Partners
Encino, California, 91436
Retina Group of Florida
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33308
National Ophthalmic Research Institute
Fort Myers, Florida, 33912
Retina Consultants of Orange County
Fullerton, California, 92835
Associated Retinal Consultants
Grand Rapids, Michigan, 49546
Vitreo-Retinal Associates
Grand Rapids, Michigan, 49546
Retina Consultants Of Carolina
Greenville, South Carolina, 29605
Long Is. Vitreoretinal Consult
Hauppauge, New York, 11788
Southeastern Retina Associates
Knoxville, Tennessee, 37922
Charleston Neuroscience Inst
Ladson, South Carolina, 29456
Retina Consultants of Nevada
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89144
Florida Eye Associates
Melbourne, Florida, 32901
Northern California Retina Vitreous Associates
Mountain View, California, 94040
Tennessee Retina PC
Nashville, Tennessee, 37203
New York University
New York, New York, 10017
University Retina and Macula Associates, PC
Oak Forest, Illinois, 60452
Ophthalmic Cons of Long Island
Oceanside, New York, 11572
Bascom Palmer Eye Institute
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, 33418
Mid Atlantic Retina - Wills Eye Hospital
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107
Associated Retina Consultants
Phoenix, Arizona, 85020
Retinal Research Institute, LLC
Phoenix, Arizona, 85053
Fort Lauderdale Eye Institute
Plantation, Florida, 33324
Retina Institute of Virginia
Richmond, Virginia, 23235
Retina Assoc of Western NY
Rochester, New York, 14620
University of Rochester Flaum Eye Institute
Rochester, New York, 14642
Retinal Consultants Med Group
Sacramento, California, 95825
California Retina Consultants
Santa Barbara, California, 93103
California Retina Consultants
Santa Maria, California, 93454
Pacific Northwest Retina
Silverdale, Washington, 98383
The Retina Consultants
Slingerlands, New York, 12159
Retina Center of Texas
Southlake, Texas, 76092
Northwest Arkansas Retina Associates
Springdale, Arkansas, 72764
Prairie Retina Center
Springfield, Illinois, 62704
Retina Vitreous Assoc of FL
St. Petersburg, Florida, 33711
Bay Area Retina Associates
Walnut Creek, California, 94598
Retina Group of New England
Waterford, Connecticut, 06385
Palmetto Retina Center
West Columbia, South Carolina, 29169
United Kingdom18 sites
Barnet Hospital
Barnet, EN5 3DJ
Bradford Royal Infirmary
Bradford, BD9 6RJ
University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol Eye Hospital
Bristol, BS1 2LX
Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL
Bristol, BT12 6BA
East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust
Canterbury, CT1 3NG
Frimley Park Hospital
Frimley, GU16 7UJ
Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Gloucester, GL1 3NN
James Paget University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Great Yarmouth, NR31 6LA
St James University Hospital
Leeds, LS9 7TF
Royal Liverpool University Hospital
Liverpool, L7 8XP
Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
London, EC1V 2PD
Royal Free Hospital
London, NW3 2QS
Kings College Hospital
London, SE5 9RS
Manchester Royal Eye Hospital
Manchester, M13 9WL
Royal Victoria Infirmary
Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 4LP
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Southampton, SO16 6YD
Sunderland Eye Infirmary
Sunderland, SR2 9HP
Hillingdon Hospital
Uxbridge, UB8 3NN
China15 sites
Beijing Friendship Hospital
Beijing, 100050
Beijing Tongren Hospital
Beijing, 100730
Peking Union Medical College Hospital
Beijing, 100730
The Second Hospital of Jilin University
Changchun, 130041
West China Hospital, Sichuan University
Chengdu, 610041
Southwest Hospital , Third Military Medical University
Chongqing, 400014
Army Medical Center of PLA(Daping Hospital)
Chongqing, 400042
Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University
Guangzhou, 510060
The Affiliated Eye Hospital of Nanjing Medical University
Nanjing, 210029
Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital
Shanghai, 200072
Shanghai First People's Hospital
Shanghai, 200080
Tianjin Eye Hospital
Tianjin, 300050
Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital
Tianjin, 300070
Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University
Wenzhou, 325027
Wuxi No.2 People's Hospital
Wuxi, 214000
Canada10 sites
Institut De L'Oeil Des Laurentides
Boisbriand, Quebec, J7H 1S6
Calgary Retina Consultants
Calgary, Alberta, T2J 0C8
QEII - HSC Department of Ophthalmology
Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 2Y9
Ivey Eye Institute
London, Ontario, N6A 4V2
Hôpital Maisonneuve - Rosemont
Montreal, Quebec, H1T 2M4
University of Ottawa Eye Institute
Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6
Toronto Retina Institute
Toronto, Ontario, M3C 0G9
Unity Health Toronto
Toronto, Ontario, M5C 2T2
University Health Network Toronto Western Hospital
Toronto, Ontario, M5T 2S8
University of British Columbia - Vancouver Coastal Health Authority
Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 1M9
Brazil9 sites
Hospital de Olhos de Aparecida - HOA
Aparecida de Goiânia, Goiás, 74980-010
Botelho Hospital da Visao
Blumenau, Santa Catarina, 89052-504
Centro Brasileiro de Cirurgia
Goiânia, Goiás, 74210-010
Hospital das Clinicas - UFRGS
Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, 90035-003
Faculdade de Medicina do ABC - FMABC
Santo André, São Paulo, 09060-650
Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo - UNIFESP*X
São Paulo, São Paulo, 04023-062
CEMAPE - Centro Médico
São Paulo, São Paulo, 04084-002
Hospital das Clinicas - FMUSP
São Paulo, São Paulo, 05403-000
Hosp de Olhos de Sorocaba
Sorocaba, São Paulo, 18031-060
Spain9 sites
Hospital dos de maig
Barcelona, 08025
Oftalvist Valencia
Burjassot, Valencia, 46100
Hospital Universitario de Bellvitge
L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, 08907
Clinica Baviera
Madrid, 28046
Instituto Oftalmologico Fernandez Vega
Oviedo, Principality of Asturias, 33012
Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra
Pamplona, Navarre, 31008
Hospital General de Catalunya
Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, 08195
Fisabio-Ofalmologia Medica
Valencia, 46015
Hospital Universitario Rio Hortega
Valladolid, 47012
Poland8 sites
OFTALMIKA Sp. z o.o
Bydgoszcz, 85-631
Specjalistyczny O?rodek Okulistyczny Oculomedica
Bydgoszcz, 85-870
Optimum Profesorskie Centrum Okulistyki
Gdansk, 80-809
Niepubliczny Zaklad Opieki Zdrowotnej PRYZMAT-OKULISTYKA
Gliwice, 44-100
SP ZOZ Szpital Uniwersytecki w Krakowie Oddzia? Kliniczny Okulistyki i Onkologii Okulistycznej
Krakow, 31-501
Osrodek Chirurgii Oka prof. Zagorskiego Rzeszow
Rzeszów, 35-017
Caminomed
Tarnowskie Góry, 42-600
Centrum Zdrowia MDM
Warsaw, 00-631
Australia7 sites
Centre For Eye Research Australia
East Melbourne, Victoria, 3002
The Lions Eye Institute
Nedlands, Western Australia, 6009
Retina Specialists Victoria
Rowville, Victoria, 3178
Strathfield Retina Clinic
Strathfield, New South Wales, 2135
Sydney Eye Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales, 2000
Sydney Retina Clinic and Day Surgery
Sydney, New South Wales, 2000
Sydney West Retina
Westmead, New South Wales, 2145
Germany7 sites
Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Klinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde
Dresden, 01307
Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Klinik für Augenheilkunde
Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106
Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes
Homburg/Saar, 66424
Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A.ö.R., Universitätsaugenklinik
Magdeburg, 39120
LMU Klinikum der Universität, Augenklinik
München, 80336
Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München
München, 81675
Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Augenklinik und Poliklinik
Würzburg, 97080
Argentina6 sites
Organizacion Medica de Investigacion
Buenos Aires, C1015ABO
Fundacion Zambrano
CABA, 1023
Oftalmos
Capital Federal, C1120AAN
Oftar
Mendoza, M5500GGK
Centro Oftalmólogos Especialistas
Rosario, S2000ANJ
Grupo Laser Vision
Rosario, S2000DLA
Czechia5 sites
FN Hradec Králové, O?ní klinika
Hradec Králové, 500 05
Faculty Hospital Ostrava
Ostrava, 708 52
Faculty Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady
Prague, 100 34
AXON Clinical
Prague
Nemocnice Sokolov
Sokolov, 356 01
Italy5 sites
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi
Florence, Tuscany, 50134
Ospedale Classificato Equiparato Sacro Cuore Don Calabria
Negrar, Veneto, 37024
Nuovo Ospedale S. Chiara - A.O.U.P Presidio Ospedaliero di Cisanello
Pisa, Tuscany, 56124
Fondazione Ptv Policlinico Tor Vergata Di Roma
Rome, Lazio, 00133
A.O. Universitaria S. Maria Della Misericordia Di Udine
Udine, Veneto, 33100
South Korea5 sites
Seoul National University Bundang Hospital
Gyeonggi-do, 13620
Kyung Hee University Hospital
Seoul, 02447
Seoul National University Hospital
Seoul, 03080
Samsung Medical Center
Seoul, 06351
Asan Medical Center.
Seoul, 138-736
Hungary4 sites
Magyar Honvedseg Egeszsegugyi Kozpont
Budapest, 1068
Peterfy Sandor utcai Korhaz-Rendelointezet es Baleseti Kozpont, Szemeszet KR
Budapest, 1076
Semmelweis Egyetem Szemészeti Vizsgálóhely
Budapest, 1085
Bajcsy-Zsilinszky Hospital
Budapest, 1106
Portugal4 sites
Hospital de Braga
Braga, 4710-243
AIBILI - Association for Innovation and Biomedical Research on Light
Coimbra, 3000-548
Espaco Medico Coimbra
Coimbra, 3030-163
Hospital de Santa Maria
Lisbon, 1649-035
Russia4 sites
Intersec Research and Technology Complex ?Eye Microsurgery? n.a. S.N. Fyodorov
Cheboksary, Mariy-El Republic, 428000
?Intersec. Research and Technology Complex ?Eye Microsurgery? n a Fyodorov Irkutsk branch
Irkutsk, 664033
Clinics of Eye Diseases, LLC
Kazan', Tatarstan Republic, 420066
?Intersec Research and Technology Complex Eye Microsurgery n a Fyodorov Novosibirsk Branch
Novosibirsk, 630096
Turkey (Türkiye)4 sites
Ankara University Medical Faculty; Department of Ophthalmology
Ankara, 06340
Ankara Baskent University Medical Faculty; Department of Ophthalmology
Ankara, 06490
Beyoglu Goz Training and Research Hospital; Department Of Ophthalmology
Istanbul, 34421
Kocaeli Üniversitesi T?p Fakültesi; Department of Ophthalmology
Kocaeli, 41380
Denmark3 sites
Aalborg Universitetshospital
Aalborg, 9000
Rigshospitalet Glostrup
Glostrup Municipality, 2600
Sjællands Universitetshospital, Roskilde
Roskilde, 4000
France3 sites
Chi De Creteil
Créteil, 94010
Centre Ophtalmologique
Paris, 75015
Centres Ophtalmologique St Exupéry
Saint-Cyr-sur-Loire, 37540
Singapore3 sites
National University Hospital
Singapore, 119074
Singapore Eye Research Institute
Singapore, 168751
Tan Tock Seng Hospital
Singapore, 308433
Taiwan3 sites
National Taiwan University Hospital
Taipei, 10002
Taipei Veterans General Hospital
Taipei, 11217
Chang Gung Medical Foundation - Linkou
Taoyuan, 333
Thailand3 sites
King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital
Bangkok, 10330
Rajavithi Hospital
Bangkok, 10400
Maharaj Nakorn ChiangMai Hospital
Chiang Mai, 50200
Hong Kong2 sites
The University of Hong Kong
Hong Kong
Hong Kong Eye Hospital
Mong Kok
About this study
Official title: A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Masked, Active Comparator-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema (RHINE)
This study will evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of faricimab administered at 8-week intervals or as specified in the protocol following treatment initiation, compared with aflibercept once every 8 weeks (Q8W), in participants with diabetic macular edema (DME).
- Conditions
- Diabetic Macular Edema
- Being tested
- Aflibercept, Faricimab, Sham Procedure
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
AfliberceptDrug
Also called Eylea
Aflibercept 2 mg was administered by intravitreal (IVT) injection into the study eye once every 8 weeks (Q8W).
FaricimabDrug
Also called VABYSMO™, RO6867461, RG7716
Faricimab 6 mg was administered by IVT injection into the study eye either once every 8 weeks (Q8W) in arm A or according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) in arm B.
Sham ProcedureProcedure or surgery
The sham is a procedure that mimics an IVT injection and involves the blunt end of an empty syringe (without a needle) being pressed against the anesthetized eye. It was administered to participants in all three treatments arms at applicable visits to maintain masking among treatment arms.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | Experimental | Participants randomized to Arm A received 6 milligrams (mg) faricimab intravitreal (IVT) injections once every 4 weeks (Q4W) to Week 20, followed by 6 mg faricimab IVT injections once every 8 weeks (Q8W) to Week 96, followed by the final study visit at Week 100. Receives: Drug: Faricimab; Procedure: Sham Procedure |
| B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | Experimental | Participants randomized to Arm B received 6 milligrams (mg) faricimab intravitreal (IVT) injections Q4W to at least Week 12, followed by a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing of 6 mg faricimab IVT injections up to once every 16 weeks (Q16W) through Week 96, followed by the final study visit at Week 100. Receives: Drug: Faricimab; Procedure: Sham Procedure |
| C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | Active comparator | Participants randomized to Arm C received 2 milligrams (mg) aflibercept intravitreal (IVT) injections Q4W to Week 16, followed by 2 mg aflibercept IVT injections Q8W to Week 96, followed by the final study visit at Week 100. Receives: Drug: Aflibercept; Procedure: Sham Procedure |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 97.5% CI is a rounding of 97.52% CI.
Measured: From Baseline through Week 56
Secondary outcomes (59)
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 97.5% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 97.52% CI.
Measured: Baseline and Week 52
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. 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. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment group, visit, visit-by-treatment group interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining Greater Than or Equal to (≥)15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT Population
BCVA was measured on the ETDRS chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, Treatment-Naive Population
BCVA was measured on the ETDRS chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15, ≥10, or ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants avoiding a loss of letters in BCVA from baseline were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants avoiding a loss of letters in BCVA from baseline were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants avoiding a loss of letters in BCVA from baseline were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15, ≥10, or ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants avoiding a loss of letters in BCVA from baseline were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants avoiding a loss of letters in BCVA from baseline were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants avoiding a loss of letters in BCVA from baseline were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline or Achieving BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/20 or Better (BCVA ≥84 Letters) in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
BCVA was measured on the ETDRS chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline or Achieving BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/20 or Better (BCVA ≥84 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline or Achieving BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/20 or Better (BCVA ≥84 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better (BCVA ≥69 Letters) in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
BCVA was measured on the ETDRS chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥69 vs. <69 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better (BCVA ≥69 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥69 vs. <69 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better (BCVA ≥69 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥69 vs. <69 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse (BCVA ≤38 Letters) in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
BCVA was measured on the ETDRS chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse (BCVA ≤38 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement invisual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse (BCVA ≤38 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. 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 weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥3-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥3-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥4-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥4-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants Without Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy (PDR) at Baseline Who Developed New PDR at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). PDR was defined as an ETDRS DRSS score of ≥61 on the 7-field/4-wide field color fundus photographs assessment by a central reading center. The weighted percentages of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline and Week 52
Percentage of Participants Without High-Risk Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy (PDR) at Baseline Who Developed High-Risk PDR at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced PDR. High-risk PDR was defined as an ETDRS DRSS score of ≥71 on the 7-field/4-wide field color fundus photographs assessment by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline and Week 52
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm on a Once Every 4-Weeks, 8-Weeks, 12-Weeks, or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval at Week 52, ITT Population
Measured: Week 52
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm on a Once Every 4-Weeks, 8-Weeks, 12-Weeks, or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval at Week 52, Treatment-Naive Population
Measured: Week 52
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm on a Once Every 4-Weeks, 8-Weeks, 12-Weeks, or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval at Week 96, ITT Population
Measured: Week 96
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm on a Once Every 4-Weeks, 8-Weeks, 12-Weeks, or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval at Week 96, Treatment-Naive Population
Measured: Week 96
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm at Week 52 Who Achieved a Once Every 12-Weeks or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval Without an Interval Decrease Below Once Every 12 Weeks, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Measured: From start of PTI (Week 12 or later) until Week 52
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm at Week 96 Who Achieved a Once Every 12-Weeks or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval Without an Interval Decrease Below Once Every 12 Weeks, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Measured: From start of PTI (Week 12 or later) until Week 96
Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment group, visit, visit-by-treatment group interaction, baseline CST (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment (U.S. and Canada vs. the rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: From Baseline through Week 56
Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment group, visit, visit-by-treatment group interaction, baseline CST (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment (U.S. and Canada vs. the rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment group, visit, visit-by-treatment group interaction, baseline CST (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), and region of enrollment (U.S. and Canada vs. the rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With Absence of Diabetic Macular Edema in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Absence of diabetic macular edema was defined as achieving a central subfield thickness (CST) of <325 microns in the study eye. CST was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane and Bruch's membrane. For each participant, an average CST value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants With Absence of Diabetic Macular Edema in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Absence of diabetic macular edema was defined as achieving a central subfield thickness of <325 microns in the study eye. Central subfield thickness was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With Retinal Dryness in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Retinal dryness was defined as achieving a central subfield thickness (ILM-BM) of <280 microns. Central subfield thickness was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants was based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Intraretinal fluid was measured using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm). The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world); Asia and rest of the world regions were combined due to a small number of enrolled participants. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 48, 52, 56, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With Absence of Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Subretinal fluid was measured using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm). The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world); Asia and rest of the world regions were combined due to a small number of enrolled participants. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 48, 52, 56, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid and Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid were measured using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm). The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. <64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world); Asia and rest of the world regions were combined due to a small number of enrolled participants. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 48, 52, 56, 92, 96, and 100
Change From Baseline in the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25) Composite Score Over Time, ITT Population
The NEI VFQ-25 captures a patient's perception of vision-related functioning and quality of life. The core measure includes 25 items that comprise 11 vision-related subscales and one item on general health. The composite score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores, or a positive change from baseline, indicating better vision-related functioning. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline NEI VFQ-25 Composite Score (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.04% CI.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 24, 52, and 100
Percentage of Participants With at Least One Adverse Event
This analysis of adverse events (AEs) includes both ocular and non-ocular (systemic) AEs. Investigators sought information on AEs at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. AEs of special interest included the following: Cases of potential drug-induced liver injury that include an elevated ALT or AST in combination with either an elevated bilirubin or clinical jaundice, as defined by Hy's Law; Suspected transmission of an infectious agent by the study drug; Sight-threatening AEs that cause a drop in visual acuity (VA) score ≥30 letters lasting more than 1 hour, require surgical or medical intervention to prevent permanent loss of sight, or are associated with severe intraocular inflammation.
Measured: From first dose of study drug through end of study (up to 2 years)
Percentage of Participants With at Least One Ocular Adverse Event in the Study Eye or the Fellow Eye
This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes ocular AEs, which are categorized as having occurred either in the study eye or the fellow eye. Investigators sought information on AEs at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. Ocular AEs of special interest included the following: Suspected transmission of an infectious agent by the study drug; Sight-threatening AEs that cause a drop in visual acuity (VA) score ≥30 letters lasting more than 1 hour, require surgical or medical intervention to prevent permanent loss of sight, or are associated with severe intraocular inflammation (IOI).
Measured: From first dose of study drug through end of study (up to 2 years)
Percentage of Participants With at Least One Non-Ocular Adverse Event
This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes non-ocular (systemic) AEs. Investigators sought information on adverse events (AEs) at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. The non-ocular AE of special interest was: Cases of potential drug-induced liver injury that include an elevated ALT or AST in combination with either an elevated bilirubin or clinical jaundice, as defined by Hy's Law.
Measured: From first dose of study drug through end of study (up to 2 years)
Plasma Concentration of Faricimab Over Time
Faricimab concentration in plasma was determined using a validated immunoassay method.
Measured: Pre-dose on Day 1 (Baseline); Weeks 4, 28, 52, 76, and 100
Percentage of Participants Who Test Positive for Treatment-Emergent Anti-Drug Antibodies Against Faricimab During the Study
Anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against fariciamb were detected in plasma using a validated bridging enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The percentage of participants with treatment-emergent ADA-positive samples includes post-baseline evaluable participants with at least one treatment-induced (defined as having an ADA-negative sample or missing sample at baseline and any positive post-baseline sample) or treatment-boosted (defined as having an ADA-positive sample at baseline and any positive post-baseline sample with a titer that is equal to or greater than 4-fold baseline titer) ADA-positive sample during the study treatment period.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 4, 28, 52, 76, and 100
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Aug 2018
- Study start9 Oct 2018
- Primary completion19 Oct 2020
- Study completion31 May 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (13)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Diabetic Macular EdemaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Hoffmann-La RocheThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 951 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hoffmann-La Roche
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Clinical Trials, Study director, Hoffmann-La Roche
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03622593
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- GR40398
- Other IDs
- 2017-005105-12, 2017
- Acronym
- RHINE
- Status last verified
- Jul 2025
- First submitted
- 1 Aug 2018
- Last updated
- 11 Jul 2025
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- FDA-regulated drug
- Yes
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: For eligible studies, qualified researchers may request access to individual patient level clinical data. See Roche's commitment to transparency of clinical study information here: https://go.roche.com/data\_sharing
Publications
Wong TY, Haskova Z, Asik K, Baumal CR, Csaky KG, Eter N, Ives JA, Jaffe GJ, Korobelnik JF, Lin H, Murata T, Ruamviboonsuk P, Schlottmann PG, Seres AI, Silverman D, Sun X, Tang Y, Wells JA, Yoon YH, Wykoff CC; YOSEMITE and RHINE Investigators. Faricimab Treat-and-Extend for Diabetic Macular Edema: Two-Year Results from the Randomized Phase 3 YOSEMITE and RHINE Trials. Ophthalmology. 2024 Jun;131(6):708-723. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.12.026. Epub 2023 Dec 28.
PubMed 38158159Wang Y, Hibar DP, Sadda S, Lim JI, Chan CK, Tan GS, Talcott KE, Gibson K, Maunz A, Lu H, Albrecht T, Amador M, Litts KM. Early Intraretinal Fluid Reduction is Linked to Vision Gains in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema. Ophthalmol Ther. 2026 Sep 22. doi: 10.1007/s40123-026-01504-z. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 42771326Li X, Liu X, Jiang Q, Wu Z, Han M, Chen Q, Idowu OO, Liu R, Liu W, Willis JR, Sun X. Efficacy, Durability, and Safety of Faricimab for Diabetic Macular Edema: 1-Year Results from the China RHINE Subpopulation. Ophthalmol Ther. 2026 May;15(5):1761-1772. doi: 10.1007/s40123-026-01378-1. Epub 2026 Apr 10.
PubMed 41961203Sheth VS, Schlottmann P, Lai TYY, Abreu F, Chang A, Eter N, Gibson K, Hu AY, Korobelnik JF, Kotak A, Kotecha A, O'Leary OE, Pearce I, Sim DA, Sun JK, Tang Y, Khanani AM. Four-Year Outcomes of Faricimab in Diabetic Macular Edema: Results from the RHONE-X Extension Trial. Ophthalmology. 2026 May;133(5):599-612. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2026.01.001. Epub 2026 Jan 12.
PubMed 41534798Jaffe GJ, Deak G, Gibson K, Khurana RN, Nudleman E, Ogura Y, Schmidt-Erfurth U, Wang T, Westenskow PD, Wong D, Yiu G, Willis JR. IMPACT OF FARICIMAB VERSUS AFLIBERCEPT ON EPIRETINAL MEMBRANE FORMATION OVER 2 YEARS IN PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA IN THE PHASE 3 YOSEMITE AND RHINE TRIALS. Retina. 2025 Nov 1;45(11):2003-2011. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000004572.
PubMed 40668667Chakravarthy U, Chaudhary V, Sadda SR, Tan CS, Vujosevic S, Fauser S, Gibson K, Glittenberg C, Holekamp N, Lanza B, Maunz A, Willis JR, Singh RP. Effect of Faricimab versus Aflibercept on Hyperreflective Foci in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema from the YOSEMITE/RHINE Trials. Ophthalmol Sci. 2025 Apr 19;5(5):100798. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2025.100798. eCollection 2025 Sep-Oct.
PubMed 40496217Goldberg RA, Mar FA, Csaky K, Amador M, Khanani AM, Gibson K, Kolomeyer AM, Sim DA, Murata T, Wang T, Udaondo P, Souverain A, Shildkrot YE, Vujosevic S, Nudleman E, Sivaprasad S. Resolution of Angiographic Macular Leakage with Faricimab versus Aflibercept in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema in YOSEMITE/RHINE. Ophthalmol Retina. 2025 Jun;9(6):515-526. doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2024.11.015. Epub 2024 Nov 22.
PubMed 39580145Zarbin M, Tabano D, Ahmed A, Amador M, Ding A, Holekamp N, Lu XY, Stoilov I, Yang M. Efficacy of Faricimab versus Aflibercept in Diabetic Macular Edema in the 20/50 or Worse Vision Subgroup in Phase III YOSEMITE and RHINE Trials. Ophthalmology. 2024 Nov;131(11):1258-1270. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.05.025. Epub 2024 Jun 8.
PubMed 38852921von Schulthess EL, Maunz A, Chakravarthy U, Holekamp N, Pauleikhoff D, Patel K, Bachmeier I, Yu S, Cohen Y, Scherb MP, Jones IL, Gibson K, Willis JR, Glittenberg C, Singh RP, Fauser S. Intraretinal Hyper-Reflective Foci Are Almost Universally Present and Co-Localize With Intraretinal Fluid in Diabetic Macular Edema. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2024 May 1;65(5):26. doi: 10.1167/iovs.65.5.26.
PubMed 38758639Stockwell AD, Chang MC, Mahajan A, Forrest W, Anegondi N, Pendergrass RK, Selvaraj S, Reeder J, Wei E, Iglesias VA, Creps NM, Macri L, Neeranjan AN, van der Brug MP, Scales SJ, McCarthy MI, Yaspan BL. Multi-ancestry GWAS analysis identifies two novel loci associated with diabetic eye disease and highlights APOL1 as a high risk locus in patients with diabetic macular edema. PLoS Genet. 2023 Aug 16;19(8):e1010609. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1010609. eCollection 2023 Aug.
PubMed 37585454Shimura M, Kitano S, Ogata N, Mitamura Y, Oh H, Ochi H, Ohsawa S, Hirakata A; YOSEMITE and RHINE Investigators. Efficacy, durability, and safety of faricimab with extended dosing up to every 16 weeks in Japanese patients with diabetic macular edema: 1-year results from the Japan subgroup of the phase 3 YOSEMITE trial. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2023 May;67(3):264-279. doi: 10.1007/s10384-023-00979-8. Epub 2023 Mar 10.
PubMed 36897413Eter N, Singh RP, Abreu F, Asik K, Basu K, Baumal C, Chang A, Csaky KG, Haskova Z, Lin H, Ruiz CQ, Ruamviboonsuk P, Silverman D, Wykoff CC, Willis JR. YOSEMITE and RHINE: Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials of Faricimab for Diabetic Macular Edema: Study Design and Rationale. Ophthalmol Sci. 2021 Dec 30;2(1):100111. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2021.100111. eCollection 2022 Mar.
PubMed 36246184Wykoff CC, Abreu F, Adamis AP, Basu K, Eichenbaum DA, Haskova Z, Lin H, Loewenstein A, Mohan S, Pearce IA, Sakamoto T, Schlottmann PG, Silverman D, Sun JK, Wells JA, Willis JR, Tadayoni R; YOSEMITE and RHINE Investigators. Efficacy, durability, and safety of intravitreal faricimab with extended dosing up to every 16 weeks in patients with diabetic macular oedema (YOSEMITE and RHINE): two randomised, double-masked, phase 3 trials. Lancet. 2022 Feb 19;399(10326):741-755. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00018-6. Epub 2022 Jan 24.
PubMed 35085503
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Jul 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Masked, Active Comparator-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema (RHINE)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03622593
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RHINE / GR40398
- Conditions
- Diabetic Macular Edema
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 951 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hoffmann-La RocheIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- 9 Oct 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 19 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 May 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 Aug 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 22 Mar 2022
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of faricimab administered at 8-week intervals or as specified in the protocol following treatment initiation, compared with aflibercept once every 8 weeks (Q8W), in participants with diabetic macular edema (DME).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | Experimental | Drug: Faricimab, Procedure: Sham ProcedureParticipants randomized to Arm A received 6 milligrams (mg) faricimab intravitreal (IVT) injections once every 4 weeks (Q4W) to Week 20, followed by 6 mg faricimab IVT injections once every 8 weeks (Q8W) to Week 96, followed by the final study visit at Week 100. |
| B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | Experimental | Drug: Faricimab, Procedure: Sham ProcedureParticipants randomized to Arm B received 6 milligrams (mg) faricimab intravitreal (IVT) injections Q4W to at least Week 12, followed by a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing of 6 mg faricimab IVT injections up to once every 16 weeks (Q16W) through Week 96, followed by the final study visit at Week 100. |
| C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | Active comparator | Drug: Aflibercept, Procedure: Sham ProcedureParticipants randomized to Arm C received 2 milligrams (mg) aflibercept intravitreal (IVT) injections Q4W to Week 16, followed by 2 mg aflibercept IVT injections Q8W to Week 96, followed by the final study visit at Week 100. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Documented diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (Type 1 or Type 2)
- Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of less than or equal to (≤)10% within 2 months prior to Day 1
- Macular thickening secondary to diabetic macular edema (DME) involving the center of the fovea
- Decreased visual acuity attributable primarily to DME
- Ability and willingness to undertake all scheduled visits and assessments
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Currently untreated diabetes mellitus or previously untreated patients who initiated oral or injectable anti-diabetic medication within 3 months prior to Day 1
- Uncontrolled blood pressure, defined as a systolic value greater than (>)180 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) and/or a diastolic value >100 mmHg while a patient is at rest
- Currently pregnant or breastfeeding, or intend to become pregnant during the study
- Treatment with panretinal photocoagulation or macular laser within 3 months prior to Day 1 to the study eye
- Any intraocular or periocular corticosteroid treatment within 6 months prior to Day 1 to the study eye
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| AfliberceptAlso: EyleaAflibercept 2 mg was administered by intravitreal (IVT) injection into the study eye once every 8 weeks (Q8W). | Drug | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W |
| FaricimabAlso: VABYSMO™, RO6867461, RG7716Faricimab 6 mg was administered by IVT injection into the study eye either once every 8 weeks (Q8W) in arm A or according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) in arm B. | Drug | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W, B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI |
| Sham ProcedureThe sham is a procedure that mimics an IVT injection and involves the blunt end of an empty syringe (without a needle) being pressed against the anesthetized eye. It was administered to participants in all three treatments arms at applicable visits to maintain masking among treatment arms. | Procedure or surgery | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W, B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI, C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W |
Primary outcome
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Time frame: From Baseline through Week 56
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), baseline BCVA (<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 97.5% CI is a rounding of 97.52% CI.
59 secondary outcomes
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Time frame: Baseline and Week 52
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining Greater Than or Equal to (≥)15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15, ≥10, or ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15, ≥10, or ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline or Achieving BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/20 or Better (BCVA ≥84 Letters) in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Time frame: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline or Achieving BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/20 or Better (BCVA ≥84 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline or Achieving BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/20 or Better (BCVA ≥84 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better (BCVA ≥69 Letters) in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Time frame: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better (BCVA ≥69 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/40 or Better (BCVA ≥69 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse (BCVA ≤38 Letters) in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Time frame: Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse (BCVA ≤38 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With BCVA Snellen Equivalent of 20/200 or Worse (BCVA ≤38 Letters) in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥3-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥3-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥4-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants With a ≥4-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 52, and 96
Percentage of Participants Without Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy (PDR) at Baseline Who Developed New PDR at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Time frame: Baseline and Week 52
Percentage of Participants Without High-Risk Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy (PDR) at Baseline Who Developed High-Risk PDR at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Time frame: Baseline and Week 52
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm on a Once Every 4-Weeks, 8-Weeks, 12-Weeks, or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval at Week 52, ITT Population
Time frame: Week 52
Percentage of Participants in the Faricimab 6 mg PTI Arm on a Once Every 4-Weeks, 8-Weeks, 12-Weeks, or 16-Weeks Treatment Interval at Week 52, Treatment-Naive Population
Time frame: Week 52
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Jul 2025.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Results publication: PubMed 38158159Wong TY, Haskova Z, Asik K, Baumal CR, Csaky KG, Eter N, Ives JA, Jaffe GJ, Korobelnik JF, Lin H, Murata T, Ruamviboonsuk P, Schlottmann PG, Seres AI, Silverman D, Sun X, Tang Y, Wells JA, Yoon YH, Wykoff CC; YOSEMITE and RHINE Investigators. Faricimab Treat-and-Extend for Diabetic Macular Edema: Two-Year Results from the Randomized Phase 3 YOSEMITE and RHINE Trials. Ophthalmology. 2024 Jun;131(6):708-723. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.12.026. Epub 2023 Dec 28.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42771326Wang Y, Hibar DP, Sadda S, Lim JI, Chan CK, Tan GS, Talcott KE, Gibson K, Maunz A, Lu H, Albrecht T, Amador M, Litts KM. Early Intraretinal Fluid Reduction is Linked to Vision Gains in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema. Ophthalmol Ther. 2026 Sep 22. doi: 10.1007/s40123-026-01504-z. Online ahead of print.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41961203Li X, Liu X, Jiang Q, Wu Z, Han M, Chen Q, Idowu OO, Liu R, Liu W, Willis JR, Sun X. Efficacy, Durability, and Safety of Faricimab for Diabetic Macular Edema: 1-Year Results from the China RHINE Subpopulation. Ophthalmol Ther. 2026 May;15(5):1761-1772. doi: 10.1007/s40123-026-01378-1. Epub 2026 Apr 10.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41534798Sheth VS, Schlottmann P, Lai TYY, Abreu F, Chang A, Eter N, Gibson K, Hu AY, Korobelnik JF, Kotak A, Kotecha A, O'Leary OE, Pearce I, Sim DA, Sun JK, Tang Y, Khanani AM. Four-Year Outcomes of Faricimab in Diabetic Macular Edema: Results from the RHONE-X Extension Trial. Ophthalmology. 2026 May;133(5):599-612. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2026.01.001. Epub 2026 Jan 12.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40668667Jaffe GJ, Deak G, Gibson K, Khurana RN, Nudleman E, Ogura Y, Schmidt-Erfurth U, Wang T, Westenskow PD, Wong D, Yiu G, Willis JR. IMPACT OF FARICIMAB VERSUS AFLIBERCEPT ON EPIRETINAL MEMBRANE FORMATION OVER 2 YEARS IN PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA IN THE PHASE 3 YOSEMITE AND RHINE TRIALS. Retina. 2025 Nov 1;45(11):2003-2011. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000004572.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40496217Chakravarthy U, Chaudhary V, Sadda SR, Tan CS, Vujosevic S, Fauser S, Gibson K, Glittenberg C, Holekamp N, Lanza B, Maunz A, Willis JR, Singh RP. Effect of Faricimab versus Aflibercept on Hyperreflective Foci in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema from the YOSEMITE/RHINE Trials. Ophthalmol Sci. 2025 Apr 19;5(5):100798. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2025.100798. eCollection 2025 Sep-Oct.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39580145Goldberg RA, Mar FA, Csaky K, Amador M, Khanani AM, Gibson K, Kolomeyer AM, Sim DA, Murata T, Wang T, Udaondo P, Souverain A, Shildkrot YE, Vujosevic S, Nudleman E, Sivaprasad S. Resolution of Angiographic Macular Leakage with Faricimab versus Aflibercept in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema in YOSEMITE/RHINE. Ophthalmol Retina. 2025 Jun;9(6):515-526. doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2024.11.015. Epub 2024 Nov 22.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38852921Zarbin M, Tabano D, Ahmed A, Amador M, Ding A, Holekamp N, Lu XY, Stoilov I, Yang M. Efficacy of Faricimab versus Aflibercept in Diabetic Macular Edema in the 20/50 or Worse Vision Subgroup in Phase III YOSEMITE and RHINE Trials. Ophthalmology. 2024 Nov;131(11):1258-1270. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.05.025. Epub 2024 Jun 8.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38758639von Schulthess EL, Maunz A, Chakravarthy U, Holekamp N, Pauleikhoff D, Patel K, Bachmeier I, Yu S, Cohen Y, Scherb MP, Jones IL, Gibson K, Willis JR, Glittenberg C, Singh RP, Fauser S. Intraretinal Hyper-Reflective Foci Are Almost Universally Present and Co-Localize With Intraretinal Fluid in Diabetic Macular Edema. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2024 May 1;65(5):26. doi: 10.1167/iovs.65.5.26.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37585454Stockwell AD, Chang MC, Mahajan A, Forrest W, Anegondi N, Pendergrass RK, Selvaraj S, Reeder J, Wei E, Iglesias VA, Creps NM, Macri L, Neeranjan AN, van der Brug MP, Scales SJ, McCarthy MI, Yaspan BL. Multi-ancestry GWAS analysis identifies two novel loci associated with diabetic eye disease and highlights APOL1 as a high risk locus in patients with diabetic macular edema. PLoS Genet. 2023 Aug 16;19(8):e1010609. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1010609. eCollection 2023 Aug.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36897413Shimura M, Kitano S, Ogata N, Mitamura Y, Oh H, Ochi H, Ohsawa S, Hirakata A; YOSEMITE and RHINE Investigators. Efficacy, durability, and safety of faricimab with extended dosing up to every 16 weeks in Japanese patients with diabetic macular edema: 1-year results from the Japan subgroup of the phase 3 YOSEMITE trial. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2023 May;67(3):264-279. doi: 10.1007/s10384-023-00979-8. Epub 2023 Mar 10.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36246184Eter N, Singh RP, Abreu F, Asik K, Basu K, Baumal C, Chang A, Csaky KG, Haskova Z, Lin H, Ruiz CQ, Ruamviboonsuk P, Silverman D, Wykoff CC, Willis JR. YOSEMITE and RHINE: Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials of Faricimab for Diabetic Macular Edema: Study Design and Rationale. Ophthalmol Sci. 2021 Dec 30;2(1):100111. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2021.100111. eCollection 2022 Mar.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. For eligible studies, qualified researchers may request access to individual patient level clinical data. See Roche's commitment to transparency of clinical study information here: https://go.roche.com/data_sharing
Related trials for Diabetic Macular Edema
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Real World Evidence in China: Faricimab Use in Diabetic Macular Edema, Retinal Vein Occlusion, and Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration (The Farseeing Study)
Diabetic Macular Edema, Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Long-Term Follow-Up Study of RGX-314 Administered in the Suprachoroidal Space for Participants With and Without Diabetic Retinopathy
Diabetic Retinopathy, DR
RecruitingPhase 3
A Phase 3 Trial for Intravitreal Injection of 4D-150 in Adults With Diabetic Macular Edema (DME).
Diabetic Macular Edema (DME)
RecruitingPhase 2
Oral N-Acetylcysteine on Diabetic Macular Edema
Diabetic Macular Edema (DME)
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
COMO: A Phase 3 Randomized, Double-Masked Study Comparing the Efficacy of EYP-1901 Against Aflibercept in DME
Diabetic Macular Edema, DME
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Clinical Trials study director
Hoffmann-La Roche
188 sites in 24 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Aflibercept and Faricimab in people with Diabetic Macular Edema, run by Hoffmann-La Roche at 188 sites in 24 countries.
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 6 inclusion and 10 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 11 Jul 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 188 sites in United States, United Kingdom, China, Canada, Brazil and 19 more countries. 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 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
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 22 Mar 2022). 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?
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations (time frame: From Baseline through Week 56). 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 NCT03622593, which also lists 13 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 11 Jul 2025.