Skip to content

Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal APL-2 Therapy With Sham Injections in Patients With Geographic Atrophy (GA) Secondary to Age-Related Macular Degeneration

A Phase 3, Multi-Center, Randomized, Double-Masked, Sham-Controlled Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Pegcetacoplan Therapy With Sham Injections in Patients With Geographic Atrophy (GA) Secondary to Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD)

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03525600
Enrollment
621
Registered
2018-05-15
Start date
2018-08-31
Completion date
2022-06-20
Last updated
2023-06-18

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

Conditions

Geographic Atrophy

Brief summary

This is a 24-month, Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, sham-injection controlled study to assess the efficacy and safety of multiple IVT injections of APL-2 in subjects with GA secondary to AMD.

Interventions

DRUGAPL-2

Complement (C3) Inhibitor

OTHERSham Procedure

Subjects will receive a Sham procedure every month

Sponsors

Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

The study eye must meet all inclusion criteria. If both eyes meet the inclusion criteria, the eye with the worst visual acuity at the screening visit will be designated as the study eye. If both eyes have the same visual acuity, the right eye will be selected as the study eye. Ocular- specific inclusion criteria apply to the study eye only, unless otherwise specified. * Age ≥ 60 years. * Normal Luminance best corrected visual acuity of 24 letters or better using Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts (approximately 20/320 Snellen equivalent). * Clinical diagnosis of GA of the macula secondary to AMD as determined by the Investigator and confirmed by the Reading Center. * The GA lesion must meet the following criteria as determined by the central reading center's assessment of Fundus Autofluorescence (FAF) imaging at screening: * Total GA area must be ≥ 2.5 and ≤ 17.5 mm2 (1 and 7 disk areas \[DA\] respectively) * If GA is multifocal, at least one focal lesion must be ≥ 1.25 mm2 (0.5 DA), with the overall aggregate area of GA as specified above in 4a. * The entire GA lesion must be completely visualized on the macula centered image and must be able to be imaged in its entirety and not contiguous with any areas of peripapillary atrophy. * Presence of any pattern of hyperautofluorescence in the junctional zone of GA. Absence of hyperautofluorescence (i.e. pattern = none) is exclusionary. * Adequate clarity of ocular media, adequate pupillary dilation, and fixation to permit the collection of good quality images as determined by the Investigator. * Female subjects must be: * Women of non-child-bearing potential (WONCBP), or * Women of child-bearing potential (WOCBP) with a negative serum pregnancy test at screening and must agree to use protocol defined methods of contraception for the duration of the study and refrain from breastfeeding for the duration of the study. * Males with female partners of child-bearing potential must agree to use protocol defined methods of contraception and agree to refrain from donating sperm for the duration of the study. * Willing and able to give informed consent and to comply with the study procedures and assessments.

Exclusion criteria

Ocular specific

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Least Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 12Baseline (screening) and Month 12The GA lesion area was measured by a quantified central reading center based on FAF images. LS mean was calculated using a mixed effect model for repeated measure (MMRM) model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
LS Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 24Baseline (screening) and Month 24The GA lesion area was measured by a quantified central reading center based on FAF images. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.
Mean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Baseline (screening) through Month 24The mean change in GA lesion area through Month 24 was measured by assuming a piecewise linear trend in time with knots by FAF images at Months 6, 12, and 18 and was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.
LS Mean Change From Baseline in Monocular Maximum Reading Speed of the Study Eye at Month 24Baseline (screening) and Month 24The maximum reading speed of the study eye was calculated per Minnesota Low-Vision Reading Test (MNREAD) or Radner Reading Charts user manuals, with no adjustment for reading inaccuracy. An additional step to cap resulting reading speed values at a maximum of 300 words per minute (wpm) was implemented. Maximum reading speed was calculated as the mean of the 3 highest non-zero reading speeds (or 2, or 1 value, as available), except when all wpm were calculated as 0 then the maximum reading speed was calculated as 0. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.
LS Mean Change From Baseline in Mean Functional Reading Independence (FRI) Index Score at Month 24Baseline (screening) and Month 24The FRI was an interviewer-administered questionnaire with 7 items on functional reading activities most relevant to GA AMD subjects. It had 1 total index score. For each FRI Index reading activity performed in the past 7 days, subjects were asked about the extent to which they required assistance beyond eyeglasses/contact lenses, including the use of low-vision aids, adjustments in the activity, or help from another subject. Mean FRI Index scores ranged from 1 (unable to do independently) to 4 (totally independent), with higher scores indicating higher functional reading independence. A negative change from baseline indicated a decrease in the FRI; disease worsening. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.
LS Mean Change From Baseline in Normal-Luminance Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (NL-BCVA) Score of the Study Eye at Month 24Baseline (screening) and Month 24The NL-BCVA was assessed by early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) chart prior to dilating the eyes at a starting distance of 4 meters and ranged from 0 (least score) to 100 (best score). If the 4-meter score was \>19 letters read correctly, the visual acuity score was the sum of total letters correctly read at 4 meters plus the addition of 30. If the 4-meter score was ≤19 letters read correctly, the visual acuity score was the sum of total letters read correctly at 4 meters and total letters read correctly at the 1-meter distance. If no letters were read correctly at either the 4-meter distance or the 1-meter distance, the visual acuity score was 0. A positive change in the value indicated improvement in visual acuity. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Countries

Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Czechia, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Poland, Puerto Rico, Spain, United Kingdom, United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

This Phase III, randomized, double-masked, sham injection-controlled study was conducted in subjects with geographic atrophy (GA) secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD) at 122 sites in 14 countries between 31 Aug 2018 and 20 Jun 2022.

Pre-assignment details

This study consisted of a screening period (up to 30 days), a randomization visit on Day 1, and a treatment period (up to 24 months). Subjects were randomized in a 2:2:1:1 ratio on Day 1 to receive treatment with pegcetacoplan monthly, pegcetacoplan every other month (EOM), sham injection monthly or sham injection EOM, respectively. A total of 621 subjects were randomized in this study.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Pegcetacoplan Monthly
Subjects received IVT injections of pegcetacoplan 15 mg/0.1 mL once monthly for 24 months.
206
Pegcetacoplan EOM
Subjects received IVT injections of pegcetacoplan 15 mg/0.1 mL EOM for 24 months.
208
Sham Pooled
Sham Monthly: Subjects received sham injections once monthly for 24 months. Sham EOM: Subjects received sham injections EOM for 24 months. The procedure for sham injection was the same as that used for IVT injection until the actual injection but no actual injection occurred.
207
Total621

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002FG003
Overall StudyAdverse Event9653
Overall StudyConsent withdrawal3620613
Overall StudyDeath7643
Overall StudyDue to Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) impact41033
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up2440
Overall StudyOther0100
Overall StudyPhysician Decision1020

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPegcetacoplan MonthlyPegcetacoplan EOMSham PooledTotal
Age, Continuous78.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.91
79.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.06
78.5 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.24
78.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.07
GA Lesion Size (fundus autofluorescence [FAF]) in the Study Eye8.3606 Millimeter square (mm^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.16892
8.2076 Millimeter square (mm^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.91213
8.2572 Millimeter square (mm^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.21864
8.2749 Millimeter square (mm^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.09557
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
0 Participants1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants2 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Hispanic or Latino
32 Participants37 Participants29 Participants98 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Multiple
0 Participants1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Not Hispanic or Latino
163 Participants155 Participants172 Participants490 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Not reported
12 Participants11 Participants6 Participants29 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Not Reported
10 Participants12 Participants6 Participants28 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Unknown
1 Participants4 Participants0 Participants5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
192 Participants192 Participants200 Participants584 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Argentina
18 Participants24 Participants18 Participants60 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Australia
3 Participants1 Participants4 Participants8 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Brazil
9 Participants13 Participants10 Participants32 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Canada
2 Participants1 Participants4 Participants7 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Czechia
2 Participants7 Participants5 Participants14 Participants
Region of Enrollment
France
12 Participants14 Participants7 Participants33 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Germany
3 Participants4 Participants11 Participants18 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Israel
0 Participants4 Participants2 Participants6 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Italy
2 Participants1 Participants0 Participants3 Participants
Region of Enrollment
New Zealand
1 Participants0 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Poland
2 Participants7 Participants6 Participants15 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Spain
1 Participants0 Participants2 Participants3 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United Kingdom
5 Participants6 Participants10 Participants21 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
146 Participants126 Participants128 Participants400 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
121 Participants126 Participants132 Participants379 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
85 Participants82 Participants75 Participants242 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
EG004
affected / at risk
EG005
affected / at risk
EG006
affected / at risk
EG007
affected / at risk
EG008
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 2060 / 2080 / 2060 / 2060 / 2080 / 2068 / 2066 / 2088 / 206
other
Total, other adverse events
113 / 20682 / 20861 / 20635 / 20634 / 20829 / 20690 / 20670 / 208101 / 206
serious
Total, serious adverse events
4 / 2062 / 2082 / 2061 / 2061 / 2080 / 20661 / 20647 / 20853 / 206

Outcome results

Primary

Least Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 12

The GA lesion area was measured by a quantified central reading center based on FAF images. LS mean was calculated using a mixed effect model for repeated measure (MMRM) model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Time frame: Baseline (screening) and Month 12

Population: The modified ITT (mITT) analysis set consisted of all subjects assigned to treatment who received at least 1 injection of pegcetacoplan or sham and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of GA lesion area in the study eye as assessed by FAF. Subjects with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of the outcome at a scheduled visit by Month 12 were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyLeast Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 121.7344 mm^2Standard Error 0.07924
Pegcetacoplan EOMLeast Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 121.7563 mm^2Standard Error 0.07446
Sham PooledLeast Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 121.9640 mm^2Standard Error 0.09592
Comparison: Model included treatment + baseline GA lesion area (\<7.5 mm\^2 or ≥7.5 mm\^2) + analysis visit + presence of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) in the fellow eye (yes or no) + analysis visit × treatment + baseline GA lesion area × analysis visit.p-value: 0.061595% CI: [-0.4703, 0.0111]MMRM model
Comparison: Model included treatment + baseline GA lesion area (\<7.5 mm\^2 or ≥7.5 mm\^2) + analysis visit + presence of CNV in the fellow eye (yes or no) + analysis visit × treatment + baseline GA lesion area × analysis visit.p-value: 0.085495% CI: [-0.4444, 0.029]MMRM model
Secondary

LS Mean Change From Baseline in Mean Functional Reading Independence (FRI) Index Score at Month 24

The FRI was an interviewer-administered questionnaire with 7 items on functional reading activities most relevant to GA AMD subjects. It had 1 total index score. For each FRI Index reading activity performed in the past 7 days, subjects were asked about the extent to which they required assistance beyond eyeglasses/contact lenses, including the use of low-vision aids, adjustments in the activity, or help from another subject. Mean FRI Index scores ranged from 1 (unable to do independently) to 4 (totally independent), with higher scores indicating higher functional reading independence. A negative change from baseline indicated a decrease in the FRI; disease worsening. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Time frame: Baseline (screening) and Month 24

Population: The mITT analysis set consisted of all subjects assigned to treatment who received at least 1 injection of pegcetacoplan or sham and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of GA lesion area in the study eye as assessed by FAF. Subjects with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of the outcome at a scheduled visit by Month 24 were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyLS Mean Change From Baseline in Mean Functional Reading Independence (FRI) Index Score at Month 24-0.408 scores on a scaleStandard Error 0.057
Pegcetacoplan EOMLS Mean Change From Baseline in Mean Functional Reading Independence (FRI) Index Score at Month 24-0.371 scores on a scaleStandard Error 0.0562
Sham PooledLS Mean Change From Baseline in Mean Functional Reading Independence (FRI) Index Score at Month 24-0.360 scores on a scaleStandard Error 0.0601
Secondary

LS Mean Change From Baseline in Monocular Maximum Reading Speed of the Study Eye at Month 24

The maximum reading speed of the study eye was calculated per Minnesota Low-Vision Reading Test (MNREAD) or Radner Reading Charts user manuals, with no adjustment for reading inaccuracy. An additional step to cap resulting reading speed values at a maximum of 300 words per minute (wpm) was implemented. Maximum reading speed was calculated as the mean of the 3 highest non-zero reading speeds (or 2, or 1 value, as available), except when all wpm were calculated as 0 then the maximum reading speed was calculated as 0. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Time frame: Baseline (screening) and Month 24

Population: The mITT analysis set consisted of all subjects assigned to treatment who received at least 1 injection of pegcetacoplan or sham and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of GA lesion area in the study eye as assessed by FAF. Subjects with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of the outcome at a scheduled visit by Month 24 were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyLS Mean Change From Baseline in Monocular Maximum Reading Speed of the Study Eye at Month 24-22.897 wpmStandard Error 4.1171
Pegcetacoplan EOMLS Mean Change From Baseline in Monocular Maximum Reading Speed of the Study Eye at Month 24-25.532 wpmStandard Error 2.7676
Sham PooledLS Mean Change From Baseline in Monocular Maximum Reading Speed of the Study Eye at Month 24-22.355 wpmStandard Error 2.9341
Secondary

LS Mean Change From Baseline in Normal-Luminance Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (NL-BCVA) Score of the Study Eye at Month 24

The NL-BCVA was assessed by early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) chart prior to dilating the eyes at a starting distance of 4 meters and ranged from 0 (least score) to 100 (best score). If the 4-meter score was \>19 letters read correctly, the visual acuity score was the sum of total letters correctly read at 4 meters plus the addition of 30. If the 4-meter score was ≤19 letters read correctly, the visual acuity score was the sum of total letters read correctly at 4 meters and total letters read correctly at the 1-meter distance. If no letters were read correctly at either the 4-meter distance or the 1-meter distance, the visual acuity score was 0. A positive change in the value indicated improvement in visual acuity. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Time frame: Baseline (screening) and Month 24

Population: The mITT analysis set consisted of all subjects assigned to treatment who received at least 1 injection of pegcetacoplan or sham and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of GA lesion area in the study eye as assessed by FAF. Subjects with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of the outcome at a scheduled visit by Month 24 were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyLS Mean Change From Baseline in Normal-Luminance Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (NL-BCVA) Score of the Study Eye at Month 24-8.126 ETDRS letter scoreStandard Error 1.0182
Pegcetacoplan EOMLS Mean Change From Baseline in Normal-Luminance Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (NL-BCVA) Score of the Study Eye at Month 24-8.947 ETDRS letter scoreStandard Error 1.0322
Sham PooledLS Mean Change From Baseline in Normal-Luminance Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (NL-BCVA) Score of the Study Eye at Month 24-6.217 ETDRS letter scoreStandard Error 1.0167
Secondary

LS Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 24

The GA lesion area was measured by a quantified central reading center based on FAF images. LS mean was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Time frame: Baseline (screening) and Month 24

Population: The mITT analysis set consisted of all subjects assigned to treatment who received at least 1 injection of pegcetacoplan or sham and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of GA lesion area in the study eye as assessed by FAF. Subjects with a baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of the outcome at a scheduled visit by Month 24 were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyLS Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 243.2275 mm^2Standard Error 0.12457
Pegcetacoplan EOMLS Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 243.3395 mm^2Standard Error 0.13034
Sham PooledLS Mean Change From Baseline in the Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye at Month 243.9726 mm^2Standard Error 0.1682
Comparison: Model included treatment + baseline GA lesion area (\<7.5 mm\^2 or ≥7.5 mm\^2) + analysis visit + baseline presence of CNV in the fellow eye (yes or no) + analysis visit × treatment + baseline GA lesion area (\<7.5 mm\^2 or ≥7.5 mm\^2) × analysis visit.p-value: 0.000495% CI: [-1.1539, -0.3362]MMRM model
Comparison: Model included treatment + baseline GA lesion area (\<7.5 mm\^2 or ≥7.5 mm\^2) + analysis visit + baseline presence of CNV in the fellow eye (yes or no) + analysis visit × treatment + baseline GA lesion area (\<7.5 mm\^2 or ≥7.5 mm\^2) × analysis visit.p-value: 0.00395% CI: [-1.0508, -0.2153]MMRM model
Secondary

Mean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24

The mean change in GA lesion area through Month 24 was measured by assuming a piecewise linear trend in time with knots by FAF images at Months 6, 12, and 18 and was calculated using a MMRM model. Baseline was defined as the last available, non-missing observation prior to first study drug administration.

Time frame: From Baseline (screening) through Month 24

Population: The mITT analysis set consisted of all subjects assigned to treatment who received at least 1 injection of pegcetacoplan or sham and had baseline and at least 1 post-baseline value of GA lesion area in the study eye as assessed by FAF.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 18 to Month 240.6262 mm^2Standard Error 0.06809
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 12 to Month 180.9033 mm^2Standard Error 0.04917
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Baseline to Month 60.9075 mm^2Standard Error 0.04755
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 6 to Month 120.8409 mm^2Standard Error 0.05128
Pegcetacoplan MonthlyMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Baseline to Month 243.2780 mm^2Standard Error 0.12525
Pegcetacoplan EOMMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 12 to Month 180.8803 mm^2Standard Error 0.05105
Pegcetacoplan EOMMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Baseline to Month 60.8829 mm^2Standard Error 0.0466
Pegcetacoplan EOMMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 6 to Month 120.8473 mm^2Standard Error 0.05086
Pegcetacoplan EOMMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 18 to Month 240.6946 mm^2Standard Error 0.05256
Pegcetacoplan EOMMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Baseline to Month 243.3051 mm^2Standard Error 0.12871
Sham PooledMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Baseline to Month 244.0031 mm^2Standard Error 0.1688
Sham PooledMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 18 to Month 240.9794 mm^2Standard Error 0.05469
Sham PooledMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Baseline to Month 60.9622 mm^2Standard Error 0.04983
Sham PooledMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 12 to Month 181.0483 mm^2Standard Error 0.05574
Sham PooledMean Change in Total Area of GA Lesions in the Study Eye Through Month 24From Month 6 to Month 121.0132 mm^2Standard Error 0.05998
Comparison: Estimates for Baseline to Month 6: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.428295% CI: [-0.1899, 0.0806]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Baseline to Month 6: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.245795% CI: [-0.2131, 0.0546]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Month 6 to Month 12: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.029295% CI: [-0.327, -0.0174]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Month 6 to Month 12: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.035295% CI: [-0.3202, -0.0115]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Month 12 to Month 18: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.051495% CI: [-0.2909, 0.0009]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Month 12 to Month 18: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.026595% CI: [-0.3164, -0.0196]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Month 18 to Month 24: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-0.5245, -0.1819]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Month 18 to Month 24: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.000295% CI: [-0.4336, -0.1361]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Baseline to Month 24: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.000695% CI: [-1.1373, -0.3129]MMRM model
Comparison: Estimates for Baseline to Month 24: Model included Treatment + Baseline GA lesion area (\< 7.5 mm\^2 or \>= 7.5 mm\^2) + Time (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) + Presence of CNV in the fellow eye (Yes or No) + Time (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 6 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 12 (continuous) x Treatment + Time Spline at Month 18 (continuous) x Treatment +p-value: 0.00195% CI: [-1.1142, -0.2817]MMRM model

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 23, 2026