Skip to content

Safety and Efficacy of Intravitreal Injection of Human Retinal Progenitor Cells in Adults With Retinitis Pigmentosa

A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Study of the Safety and Efficacy of Intravitreal Injection of Human Retinal Progenitor Cells (jCell) in Adult Subjects With Retinitis Pigmentosa (RP)

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03073733
Enrollment
84
Registered
2017-03-08
Start date
2017-03-01
Completion date
2020-11-13
Last updated
2024-06-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Retinitis Pigmentosa

Brief summary

This study evaluates the changes in visual function at 12 months following a single injection of human retinal progenitor cells compared to sham treated controls in a cohort of adult subjects with RP.

Detailed description

There is no effective treatment for RP; once photoreceptors are lost, they do not regenerate. The rate of deterioration of vision varies from person to person, with most people with RP legally blind by age 40. Preclinical studies demonstrated that transplantation of retinal progenitor cells into the eye can result in both photoreceptor replacement and significant slowing of host photoreceptor loss. Thus, the primary goal of this therapy is to preserve, and potentially improve, vision by intervening in the disease at a time when dystrophic host photoreceptors can be protected and reactivated. Based on the demonstration of acceptable safety and tolerability in a phase 1/2a study, this phase 2b study is designed as a controlled comparison of the changes in visual function and functional vision in subjects who receive a single jCell injection in comparison to a comparable sham-treated control group of subjects with RP.

Interventions

live suspension of 3.0 or 6.0 x 10e6 human retinal progenitor cells (hRPC) suspended in clinical grade medium injected intravitreally under local anesthesia

pressing the hub of a syringe with no needle against the eye to mimic intravitreal injection

Sponsors

California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM)
CollaboratorOTHER
jCyte, Inc
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

Subjects, their family members and clinical staff performing key efficacy assessments will be masked to the randomization assignment of subjects. Due to the nature of some safety assessments and the sham treatment, not all personnel can be masked.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Clinical diagnosis of RP confirmed by ERG and willing to consent to mutation typing, if not already done Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) 20/80 or worse and no worse than 20/800 Adequate organ function and negative infectious disease screen Female of childbearing potential must have negative pregnancy test and be willing to use medically accepted methods of contraception throughout the study

Exclusion criteria

Eye disease other than RP that impairs visual function Pseudo-RP, cancer-associated retinopathies History of malignancy or other end-stage organ disease, or any chronic disease requiring continuous treatment with system steroids, anticoagulants or immunosuppressive agents Known allergy to penicillin or streptomycin Treatment with corticosteroids or any investigational or neuroprotectant therapy within 90 days of enrollment Cataract surgery within 3 months prior to enrollment

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)12 monthsMean change in BCVA in study eye from baseline to month 12 as assessed by E-ETDRS in ITT population. A letter score is used to compare change over time, with a higher number of letters representing better visual function, and a lower number of letters representing worse visual function. For example, 85 letters is equivalent to 20/20 visual acuity and 5 letters is equivalent to 20/800 visual acuity. A change value is derived for each subject by taking the letter score at 12 months and subtracting the letter score at baseline. A mean of all change values is then calculated for each arm.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Contrast Sensitivity (CS) at 1.0 CPD12 monthsAssessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. For example, if a subject's CS peak appears to be at 2.0 CPD, then additional testing occurs at 1.0 and 4.0 CPD. RP patients have suppressed CS curves and the most common pattern widths are at 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 CPD. Severely impaired subjects (e.g., BCVA \< 20/400) usually have flat curves with low values (e.g., 1.28), while in mildly impaired RP subjects the values can be higher (e.g., 7.12), but are rarely near normal. These data represent mean change in CS from baseline to 12 months, with greater values representing greater improvement in visual function.
Kinetic Visual Field (KVF)12 monthsMean change in total area (degrees squared) of all islands of vision from baseline to 12 months.
Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT)12 monthsThe LLMT identifies the performance of RP patients as they walk along an indoor pathway of arrows and obstacles at varying lighting levels. The Critical Illumination Level (CIL) is the light level below which the patient has a markedly slower pace and more errors than all light levels above (brighter than) that point. The LLMT uses light levels that go from very dim (0.12 lux) to a bright indoor room (500 lux), with evenly spaced increments that increase light by doubling the brightness of the room from the prior level. These evenly spaced light levels have been converted to a scale score to enable easier calculation of change scores. The dimmest light level of 0 lux (completely dark room) corresponds to a scale score of 13, whereas the brightest light level of 500 lux corresponds to a scale score of 0. A positive scale score change from baseline to 12 months represents improvement in low light vision, whereas a negative scale score change represents a decline in low light vision.
Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability)12 monthsThe VA LV VFQ-48 (VFQ) is used to capture changes in patients' self-reporting of their difficulty with reading, mobility and performing other daily living activities affected by visual impairment. There are 4 scales on the VFQ including Visual Information, Reading, Visual Motor, and Mobility. A fifth value, Visual Ability, is an aggregate score of the 4 scales, measured in units called logits, and is calculated for each person based on item weighting using Raasch analysis. Visual Ability is used broadly to represent changes in subject-reported outcomes from visit to visit. Higher positive values on the Visual Ability score represent better function and less impairment, whereas lower or negatives scores represent worse function or more impairment. Change in the Visual Ability scale on the VFQ is calculated by taking a subject's score at 12 months and subtracting from it the baseline score.
Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)12 monthsAssessed by treatment emergent adverse events, immunogenicity and safety visual assessments

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

85 subjects were enrolled; 84 subjects were randomized

Pre-assignment details

One subject received a 4.0 x 10e6 dose prior to a major protocol amendment that excluded this dose group; this subject is not included in the analyses presented.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Sham Treated Control
Mock injection: pressing the hub of a syringe with no needle against the study eye to mimic intravitreal injection
29
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1
single intravitreal injection of 3.0 x 10e6 retinal progenitor cells into the study eye
27
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2
single intravitreal injection of 6.0 x 10e6 retinal progenitor cells into the study eye
27
Total83

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up100
Overall StudyPhysician Decision010
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject001

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicSham Treated ControlTotalTest (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
6 Participants12 Participants3 Participants3 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
23 Participants71 Participants24 Participants24 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
5 Participants16 Participants7 Participants4 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
24 Participants67 Participants20 Participants23 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
6 Participants13 Participants5 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
1 Participants4 Participants1 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
22 Participants65 Participants20 Participants23 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
29 participants83 participants27 participants27 participants
Selection of study eye
study eye OD
12 Participants38 Participants14 Participants12 Participants
Selection of study eye
study eye OS
17 Participants45 Participants13 Participants15 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
7 Participants35 Participants13 Participants15 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
22 Participants48 Participants14 Participants12 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 290 / 270 / 27
other
Total, other adverse events
13 / 2918 / 2714 / 27
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 291 / 270 / 27

Outcome results

Primary

Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)

Mean change in BCVA in study eye from baseline to month 12 as assessed by E-ETDRS in ITT population. A letter score is used to compare change over time, with a higher number of letters representing better visual function, and a lower number of letters representing worse visual function. For example, 85 letters is equivalent to 20/20 visual acuity and 5 letters is equivalent to 20/800 visual acuity. A change value is derived for each subject by taking the letter score at 12 months and subtracting the letter score at baseline. A mean of all change values is then calculated for each arm.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: ITT: All randomized subjects who provide any post-randomization data. One subject received a 4.0 x 10e6 dose prior to a protocol amendment that excluded this dose level; this subject is not included in these analyses. Also, of the 83 remaining subjects to be enrolled and randomized, 80 completed the study.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlBest Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)3.9 Letters correctStandard Deviation 9.92
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)1.3 Letters correctStandard Deviation 14.14
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA)2.6 Letters correctStandard Deviation 21.53
p-value: 0.58295% CI: [-10.3, 5.8]linear model for repeated measures
p-value: 0.98495% CI: [-8.2, 8]linear model for repeated measures
Secondary

Contrast Sensitivity (CS) at 1.0 CPD

Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. For example, if a subject's CS peak appears to be at 2.0 CPD, then additional testing occurs at 1.0 and 4.0 CPD. RP patients have suppressed CS curves and the most common pattern widths are at 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 CPD. Severely impaired subjects (e.g., BCVA \< 20/400) usually have flat curves with low values (e.g., 1.28), while in mildly impaired RP subjects the values can be higher (e.g., 7.12), but are rarely near normal. These data represent mean change in CS from baseline to 12 months, with greater values representing greater improvement in visual function.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: mITT: all randomized subjects who provide any post-randomization data, excluding subjects with missing baseline or who are below the limit of detection (LOD) at baseline; shown here are subjects who could be assessed at a pattern width of 1.0 CPD, which applies to the largest number of participating subjects as compared to the other CPD pattern widths.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlContrast Sensitivity (CS) at 1.0 CPD0.4331 CS at 1.0 cycles per degree (CPD)Standard Deviation 1.5011
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Contrast Sensitivity (CS) at 1.0 CPD1.9145 CS at 1.0 cycles per degree (CPD)Standard Deviation 4.3072
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Contrast Sensitivity (CS) at 1.0 CPD0.1142 CS at 1.0 cycles per degree (CPD)Standard Deviation 4.9526
p-value: 0.2995% CI: [-1.1341, 3.7313]linear model for repeated measures
p-value: 0.75995% CI: [-2.6516, 1.9433]linear model for repeated measures
Secondary

Kinetic Visual Field (KVF)

Mean change in total area (degrees squared) of all islands of vision from baseline to 12 months.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: mITT: all randomized subjects who provide any post-randomization data, excluding subjects with missing baseline or who are below the limit of detection (LOD) at baseline.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlKinetic Visual Field (KVF)260.19 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 900.024
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Kinetic Visual Field (KVF)-44.02 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 1001.614
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Kinetic Visual Field (KVF)560.19 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 2453.259
p-value: 0.51595% CI: [-1126.21, 568.75]linear model for repeated measures
p-value: 0.49995% CI: [-562.87, 1147.23]linear model for repeated measures
Secondary

Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT)

The LLMT identifies the performance of RP patients as they walk along an indoor pathway of arrows and obstacles at varying lighting levels. The Critical Illumination Level (CIL) is the light level below which the patient has a markedly slower pace and more errors than all light levels above (brighter than) that point. The LLMT uses light levels that go from very dim (0.12 lux) to a bright indoor room (500 lux), with evenly spaced increments that increase light by doubling the brightness of the room from the prior level. These evenly spaced light levels have been converted to a scale score to enable easier calculation of change scores. The dimmest light level of 0 lux (completely dark room) corresponds to a scale score of 13, whereas the brightest light level of 500 lux corresponds to a scale score of 0. A positive scale score change from baseline to 12 months represents improvement in low light vision, whereas a negative scale score change represents a decline in low light vision.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Modified ITT: all randomized subjects who provide any post-randomization data, excluding subjects with missing baseline

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT)0.6 Scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 2
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT)-0.3 Scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.49
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT)0.2 Scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.96
p-value: 0.1695% CI: [-2.1, 0.3]linear model for repeated measures
p-value: 0.62295% CI: [-1.5, 0.9]linear model for repeated measures
Secondary

Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability)

The VA LV VFQ-48 (VFQ) is used to capture changes in patients' self-reporting of their difficulty with reading, mobility and performing other daily living activities affected by visual impairment. There are 4 scales on the VFQ including Visual Information, Reading, Visual Motor, and Mobility. A fifth value, Visual Ability, is an aggregate score of the 4 scales, measured in units called logits, and is calculated for each person based on item weighting using Raasch analysis. Visual Ability is used broadly to represent changes in subject-reported outcomes from visit to visit. Higher positive values on the Visual Ability score represent better function and less impairment, whereas lower or negatives scores represent worse function or more impairment. Change in the Visual Ability scale on the VFQ is calculated by taking a subject's score at 12 months and subtracting from it the baseline score.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: mITT: all randomized subjects who provide any post-randomization data, excluding subjects with missing baseline.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability)0.225 logitsStandard Deviation 0.4194
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability)0.146 logitsStandard Deviation 0.5228
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability)0.360 logitsStandard Deviation 0.6963
p-value: 0.44295% CI: [-0.399, 0.176]linear model for repeated measures
p-value: 0.40195% CI: [-0.165, 0.409]linear model for repeated measures
Secondary

Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)

Assessed by treatment emergent adverse events, immunogenicity and safety visual assessments

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Safety population: all subjects who receive any study treatment (including sham); subjects who did not complete may not have data at 12-month time point

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with severe TEAE0 participants
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal sclera absent at baseline and present at M120 participants
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with CME absent at baseline and present at M12 (OCT)1 participants
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with SAE0 participants
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with TEAE15 participants
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with related/possibly related TEAE7 participants
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal AC flare absent at baseline and present at M120 participants
Sham Treated ControlSafety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal conjunctiva absent at baseline and present at M120 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with SAE1 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal conjunctiva absent at baseline and present at M122 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with TEAE20 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with related/possibly related TEAE14 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with severe TEAE3 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with CME absent at baseline and present at M12 (OCT)0 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal sclera absent at baseline and present at M121 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal AC flare absent at baseline and present at M120 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with CME absent at baseline and present at M12 (OCT)0 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with related/possibly related TEAE13 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with TEAE21 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal AC flare absent at baseline and present at M120 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal sclera absent at baseline and present at M120 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with SAE0 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with severe TEAE1 participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Safety of Intravitreal Injection of Retinal Progenitor Cells (RPC)Subjects with clinically significant abnormal conjunctiva absent at baseline and present at M120 participants
Post Hoc

Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population

Mean change in BCVA in study eye from baseline to month 12 as assessed by E-ETDRS in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76). The PP population excludes seven subjects with major protocol violations, including two subjects who received a different treatment than the group to which they were randomized, four subjects with preexisting ophthalmic conditions meeting exclusion criteria (three glaucoma and one amblyopia), and one subject who experienced an intraocular lens subluxation (i.e., the displacement of a replacement lens following previous cataract surgery - unrelated to study drug) and could not perform endpoint testing at 12 months. Refer to Outcome Measure #1 for more information on how change in BCVA from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlBest Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population2.8 Letters correctStandard Deviation 8.69
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population3.0 Letters correctStandard Deviation 11.43
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population7.4 Letters correctStandard Deviation 15.57
p-value: 0.099t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.13t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Mean change in BCVA from Baseline to month 12 as assessed by E-ETDRS in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55). The work undertaken to understand what contributed to variability in measurements in the Phase 2b study, combined with the available published literature, has led to the identification of the characteristics of individuals who provide inconsistent/unreliable data. One such characteristic is found in subjects in whom there is a substantial BCVA disparity of more than 15 letters between their study (worse) eye and fellow (better) eye. This disparity has the potential to lead to variable testing results due to the brain's un-suppression of the image from their worse-seeing eye under clinical study monocular test conditions where their dominant eye is covered. Refer to Outcome Measure #1 for more information on how change in BCVA from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlBest Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0.86 Letters correctStandard Deviation 6.54
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0.82 Letters correctStandard Deviation 7.98
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes10.25 Letters correctStandard Deviation 15.91
p-value: 0.019t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.019t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Mean change in BCVA in study eye from baseline to month 12 as assessed by E-ETDRS in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye and with the ability to maintain fixation at baseline (N=42). Beyond the BCVA disparity characteristic described in the previous post-hoc outcome measures, another characteristic that was found to lead to high degrees of testing variability was the inability to maintain fixation as assessed by a fixation score of 1 on kinetic visual field testing. This inability was due to either an atypical form of RP which caused the development of a central scotoma (blind spot), or the absence of remaining central visual field. These individuals tended to have extremely variable results that were dependent upon their ability to use unsteady peripheral eccentric viewing to perform the clinical endpoint tests. Refer to Outcome Measure #1 for more information on how change in BCVA from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlBest Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation2.00 Letters correctStandard Deviation 5.75
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.29 Letters correctStandard Deviation 7.56
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation13.00 Letters correctStandard Deviation 16.47
p-value: 0.019t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.011t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Mean change in BCVA in study eye from baseline to month 12 as assessed by E-ETDRS in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21). Central foveal thickness, as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), is believed to be an anatomical marker representing the number of surviving foveal cones. A thicker central fovea corresponds to more surviving cone photoreceptors which are available to be up-regulated. Refer to Outcome Measure #1 for more information on how change in BCVA from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlBest Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness3.50 Letters correctStandard Deviation 3.96
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness-0.40 Letters correctStandard Deviation 10.36
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness18.38 Letters correctStandard Deviation 18.68
p-value: 0.03t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.033t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population

Mean change in total area (degrees squared) of all islands of vision from baseline to 12 months in the Per Protocol (PP) Population (N=76). Refer to Outcome Measure #7 for background information on the PP population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlKinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population229.13 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 908.525
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population-37.81 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 1021.757
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population594.47 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 2558.858
p-value: 0.261t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.139t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Mean change in total area (degrees squared) of all islands of vision from baseline to 12 months in the Per Protocol (PP) Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55). Refer to Outcome Measure #12 for background information on this analysis population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlKinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes313.33 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 964.08
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes-173.46 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 1027.19
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes843.93 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 3035.82
p-value: 0.255t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.109t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Mean change in total area (degrees squared) of all islands of vision from baseline to 12 months in the Per Protocol (PP) Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye and with the ability to maintain fixation at baseline (N=42). Refer to Outcome Measure #16 for background information on this analysis population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlKinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation135.14 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 595.55
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation-94.83 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 1039.37
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation1263.68 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 3208.76
p-value: 0.117t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.083t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Mean change in total area (degrees squared) of all islands of vision from baseline to 12 months in the Per Protocol (PP) Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at bbaseline (N=21). Refer to Outcome Measure #24 for background information on this analysis population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlKinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness393.93 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 613.69
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness107.50 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 873.65
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Kinetic Visual Field (KVF) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness2251.86 Total area (degrees squared)Standard Deviation 3668.83
p-value: 0.099t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.076t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population

The LLMT identifies the performance of RP patients as they walk along an indoor pathway of arrows and obstacles at varying lighting levels. The Critical Illumination Level (CIL) is the light level below which the patient has a markedly slower pace and more errors than all light levels above (brighter than) that point. The LLMT uses light levels that go from very dim (0.12 lux) to a very bright (500 lux), with evenly spaced increments that increase light by doubling the brightness of the room from the prior level. These evenly spaced light levels have been converted to a scale score to enable easier calculation of change scores. The dimmest level of 0 lux corresponds to a scale score of 13, whereas the brightest level of 500 lux corresponds to a scale score of 0. A positive scale score change from baseline to 12 months represents improvement, whereas a negative scale score change represents a decline. Refer to Outcome Measure #7 for background information on the PP population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 66 posted a measurable CIL value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of the PP Population analyses.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population0.6 Scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.06
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population0.4 Scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.14
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population0.4 Scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.82
p-value: 0.35t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.5t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

The LLMT identifies the performance of RP patients as they walk along an indoor pathway of arrows and obstacles at varying lighting levels. The Critical Illumination Level (CIL) is the light level below which the patient has a markedly slower pace and more errors than all light levels above (brighter than) that point. The LLMT uses light levels that go from very dim (0.12 lux) to very bright (500 lux), with evenly spaced increments that increase light by doubling the brightness of the room from the prior level. These evenly spaced light levels have been converted to a scale score to enable easier calculation of change scores. The dimmest level of 0 lux corresponds to a scale score of 13, whereas the brightest level of 500 lux corresponds to a scale score of 0. A positive scale score change from baseline to 12 months represents improvement, whereas a negative scale score change represents a decline. Refer to Outcome Measure #12 for background information on this analysis population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 46 posted a measurable CIL value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0.82 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.24
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0.43 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.22
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0.80 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.93
p-value: 0.488t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.273t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

The LLMT identifies the performance of RP patients as they walk along an indoor pathway of arrows and obstacles at varying lighting levels. The Critical Illumination Level (CIL) is the light level below which the patient has a markedly slower pace and more errors than all light levels above (brighter than) that point. The LLMT uses light levels that go from very dim (0.12 lux) to very bright (500 lux), with evenly spaced increments that increase light by doubling the brightness of the room from the prior level. These evenly spaced light levels have been converted to a scale score to enable easier calculation of change scores. The dimmest level of 0 lux corresponds to a scale score of 13, whereas the brightest level of 500 lux corresponds to a scale score of 0. A positive scale score change from baseline to 12 months represents improvement, whereas a negative scale score change represents a decline. Refer to Outcome Measure #16 for background information on this analysis population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 38 posted a measurable CIL value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.33 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.78
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.23 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.01
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.92 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.02
p-value: 0.172t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.14t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

The LLMT identifies the performance of RP patients as they walk along an indoor pathway of arrows and obstacles at varying lighting levels. The Critical Illumination Level (CIL) is the light level below which the patient has a markedly slower pace and more errors than all light levels above (brighter than) that point. The LLMT uses light levels that go from very dim (0.12 lux) to very bright (500 lux), with evenly spaced increments that increase light by doubling the brightness of the room from the prior level. These evenly spaced light levels have been converted to a scale score to enable easier calculation of change scores. The dimmest level of 0 lux corresponds to a scale score of 13, whereas the brightest level of 500 lux corresponds to a scale score of 0. A positive scale score change from baseline to 12 months represents improvement, whereas a negative scale score change represents a decline. Refer to Outcome Measure #24 for background information on this analysis population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness - all 21 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 20 posted a measurable CIL value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0.43 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.98
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness-0.60 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.55
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Luminance Mobility Test (LLMT) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness1.50 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.07
p-value: 0.1099t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.012t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population

The VA LV VFQ-48 (VFQ) is used to capture changes in patients' self-reporting of their difficulty with reading, mobility and performing other daily living activities affected by visual impairment. There are 4 scales on the VFQ including Visual Information, Reading, Visual Motor, and Mobility. The data shown in this outcome measure is focused on the fourth scale, Mobility, and is measured in units called logits. Higher positive values on the Mobility score represent better function and less impairment, whereas lower or negatives scores represent worse function or more impairment. Change in the Mobility scale on the VFQ is calculated by taking a subject's score at 12 months and subtracting from it the baseline score.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population0.024 logitsStandard Deviation 0.499
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population0.256 logitsStandard Deviation 0.716
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population0.521 logitsStandard Deviation 0.813
p-value: 0.006t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

The VA LV VFQ-48 (VFQ) is used to capture changes in patients' self-reporting of their difficulty with reading, mobility and performing other daily living activities affected by visual impairment. There are 4 scales on the VFQ including Visual Information, Reading, Visual Motor, and Mobility. The data shown in this outcome measure is focused on the fourth scale, Mobility, and is measured in units called logits. Higher positive values on the Mobility score represent better function and less impairment, whereas lower or negatives scores represent worse function or more impairment. Change in the Mobility scale on the VFQ is calculated by taking a subject's score at 12 months and subtracting from it the baseline score.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation-0.054 logitsStandard Deviation 0.412
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.237 logitsStandard Deviation 0.306
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Mobility) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.676 logitsStandard Deviation 0.957
p-value: 0.011t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability) - PP Population

The VA LV VFQ-48 (VFQ) is used to capture changes in patients' self-reporting of their difficulty with reading, mobility and performing other daily living activities affected by visual impairment. There are 4 scales on the VFQ including Visual Information, Reading, Visual Motor, and Mobility. A fifth value, Visual Ability, is an aggregate score of the 4 scales, measured in units called logits, and is calculated for each person based on item weighting using Raasch analysis. Visual Ability is used broadly to represent changes in subject-reported outcomes from visit to visit. Higher positive values on the Visual Ability score represent better function and less impairment, whereas lower or negatives scores represent worse function or more impairment. Change in the Visual Ability scale on the VFQ is calculated by taking a subject's score at 12 months and subtracting from it the baseline score. Refer to Outcome Measure #7 for background information on the PP population.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlLow Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability) - PP Population0.238 logitsStandard Deviation 0.4324
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability) - PP Population0.151 logitsStandard Deviation 0.5329
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Low Vision Functional Questionnaire (Visual Ability) - PP Population0.371 logitsStandard Deviation 0.7335
p-value: 0.22t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.119t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population

Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. The data shown here are for mean change from baseline to 12 months in the peak of the CS curve in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76). Refer to Outcome Measure #7 for background information on the PP population. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 65 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of the PP Population analyses.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlPeak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population1.3454 Peak CSStandard Deviation 4.4164
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population0.1294 Peak CSStandard Deviation 2.4379
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population3.1329 Peak CSStandard Deviation 12.4076
p-value: 0.264t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.139t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. The data shown here are for mean change from baseline to 12 months in the peak of the CS curve in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55). Refer to Outcome Measure #12 for background information on this analysis population. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 45 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlPeak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0.61 Peak CSStandard Deviation 1.85
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0.11 Peak CSStandard Deviation 2.76
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes6.09 Peak CSStandard Deviation 13.87
p-value: 0.075t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.062t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. The data shown here are for mean change from baseline to 12 months in the peak of the CS curve in the PP Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye and with the ability to maintain fixation at Baseline (N=42). Refer to Outcome Measure #16 for background information on this analysis population. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 37 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlPeak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.812 Peak CSStandard Deviation 2.049
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0.020 Peak CSStandard Deviation 2.877
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation7.089 Peak CSStandard Deviation 14.703
p-value: 0.076t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.057t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. The data shown here are for mean change from baseline to 12 months in the peak of the CS curve in the Per Protocol (PP) Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21). Refer to Outcome Measure #24 for background information on this analysis population. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness - all 21 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 19 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham Treated ControlPeak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0.777 Peak CSStandard Deviation 0.732
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness-1.343 Peak CSStandard Deviation 2.492
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness10.791 Peak CSStandard Deviation 18.018
p-value: 0.08t-test, 1 sided
p-value: 0.05t-test, 1 sided
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 100% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 65 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of the PP Population analyses.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population5 Participants
p-value: 0.0959Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 100% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 45 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes5 Participants
p-value: 0.013Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline and with the ability to maintain fixation at Baseline (N=42), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 100% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 37 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation5 Participants
p-value: 0.039Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 100% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness - all 21 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 19 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥100%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness3 Participants
p-value: 0.2Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 10 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The PP population excludes seven subjects with major protocol violations, including two subjects who received a different treatment than the group to which they were randomized, four subjects with preexisting ophthalmic conditions meeting exclusion criteria (three glaucoma and one amblyopia), and one subject who experienced an intraocular lens subluxation (i.e., the displacement of a replacement lens following previous cataract surgery - unrelated to study drug) and could not perform endpoint testing at 12 months.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population5 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population4 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population9 Participants
p-value: 0.205Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 10 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The work undertaken to understand what contributed to variability in measurements in the Phase 2b study, combined with the available published literature, has led to the identification of the characteristics of individuals who provide inconsistent/unreliable data. One such characteristic is found in subjects in whom there is a substantial BCVA disparity of more than 15 letters between their study (worse) eye and fellow (better) eye. This disparity has the potential to lead to variable testing results due to the brain's un-suppression of the image from their worse-seeing eye under clinical study monocular test conditions where their dominant eye is covered.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes8 Participants
p-value: 0.009Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye and with the ability to maintain fixation at baseline (N=42), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 10 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Beyond the BCVA disparity characteristic described in the previous post-hoc outcome measures, another characteristic that was found to lead to high degrees of testing variability was the inability to maintain fixation as assessed by a fixation score of 1 on kinetic visual field testing. This inability was due to either an atypical form of RP which caused the development of a central scotoma (blind spot), or the absence of remaining central visual field. These individuals tended to have extremely variable results that were dependent upon their ability to use unsteady peripheral eccentric viewing to perform the clinical endpoint tests.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation8 Participants
p-value: 0.004Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 10 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Central foveal thickness, as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), is believed to be an anatomical marker representing the number of surviving foveal cones. A thicker central fovea corresponds to more surviving cone photoreceptors which are available to be up-regulated.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥10 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness6 Participants
p-value: 0.0406Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 13 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The PP population excludes seven subjects with major protocol violations, including two subjects who received a different treatment than the group to which they were randomized, four subjects with preexisting ophthalmic conditions meeting exclusion criteria (three glaucoma and one amblyopia), and one subject who experienced an intraocular lens subluxation (i.e., the displacement of a replacement lens following previous cataract surgery - unrelated to study drug) and could not perform endpoint testing at 12 months.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population3 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population4 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population7 Participants
p-value: 0.157Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 13 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The work undertaken to understand what contributed to variability in measurements in the Phase 2b study, combined with the available published literature, has led to the identification of the characteristics of individuals who provide inconsistent/unreliable data. One such characteristic is found in subjects in whom there is a substantial BCVA disparity of more than 15 letters between their study (worse) eye and fellow (better) eye. This disparity has the potential to lead to variable testing results due to the brain's un-suppression of the image from their worse-seeing eye under clinical study monocular test conditions where their dominant eye is covered.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes6 Participants
p-value: 0.029Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye and with the ability to maintain fixation at baseline (N=42), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 13 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Beyond the BCVA disparity characteristic described in the previous post-hoc outcome measures, another characteristic that was found to lead to high degrees of testing variability was the inability to maintain fixation as assessed by a fixation score of 1 on kinetic visual field testing. This inability was due to either an atypical form of RP which caused the development of a central scotoma (blind spot), or the absence of remaining central visual field. These individuals tended to have extremely variable results that were dependent upon their ability to use unsteady peripheral eccentric viewing to perform the clinical endpoint tests.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation6 Participants
p-value: 0.006Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 13 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Central foveal thickness, as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), is believed to be an anatomical marker representing the number of surviving foveal cones. A thicker central fovea corresponds to more surviving cone photoreceptors which are available to be up-regulated.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥13 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness6 Participants
p-value: 0.007Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 150% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 65 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of the PP Population analyses.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population4 Participants
p-value: 0.1868Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 150% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 45 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes4 Participants
p-value: 0.033Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline and with the ability to maintain fixation at Baseline (N=42), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 150% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 37 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation4 Participants
p-value: 0.096Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 150% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness - all 21 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 19 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥150%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness3 Participants
p-value: 0.2Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 15 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The PP population excludes seven subjects with major protocol violations, including two subjects who received a different treatment than the group to which they were randomized, four subjects with preexisting ophthalmic conditions meeting exclusion criteria (three glaucoma and one amblyopia), and one subject who experienced an intraocular lens subluxation (i.e., the displacement of a replacement lens following previous cataract surgery - unrelated to study drug) and could not perform endpoint testing at 12 months.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population3 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population6 Participants
p-value: 0.125Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 15 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The work undertaken to understand what contributed to variability in measurements in the Phase 2b study, combined with the available published literature, has led to the identification of the characteristics of individuals who provide inconsistent/unreliable data. One such characteristic is found in subjects in whom there is a substantial BCVA disparity of more than 15 letters between their study (worse) eye and fellow (better) eye. This disparity has the potential to lead to variable testing results due to the brain's un-suppression of the image from their worse-seeing eye under clinical study monocular test conditions where their dominant eye is covered.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes5 Participants
p-value: 0.01Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye and with the ability to maintain fixation at baseline (N=42), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 15 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Beyond the BCVA disparity characteristic described in the previous post-hoc outcome measures, another characteristic that was found to lead to high degrees of testing variability was the inability to maintain fixation as assessed by a fixation score of 1 on kinetic visual field testing. This inability was due to either an atypical form of RP which caused the development of a central scotoma (blind spot), or the absence of remaining central visual field. These individuals tended to have extremely variable results that were dependent upon their ability to use unsteady peripheral eccentric viewing to perform the clinical endpoint tests.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation5 Participants
p-value: 0.016Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 15 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Central foveal thickness, as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), is believed to be an anatomical marker representing the number of surviving foveal cones. A thicker central fovea corresponds to more surviving cone photoreceptors which are available to be up-regulated.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥15 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness5 Participants
p-value: 0.026Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 200% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to month 12 is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 65 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of the PP Population analyses.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population2 Participants
p-value: 0.608Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 200% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 45 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes2 Participants
p-value: 0.199Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline and with the ability to maintain fixation at Baseline (N=42), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 200% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 37 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation2 Participants
p-value: 0.48Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) Population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 200% in Peak CS from baseline to month 12. Assessment of the ability to detect changes in shades of grey, as measured with a vertical striped pattern that varies in width (cycles per degree or CPD); CS thresholds are created by taking the mean of multiple trials at each pattern width. A CS curve is created using a minimum of three pattern widths, one at the subject's peak or highest sensitivity, and then one larger and smaller pattern width on either side of the peak. Refer to Outcome Measure #2 for more information on how change in CS from baseline to 12 months is assessed.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness - all 21 subjects from this population completed the study, of which 19 posted a measurable CS value at both baseline and 12 months. Missing values were not imputed for purposes of this analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥200%): Peak Contrast Sensitivity (CS) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness1 Participants
p-value: 1Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population (N=76), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 20 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The PP population excludes seven subjects with major protocol violations, including two subjects who received a different treatment than the group to which they were randomized, four subjects with preexisting ophthalmic conditions meeting exclusion criteria (three glaucoma and one amblyopia), and one subject who experienced an intraocular lens subluxation (i.e., the displacement of a replacement lens following previous cataract surgery - unrelated to study drug) and could not perform endpoint testing at 12 months.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) population - 74 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population1 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population2 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population4 Participants
p-value: 0.173Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye at baseline (N=55), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 20 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. The work undertaken to understand what contributed to variability in measurements in the Phase 2b study, combined with the available published literature, has led to the identification of the characteristics of individuals who provide inconsistent/unreliable data. One such characteristic is found in subjects in whom there is a substantial BCVA disparity of more than 15 letters between their study (worse) eye and fellow (better) eye. This disparity has the potential to lead to variable testing results due to the brain's un-suppression of the image from their worse-seeing eye under clinical study monocular test conditions where their dominant eye is covered.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes - 54 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes3 Participants
p-value: 0.072Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye and with the ability to maintain fixation at baseline (N=42), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 20 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Beyond the BCVA disparity characteristic described in the previous post-hoc outcome measures, another characteristic that was found to lead to high degrees of testing variability was the inability to maintain fixation as assessed by a fixation score of 1 on kinetic visual field testing. This inability was due to either an atypical form of RP which caused the development of a central scotoma (blind spot), or the absence of remaining central visual field. These individuals tended to have extremely variable results that were dependent upon their ability to use unsteady peripheral eccentric viewing to perform the clinical endpoint tests.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population with ≤15 letter baseline BCVA disparity between eyes and ability to maintain fixation - 41 subjects from this population completed the study

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes & Ability to Maintain Fixation3 Participants
p-value: 0.098Fisher Exact
Post Hoc

Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness

Comparison of responder rates across treatment groups in the Per Protocol (PP) population with a study eye that is ≤15 letters worse than the fellow eye, the ability to maintain fixation, and with at least 130µm of central foveal thickness (as measured in the central subfield region) remaining at baseline (N=21), with a responder being defined as someone who gains at least 20 letters in BCVA (assessed by E-ETDRS) from baseline to month 12. Central foveal thickness, as measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), is believed to be an anatomical marker representing the number of surviving foveal cones. A thicker central fovea corresponds to more surviving cone photoreceptors which are available to be up-regulated.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Per Protocol (PP) Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and \>130µm Central Foveal Thickness

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Sham Treated ControlResponder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 1Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness0 Participants
Test (jCell Injection) Dose Level 2Responder Analysis (≥20 Letters): Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) - PP Population With ≤15 Letter Baseline BCVA Disparity Between Eyes, Ability to Maintain Fixation, and >130µm Central Foveal Thickness3 Participants
p-value: 0.2Fisher Exact

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 10, 2026