Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant Compared to Sham Injection in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema
Phase 3
Completed
- Conditions
- Diabetic Macular Edema
- Interventions
- Procedure: Standard of care laser photocoagulationDrug: Fluocinolone Acetonide
- Registration Number
- NCT00344968
- Lead Sponsor
- Alimera Sciences
- Brief Summary
This study will evaluate the safety and efficacy of an intravitreal insert of fluocinolone acetonide for the treatment of diabetic macular edema.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 956
Inclusion Criteria
- Age >= 18 years with diabetic macular edema
- Diagnosis of diabetes mellitus types 1 or 2
- Best corrected visual acuity of 19-68 letters
- Retinal thickness > 250 micron by OCT
- Investigator is comfortable deferring macular laser treatment for 6 weeks
Read More
Exclusion Criteria
- Glaucoma, ocular hypertension, IOP >21 mmHg or concurrent therapy at screening with IOP lowering agents
- Retinal or choroidal neovascularization due to ocular conditions other than diabetic retinopathy
- Prior intravitreal, subtenon, or periocular steroid therapy within 6 months
- Any ocular surgery within the last 3 months
- Retinal laser treatment within the last 3 months
- History of uncontrolled IOP elevation with steroid use that did not respond to topical therapy
- Any lens opacity which impairs visualization of the posterior pole
Read More
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description 3 Standard of care laser photocoagulation - 1 Fluocinolone Acetonide - 2 Fluocinolone Acetonide -
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Visual Acuity 36 months The percentage of subjects with an increase from baseline of 15 or more letters in best corrected visual acuity letter score as assessed by ETDRS eye chart (study eye).
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Retinal Thickness 36 months Retinal images where sent to a reading center for analysis. Some images were not clear/distorted and could not be properly analyzed. This accounts for the discrepancy in the number of participants analyzed.