Myopia, Astigmatism, Presbyopia
Conditions
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to compare the overall performance of a monthly replacement contact lens when worn for one month and when worn for two weeks.
Interventions
Commercially marketed, silicone hydrogel contact lens worn bilaterally on a daily wear basis for up to 30 days with a two week and four week evaluation visit.
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Habitual and successful wearers of contact lenses made of lotrafilcon B material for at least 4 weeks prior to enrollment. * Good general health. * Sphere requirement in the range +6.00 to -10.00 with astigmatism or multifocal correction or no astigmatism or multifocal correction. * Ability to comply with all protocol-mandated procedures and to attend all scheduled office visits. * Other protocol-defined inclusion criteria may apply.
Exclusion criteria
* Anterior segment abnormalities (i.e., cataracts, opacities, etc.) or active anterior segment disease. * Administration of any investigational drug or device within 14 days of study initiation. * Use of any eye drops with a pharmacological effect within 7 days of Visit 1. * Known local or systemic hypersensitivity to contact lens cleaning and disinfecting solutions. * Post-refractive surgery. * Currently pregnant or lactating by case history. * Other protocol-defined
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Comfort | 2 weeks | Overall comfort was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent. |
| End of Day Dryness | 2 weeks | End of day dryness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. End of day dryness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very dry and 10 being not dry. |
| Ocular Redness | 2 weeks | Ocular redness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Ocular redness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very red and 10 being not red. |
| Visual Clarity | 2 weeks | Visual clarity was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Visual clarity was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent. |
| Lens Deposits | 2 weeks | Protein and lipid deposits on the contact lens surface were assessed for each eye by the investigator using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the wearer's eye. Deposits were graded on a scale of 0 to 4, with 0 being none and 4 being severe. |
| Corrected Visual Acuity | 2 weeks | Each eye was tested individually while the participant read distant charts in normal lighting. Corrected visual acuity was measured using a Snellen chart, which was converted into logMAR units (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution). A 20/20 Snellen acuity equates to a logMAR acuity of 0.0 and is considered normal distance eyesight. Positive logMAR values indicate poorer vision, and negative values denote better visual acuity. |
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B Commercially marketed, silicone hydrogel contact lenses worn bilaterally on a daily wear basis for up to 30 days with a two week and four week evaluation visit. | 117 |
| Total | 117 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Noncompliance | 2 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Lotrafilcon B |
|---|---|
| Age Continuous | 45.8 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.6 |
| Gender Female | 79 participants |
| Gender Male | 36 participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk |
|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | — / — |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 117 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 117 |
Outcome results
Corrected Visual Acuity
Each eye was tested individually while the participant read distant charts in normal lighting. Corrected visual acuity was measured using a Snellen chart, which was converted into logMAR units (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution). A 20/20 Snellen acuity equates to a logMAR acuity of 0.0 and is considered normal distance eyesight. Positive logMAR values indicate poorer vision, and negative values denote better visual acuity.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Corrected Visual Acuity | 0.04 logMAR | Standard Deviation 0.07 |
Corrected Visual Acuity
Each eye was tested individually while the participant read distant charts in normal lighting. Corrected visual acuity was measured using a Snellen chart, which was converted into logMAR units (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution). A 20/20 Snellen acuity equates to a logMAR acuity of 0.0 and is considered normal distance eyesight. Positive logMAR values indicate poorer vision, and negative values denote better visual acuity.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Corrected Visual Acuity | 0.04 logMAR | Standard Deviation 0.08 |
End of Day Dryness
End of day dryness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. End of day dryness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very dry and 10 being not dry.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | End of Day Dryness | 7.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.1 |
End of Day Dryness
End of day dryness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. End of day dryness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very dry and 10 being not dry.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | End of Day Dryness | 7.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.4 |
Lens Deposits
Protein and lipid deposits on the contact lens surface were assessed for each eye by the investigator using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the wearer's eye. Deposits were graded on a scale of 0 to 4, with 0 being none and 4 being severe.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Lens Deposits | 0.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.7 |
Lens Deposits
Protein and lipid deposits on the contact lens surface were assessed for each eye by the investigator using a biomicroscope, which magnifies the appearance of the contact lens on the wearer's eye. Deposits were graded on a scale of 0 to 4, with 0 being none and 4 being severe.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Lens Deposits | 0.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.7 |
Ocular Redness
Ocular redness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Ocular redness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very red and 10 being not red.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Ocular Redness | 9.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.6 |
Ocular Redness
Ocular redness was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Ocular redness was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being very red and 10 being not red.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Ocular Redness | 9.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.4 |
Overall Comfort
Overall comfort was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Overall Comfort | 8.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.7 |
Overall Comfort
Overall comfort was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Overall comfort was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Overall Comfort | 8.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.4 |
Visual Clarity
Visual clarity was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 2 weeks of wear. Visual clarity was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Visual Clarity | 8.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.5 |
Visual Clarity
Visual clarity was assessed and reported by the participant on a questionnaire as a single, retrospective evaluation of 4 weeks of wear. Visual clarity was measured on a 10-point scale, with 1 being poor and 10 being excellent.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Population: Analysis conducted per protocol, with exclusions due to reasons such as protocol deviations as determined by masked review; discontinuations; and/or missing responses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lotrafilcon B | Visual Clarity | 8.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.5 |