May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Clinical Trials in Age–related Macular Degeneration (AMD) Are Not Comparable Based on Entry Visual Acuity and Lesion–size Measurement Techniques
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • K. Hunter
    Ophthalmology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA
  • E.L. Thomas
    Retina–Vitreous Associates, Los Angeles, CA
  • N.J. Rudometkin
    Ophthalmology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  K. Hunter, None; E.L. Thomas, Miravant Pharmaceuticals, Inc. C; N.J. Rudometkin, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 2427. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      K. Hunter, E.L. Thomas, N.J. Rudometkin; Clinical Trials in Age–related Macular Degeneration (AMD) Are Not Comparable Based on Entry Visual Acuity and Lesion–size Measurement Techniques . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):2427.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract
 
Abstract:
 

To compare entry criteria for vision and lesion–size measurement techniques for published and in–progress AMD clinical trials and to demonstrate lack of comparability among these trials.

 

Protocol descriptions of entry criteria for vision and lesion–size measurement techniques for trials using verteporfin, SnET2, anacortaave, ranibizumab, pegatanib, apharesis and squalamine clinical trials in AMD are presented.

 

Of the 14 major AMD clinical trials reviewed, entry criteria for vision assessment differed in 8 (See Table for variable ranges of entry criteria visual acuities). Lesion–size measurement techniques differ in these studies depending on four differing measurement techniques for optic disc diameter (DD). DD defined lesion size in disc–areas based on either an assumed disc–diameter (1.5 mm, 1.8 mm or 1.93 mm) or by measuring each individual DD. Depending which of the assumed disc–diameters used by different reading centers, a lesion–size discrepancy of up to 69% smaller to up to 66 % larger can be found. These variables create a significant source of discrepancy when attempting to compare results of clinical trials in AMD.

 

Variability in vision entry criteria and lesion–size measurement techniques for AMD clinical trials create difficulty in comparison of results of these studies.

 

 

 
Keywords: age-related macular degeneration • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: systems/equipment/techniques • clinical research methodology 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×