Efficacy and Safety Study of OPC-1085EL Ophthalmic Solution in Subjects With Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension
- Conditions
- Ocular HypertensionGlaucoma
- Interventions
- Drug: OPC-1085EL ophthalmic solution
- Registration Number
- NCT02105285
- Lead Sponsor
- Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
- Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of OPC-1085EL ophthalmic solution in comparison with carteolol long-acting ophthalmic solution in subjects who are insufficiently responsive to carteolol long-acting ophthalmic solution.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 193
- Subjects with diagnosis of bilateral primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension
- Subjects with ocular conditions as defined by the protocol
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description OPC-1085EL ophthalmic solution OPC-1085EL ophthalmic solution Once daily Carteolol long-acting ophthalmic solution Carteolol long-acting ophthalmic solution Once daily
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Decrease From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure at Week 8 Predose Baseline, Week 8 Predose Comparison of each group in change from baseline in intraocular pressure. Arm of "a treatment group coming together with latanoprost / carteolol" is a reference group. As for "Primary Outcome" and "Secondary Outcome" analysis , the OPC-1085EL group was compared only to the carteolol group, not to the latanoprost/carteolol concomitant group.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Intraocular Pressure at Week 8 at 8 Hours After IMP Administration Week 8 at 8 hours after IMP administration Comparison of each group in intraocular pressure at Week 8 at 8 hours after IMP administration.
Arm of "a treatment group coming together with latanoprost / carteolol" is a reference group. As for "Primary Outcome" and "Secondary Outcome" analysis , the OPC-1085EL group was compared only to the carteolol group, not to the latanoprost/carteolol concomitant group.
The number of subjects showed in the Participant Flow comes from all the subjects administered IMP. For efficacy analysis, on the other hand, several subjects were excluded from the analysis according to the statistical analysis plan. For example, subjects without IOP after administration were excluded. In addition, IOP measurement at 8 hours was not mandatory. That is why there are differences between the number in the Participant Flow and Outcome.Intraocular Pressure at Week 8 at 2 Hours After IMP Administration Week 8 at 2 hours after IMP administration Comparison of each group in intraocular pressure at Week 8 at 2 hours after IMP administration.
Arm of "a treatment group coming together with latanoprost / carteolol" is a reference group. As for "Primary Outcome" and "Secondary Outcome" analysis , the OPC-1085EL group was compared only to the carteolol group, not to the latanoprost/carteolol concomitant group.
The number of subjects showed in the Participant Flow comes from all the subjects administered IMP. For efficacy analysis, on the other hand, several subjects were excluded from the analysis according to the statistical analysis plan. For example, subjects without IOP after administration were excluded. In addition, IOP measurement at 8 hours was not mandatory. That is why there are differences between the number in the Participant Flow and Outcome.Intraocular Pressure at Week 8 Predose Week 8 Predose Comparison of each group in intraocular pressure at Week 8 Predose. Arm of "a treatment group coming together with latanoprost / carteolol" is a reference group. As for "Primary Outcome" and "Secondary Outcome" analysis , the OPC-1085EL group was compared only to the carteolol group, not to the latanoprost/carteolol concomitant group.
The number of subjects showed in the Participant Flow comes from all the subjects administered IMP. For efficacy analysis, on the other hand, several subjects were excluded from the analysis according to the statistical analysis plan. For example, subjects without IOP after administration were excluded. In addition, IOP measurement at 8 hours was not mandatory. That is why there are differences between the number in the Participant Flow and Outcome.Change From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure at Week 8 at 8 Hours After IMP Administration Baseline, Week 8 at 8 hours after IMP administration Comparison of each group in change from baseline in intraocular pressure at Week 8 at 8 hours after IMP administration.
Arm of "a treatment group coming together with latanoprost / carteolol" is a reference group. As for "Primary Outcome" and "Secondary Outcome" analysis , the OPC-1085EL group was compared only to the carteolol group, not to the latanoprost/carteolol concomitant group.
The number of subjects showed in the Participant Flow comes from all the subjects administered IMP. For efficacy analysis, on the other hand, several subjects were excluded from the analysis according to the statistical analysis plan. For example, subjects without IOP after administration were excluded. In addition, IOP measurement at 8 hours was not mandatory. That is why there are differences between the number in the Participant Flow and Outcome.Decrease From Baseline in Intraocular Pressure at Week 8 at 2 Hours After IMP Administration Baseline, Week 8 at 2 hours after IMP administration Comparison of each group in change from baseline in intraocular pressure at Week 8 at 2 hours after IMP administration.
Arm of "a treatment group coming together with latanoprost / carteolol" is a reference group. As for "Primary Outcome" and "Secondary Outcome" analysis , the OPC-1085EL group was compared only to the carteolol group, not to the latanoprost/carteolol concomitant group.
The number of subjects showed in the Participant Flow comes from all the subjects administered IMP. For efficacy analysis, on the other hand, several subjects were excluded from the analysis according to the statistical analysis plan. For example, subjects without IOP after administration were excluded. In addition, IOP measurement at 8 hours was not mandatory. That is why there are differences between the number in the Participant Flow and Outcome.