Macular EpiRetinal Brachytherapy Versus Lucentis® Only Treatment (MERLOT)
Information source: King's College Hospital NHS Trust
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on August 23, 2015 Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.
Condition(s) targeted: Macular Degeneration
Intervention: Epimacular Brachytherapy (Device); Ranibizumab (Drug)
Phase: Phase 4
Status: Active, not recruiting
Sponsored by: King's College Hospital NHS Trust Official(s) and/or principal investigator(s): Timothy L Jackson, PhD FRCOphth, Principal Investigator, Affiliation: King's College Hospital NHS Trust
Summary
Wet age-related macular degeneration is the most common cause of blind registration in the
UK. Standard treatment involves regular eye injections of a drug called ranibizumab
(Lucentis). For most patients, ranibizumab maintains their vision but the effect of the drug
is temporary, and they therefore require monthly hospital visits and typically six
injections into the eye every year, probably for life.
This study tests a new surgical device that delivers a focal dose of radiation (epimacular
brachytherapy) to the macula (the part inside the back of the eye that gives fine central
vision), to try and reduce or eliminate the need for ongoing, regular eye injections. The
trial compares epimacular brachytherapy to ongoing standard treatment with ranibizumab.
Whereas most studies of this new surgical device target patients who have not yet commenced
any treatment, this study targets those who are requiring frequent eye injections, as there
are limited surgical resources and these resources are best directed to those who have not
fully responded to ranibizumab therapy, or whose response is shortlived. These patients
have the most to gain from a device that may reduce their burden of treatment. The findings
in untreated disease cannot be extrapolated to this discrete subset of patients, hence the
need for a study that targets refractory disease.
It is hypothesised that epimacular brachytherapy will reduce the frequency of Lucentis®
(ranibizumab) re-treatment that patients require, whilst maintaining visual acuity.
Clinical Details
Official title: A Randomised Controlled Trial of Epimacular Brachytherapy Versus Ranibizumab Monotherapy for the Treatment of Subfoveal Choroidal Neovascularisation Associated With Wet Age-related Macular Degeneration in Patients Who Have Commenced Anti-VEGF Therapy
Study design: Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment, Masking: Single Blind (Outcomes Assessor), Primary Purpose: Treatment
Primary outcome: Mean change in ETDRS best-corrected visual acuityMean number of re-treatment injections of Lucentis® per patient, per year.
Secondary outcome: Percentage of subjects losing < 15 ETDRS lettersPercentage of subjects gaining ≥ 0 ETDRS letters Percentage of subjects gaining ≥ 15 ETDRS letters Change in total lesion size by fluorescein angiography Change in total CNV size by fluorescein angiography Foveal thickness measured using OCT.
Detailed description:
The eye is designed like a camera, with a lens at the front and a film at the back. Using
this analogy, the retina is the film in the camera. In the center of the retina is the
macula, the region that absorbs focused light from the lens and creates an image of the
outside world that is then transmitted to the brain.
The commonest cause of irreversible blindness in developed nations is age related macular
degeneration (AMD). There are two types, 'dry' and 'wet' AMD. Wet AMD is also called
neovascular AMD: It is the most damaging type and can blind people in a matter of weeks.
Neovascular AMD is due to the growth of blood vessels under the retina, similar to a wound
healing process. The blood vessels grow in two patterns, classic (15%) and occult (85%);
these can be visualized with fluorescein angiography, a commonly used technique that
photographs the macula after a fluorescent dye is injected into the arm. In most research on
AMD, vision is assessed using the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS)
vision chart, with results quantified in numbers of letters read correctly, from 0 (very
poor vision) to 100 (very good vision).
A new treatment has recently been licensed in the UK called ranibizumab (trade name,
Lucentis). This is an antibody that reduces the effect of vascular endothelial growth factor
(VEGF), a chemical that mediates new blood vessel growth. This drug is injected into the eye
at regular intervals (up to 12 a year, and typically 6 a year). Patients receiving 12
ranibizumab injections per year have a greater than 90% chance of maintaining their vision
over 12 months (1-2). Another drug called bevacizumab (Avastin) has been used off label
(without a licence) in the UK, USA and other countries, and this also targets VEGF. In
non−randomized trials it showed similar results to ranibizumab, and is currently being
assessed in head−to−head trials with ranibizumab in the UK and the USA.
One of the drawbacks of ranibizumab therapy is that patients require regular injections into
the eye. In the UK, NICE recommends patient with newly diagnosed wet AMD receive three
consecutive monthly injections of ranibizumab, followed by 'as required' therapy based on
disease activity. They estimate that patients receive eight injections in the first year,
six in the second, and ongoing treatment thereafter. Patients require monthly hospital
visits for life and each injection caries a small but cumulative risk of complications such
as bleeding inside the eye, infection, detachment of the retina, raised eye pressure, and
systemic effects such as stroke. A treatment that produced a more durable reduction in
disease activity might reduce these risks, be more cost effective for the health service,
and reduce the considerable burden of treatment for patients and their carers, with the
prospect of fewer hospital visits. It would also give patients an alternative choice, should
they not wish to undergo such regular eye injections.
Radiation has the potential to produce a more durable therapeutic effect, by targeting the
proliferating cells that cause visual damage in wet AMD. It is well known that radiation can
modify the wound healing process, which is a biological process similar to neovascular AMD.
Previous studies with external beam radiation have shown an effect on the progression of
macular degeneration. However vision was not improved - possibly due to the type of
radiation used, the accuracy of delivery, and collateral damage to neighbouring structures.
Epimacular brachytherapy delivers local, controlled radiation 1−3 mm into the macula, during
an operation called a vitrectomy. The proposed device will be CE marked (approved for
clinical use) and is manufactured by NeoVista, who have completed preliminary trials to
assess the safety and feasibility of treating naive (newly diagnosed) neovascular AMD with a
single application of brachytherapy. Initial data showed that epiretinal treatment
stabilised vision for most patients with neovascular AMD. Phase II trials using the device
with two concomitant doses of bevacizumab showed promising results with 91% of patients
maintaining vision (losing fewer than 15 ETDRS letters), with an average improvement of 8. 9
ETDRS letters (3). The percentage of patients whose visual acuity improved by more than 3
lines (15 letters on the ETDRS scale) was 38%. These results are similar to the large
studies of monthly ranibizumab. A mean gain of 8. 9 letters is more than twice the visual
gain reported in large studies (HORIZON) of 'as required' dosing, as occurs in the UK.
A large, international, randomized, multicentre study of the device, used with two
concomitant injections of ranibizumab, is now underway (the CABERNET study). Recruitment is
occuring in the hospital of the applicant, and two other UK sites, with more sites to
follow. The CABERNET study uses the device in treatment naive disease and was favourably
reviewed by the Southwest Research Ethics Committee (07/H0206/50).
Whilst the CABERNET study will provide high quality data in treatment naive disease, it is
not possible to rely on this study in relation to previously treated disease. Prior therapy
with ranibizumab modifies the disease process, and those that respond poorly to injections
differ from the majority, suggesting differences in the underlying disease process. It is
therefore necessary to study the subset of patients with refractory disease, if valid
clinical conclusions are to be reached. Furthermore, because there is limited vitreoretinal
surgical capacity it is logical to offer surgical intervention to patients who have not
responded fully to ranibizumab, rather than aim to treat all patients presenting with
wet-AMD. To this end, an uncontrolled study (MERITAGE) using the device in refractory,
previously treated disease has commenced, having received a favourable opinion from the
Southwest Research Ethics Committee (07/H0206/55). The present randomised controlled trial
(MERLOT) follows on from the Phase II MERITAGE study. It targets previously treated disease,
and patients that are receiving regular ranibizumab, to determine if the device benefits
this large subset of patients.
Eligibility
Minimum age: 50 Years.
Maximum age: N/A.
Gender(s): Both.
Criteria:
Inclusion Criteria:
1. Subjects with subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation associated with wet age-related
macular degeneration. Retinal Angiomatous Proliferation (RAP) lesions not directly
involving the fovea must be associated with contiguous foveal leakage demonstrated on
fundus examination, OCT, or fluorescein angiography;
2. Subjects must have received anti-VEGF induction treatment, defined as the first three
months of anti-VEGF therapy. Following this induction period, subjects must have
received at least 4 additional injections of Lucentis® in no more than 12 months
preceding enrolment, or 2 additional injections of Lucentis® in no more than 6 months
preceding enrolment, given on an as needed basis;
3. At the time subjects commenced anti-VEGF therapy for wet age-related macular
degeneration they were aged 50 years or older and met the NICE treatment criteria
for Lucentis® therapy, as outlined in the Final Appraisal Determination (FAD). This
states that all of the following circumstances must apply in the eye to be treated:
- the best-corrected visual acuity is between 6/12 and 6/96 (24 to 69 ETDRS
letters)
- there is no permanent structural damage to the central fovea
- the lesion size is less than or equal to 12 disc areas in greatest linear
dimension
- there is evidence of recent presumed disease progression (blood vessel growth,
as indicated by fluorescein angiography, or recent visual acuity changes)
Exclusion Criteria:
1. Patients who have not been treated in accordance with NICE guidance;
2. Visual acuity worse than 6/96 at the time of study enrolment;
3. Subjects with prior or concurrent subfoveal CNV therapy with agents, surgery or
devices (other than Macugen®, Avastin®, or Lucentis®) including thermal laser
photocoagulation (with or without photographic evidence), photodynamic therapy,
intravitreal or subretinal steroids, and transpupillary thermotherapy (TTT);
4. Subfoveal scarring;
5. Subjects with active concomitant disease in the study eye, including uveitis,
presence of pigment epithelial tears or rips, acute ocular or periocular infection;
6. Subjects who have been previously diagnosed with Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
Subjects who do not have a documented diagnosis, but have retinal findings consistent
with Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus;
7. Subjects with advanced glaucoma (greater than 0. 8 cup: disk) or intraocular pressure
≥ 30 mmHg in the study eye;
8. Previous glaucoma filtering surgery in the study eye;
9. Subjects with inadequate pupillary dilation or significant media opacities in the
study eye, including cataract, which may interfere with visual acuity or the
evaluation of the posterior segment;
10. Current vitreous haemorrhage in the study eye;
11. History of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment or macular hole in the study eye;
12. Subjects who present with CNV due to causes other than AMD, including subjects with
known or suspected idiopathic polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (IPCV), ocular
histoplasmosis syndrome, angioid streaks, multifocal choroiditis, choroidal rupture,
or pathologic myopia (spherical equivalent ≥ 8 Dioptre or axial length ≥ 25mm);
13. Subjects who have undergone any intraocular surgery in the study eye within 12 weeks
prior to the screening visit, with the exception of cataract surgery as discussed in
the Exclusion Criteria #14
14. Previous cataract surgery within 2 months prior to enrolment into the study;
15. Subjects with known serious allergies to fluorescein dye used in angiography;
16. Subjects with known sensitivity or allergy to Lucentis®;
17. Subjects who underwent previous radiation therapy to the eye, head or neck;
18. Subjects with an intravitreal device or drug in the study eye;
19. Subjects with any other condition, which in the judgment of the investigator would
prevent the subject from completing the study (e. g. documented diagnosis of dementia
or serious mental illness);
20. Current participation in another drug or device clinical trial, or participation in
such a clinical trial within the last year;
21. History of use of drugs with known retinal toxicity, including: chloroquine (Aralen -
an anti-malarial drug), hydroxychloroquine (Plaquenil), phenothiazines,
chlorpromazine (Thorazine), thioridazine (Mellaril), fluphenazine (Prolixin),
perphenazine (Trilafon), and trifluoperazine (Stelazine);
22. Subjects who are unwilling or unable to return for scheduled treatment and follow-up
examinations for three years;
23. Women must be post-menopausal more than 1 year unless surgically sterilised
Locations and Contacts
Bristol Eye Hospital, Bristol BS1 2LX, United Kingdom
Darlington Memorial Hospital, Darlington DL3 6HX, United Kingdom
King's College Hospital, London SE5 9RS, United Kingdom
Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, Devon EX2 5DW, United Kingdom
Plymouth Royal Eye Infirmary, Plymouth, Devon PL4 6PL, United Kingdom
Torbay Hospital, Torquay, Devon TQ2 7AA, United Kingdom
Royal Bournemouth Hospital, Bournemouth, Dorset BH7 7DW, United Kingdom
Sussex Eye Hospital, Brighton, East Sussex BN2 5BF, United Kingdom
Hull and East Yorks Hospital, Hull, East Yorkshire HU3 2JZ, United Kingdom
Essex County Hospital, Colchester, Essex CO3 3SP, United Kingdom
Southend Hospital, Westcliff-on-Sea,, Essex SS0 0RY, United Kingdom
Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester, Greater Manchester M13 9WH, United Kingdom
Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3LY, United Kingdom
Maidstone Hospital, Maidstone, Kent ME16 9QQ, United Kingdom
Ashford William Harvey Hospital, Willesborough, Kent TN24 0LZ, United Kingdom
Royal Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, Merseyside L7 8XP, United Kingdom
Arrowe Park Hospital, Upton, Merseyside CH49 5PE, United Kingdom
James Cook Hospital, Middlesborough, North Yorkshire TS4 3BW, United Kingdom
Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, South Yorkshire S10 2JF, United Kingdom
Southampton Hospital, Shirley, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle, Tyne and Wear NE1 4LP, United Kingdom
Sunderland Eye Infimary, Sunderland, Tyne and Wear SR2 9HP, United Kingdom
Warwick Hospital Eye Unit, Warwick, Warwickshire CV34 5BW, United Kingdom
St James University Hospital, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS9 7TF, United Kingdom
Additional Information
MERLOT Study website with information for Patients and Investigators Website for King's College Hospital (Study Sponsor Site)
Starting date: November 2009
Last updated: August 14, 2015
|