Triamcinolone Acetonide Injections to Treat Diabetic Macular Edema
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00231023|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : October 3, 2005
Last Update Posted : March 4, 2008
|First Submitted Date ICMJE||October 2, 2005|
|First Posted Date ICMJE||October 3, 2005|
|Last Update Posted Date||March 4, 2008|
|Study Start Date ICMJE||September 2005|
|Primary Completion Date||Not Provided|
|Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Change History||Complete list of historical versions of study NCT00231023 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site|
|Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Current Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures||Not Provided|
|Original Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures||Not Provided|
|Brief Title ICMJE||Triamcinolone Acetonide Injections to Treat Diabetic Macular Edema|
|Official Title ICMJE||Pilot Study of Peribulbar Triamcinolone Acetonide for Diabetic Macular Edema|
This study will evaluate which of the three following treatment options is better for diabetic macular edema: laser alone, steroid injection alone, or steroid injection followed by laser. Macular edema is a swelling in the small central part of the retina - the part of the retina that is used for sharp, straight-ahead vision. Laser treatment is the only treatment that has been proven to be beneficial for diabetic macular edema. It reduces the swelling and lessens the chance of further vision loss, but it does not improve vision. Triamcinolone is a steroid drug that decreases inflammation and scarring. Injections of the drug have decreased macular edema in some patients and improved vision. Swelling may return, requiring repeat injections, and it is not known if the vision improvement is permanent. This 3-year study will examine and compare the benefits and side effects of both treatments, alone and in combination.
Patients 18 years of age and older with diabetic macular edema may be eligible for this study. Participants undergo the following tests and procedures.
At the beginning of the study:
Photographs of the retina and lens. A special camera with bright flashes is used to take these photographs.
Some patients will have one eye treated and some patients will have both eyes treated. The treatment for a given individual is determined by chance:
Patients return to the clinic for follow-up visits at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 36 months, or more often if needed, after the initial treatment for an eye exam, measurement of visual acuity, and OTC. Photographs of the retina are taken at the 4- and 8-month visits and at the 1-, 2- and 3-year visits. Fluorescein angiography may be done at 4 months. Blood pressure is measured at the 1-, 2- and 3-year visits, and an HbA1c blood test is done at 4 and 8 months and at the yearly visits. Participants may be asked to complete a questionnaire once a year about their vision and medical condition. Treatment options are discussed at the 4- and 8-month visits.
Diabetic retinopathy is a major cause of visual impairment in the United States. Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a manifestation of diabetic retinopathy that produces loss of central vision. Data from the Wisconsin Epidemiologic Study of Diabetic Retinopathy (WESDR) estimate that after 15 years of known diabetes, the prevalence of diabetic macular edema is approximately 20% in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM), 25% in patients with type 2 DM who are taking insulin, and 14% in patients with type 2 DM who do not take insulin.
In a review of three early studies concerning the natural history of diabetic macular edema, Ferris and Patz found that 53% of 135 eyes with diabetic macular edema, presumably all involving the center of the macula, lost two or more lines of visual acuity over a two year period. In the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS), 33% of 221 untreated eyes available for follow-up at the 3-year visit, all with edema involving the center of the macula at baseline, had experienced a 15 or more letter decrease in visual acuity score (equivalent to a doubling of the visual angle, e.g., 20/25 to 20/50, and termed "moderate visual loss").
In the ETDRS, focal/grid photocoagulation of eyes with clinically significant macular edema (CSME) reduced the risk of moderate visual loss by approximately 50% (from 24% to 12%, three years after initiation of treatment). Therefore, 12% of treated eyes developed moderate visual loss in spite of treatment. Furthermore, approximately 40% of treated eyes that had retinal thickening involving the center of the macula at baseline still had thickening involving the center at 12 months, as did 25% of treated eyes at 36 months.
Although several treatment modalities are currently under investigation, the only demonstrated means to reduce the risk of vision loss from diabetic macular edema are laser photocoagulation, as demonstrated by the ETDRS, and intensive glycemic control, as demonstrated by the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) and the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS). In the DCCT, intensive glucose control reduced the risk of onset of diabetic macular edema by 23% compared with conventional treatment. Long-term follow-up of patients in the DCCT show a sustained effect of intensive glucose control, with a 58% risk reduction in the development of diabetic macular edema for the DCCT patients followed in the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study.
The frequency of an unsatisfactory outcome following laser photocoagulation in some eyes with diabetic macular edema has prompted interest in other treatment modalities. One such treatment is pars plana vitrectomy. These studies suggest that vitreomacular traction, or the vitreous itself, may play a role in increased retinal vascular permeability. Removal of the vitreous or relief of mechanical traction with vitrectomy and membrane stripping may be followed by substantial resolution of macular edema and corresponding improvement in visual acuity. However, this treatment may be applicable only to a specific subset of eyes with diabetic macular edema. It also requires a complex surgical intervention with its inherent risks, recovery time, and expense. Other treatment modalities such as pharmacologic therapy with oral protein kinase C inhibitors and antibodies targeted at vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) are under investigation.
The use of intravitreal corticosteroids is another treatment modality that has generated recent interest. However, use of intravitreal corticosteroids generally has been reserved for cases of DME in which there is at least moderate loss of visual acuity (e.g., worse than 20/40). This treatment generally has not been widely used for mild cases of DME due to concerns about its potential risks, particularly glaucoma and cataract, relative to the potential benefit.
Injection of corticosteroids around the eye (anterior subtenon's, posterior subtenon's, retrobulbar) has been used as an alternative to intravitreal injection. Although data are limited, it is presumed that the adverse effects on the eye are lower with an injection around the eye compared with in the eye. There are also little data on the efficacy of this treatment. This study is being conducted to collect pilot data on the safety and efficacy of peribulbar corticosteroids to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of efficacy to merit conducting a phase 3 randomized trial.
|Study Type ICMJE||Interventional|
|Study Phase ICMJE||Phase 2|
|Study Design ICMJE||Primary Purpose: Treatment|
|Condition ICMJE||Diabetic Retinopathy|
|Intervention ICMJE||Drug: Peribulbar Triamcinolone Acetonide|
|Study Arms ICMJE||Not Provided|
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
|Recruitment Status ICMJE||Completed|
|Original Enrollment ICMJE||Same as current|
|Study Completion Date ICMJE||May 2006|
|Primary Completion Date||Not Provided|
|Eligibility Criteria ICMJE||
To be eligible, the following inclusion criteria (1-4) must be met:
-Age greater than or equal to 18 years
A patient is not eligible if any of the following exclusion criteria (5-13) are present:
5. History of chronic renal failure requiring dialysis or kidney transplant.
6. A condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, would preclude participation in the study (e.g., unstable medical status including blood pressure and glycemic control).
STUDY EYE CRITERIA
The patient must have at least one eye meeting all of the inclusion criteria (a-e) and none of the exclusion criteria (f-t) listed below.
A patient may have two study eyes only if both are eligible at the time of randomization
The eligibility criteria for a study eye are as follows:
|Ages ICMJE||Child, Adult, Older Adult|
|Accepts Healthy Volunteers ICMJE||No|
|Contacts ICMJE||Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects|
|Listed Location Countries ICMJE||United States|
|Removed Location Countries|
|NCT Number ICMJE||NCT00231023|
|Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE||050251
|Has Data Monitoring Committee||Not Provided|
|U.S. FDA-regulated Product||Not Provided|
|IPD Sharing Statement ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Responsible Party||Not Provided|
|Study Sponsor ICMJE||National Eye Institute (NEI)|
|Collaborators ICMJE||Not Provided|
|Investigators ICMJE||Not Provided|
|PRS Account||National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC)|
|Verification Date||May 2006|
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP