Skip to content

Safety and Efficacy of KPI-121 in Subjects With DED

A Phase 3, Double-masked, Randomized, Controlled Study of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic Suspension Compared to Vehicle In Subjects With Dry Eye Disease (STRIDE 3)

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03616899
Acronym
STRIDE 3
Enrollment
901
Registered
2018-08-06
Start date
2018-07-10
Completion date
2020-02-05
Last updated
2021-04-02

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

Conditions

Kerato Conjunctivitis Sicca

Brief summary

The primary purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension compared to vehicle (placebo) in subjects who have a documented clinical diagnosis of dry eye disease. The product will be studied over 14 days, with 1-2 drops instilled in each eye four times daily (QID).

Detailed description

This is a Phase 3, multi-center, double-masked, randomized, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension versus vehicle in subjects with dry eye disease.

Interventions

DRUGKPI-121 Ophthalmic Suspension

KPI-121 Ophthalmic Suspension

DRUGVehicle

Vehicle for KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension

Sponsors

Kala 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
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Have a documented clinical diagnosis of dry eye disease in both eyes

Exclusion criteria

* Known hypersensitivity or contraindication to the investigational product(s) or components * History of glaucoma, IOP\>21 mmHg at the screening or randomization visits, or being treated for glaucoma in either eye. * Diagnosis of: ongoing ocular infection; severe/serious ocular condition that in judgment of Investigator could confound study assessments or limit compliance; or have been exposed to an investigational drug within 30 days prior to screening. * In the opinion of the Investigator or study coordinator, be unwilling or unable to comply with study protocol or unable to successfully instill eye drops.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15)Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse.
Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) in the Subgroup of Participants With More Severe Ocular DiscomfortBaseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse, in a sub-group of participants with more severe ocular discomfort at baseline.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Conjunctival Hyperemia Scores at Visit 4 (Day 15) by Alternate AssessorBaseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)Comparison of mean bulbar conjunctival hyperemia between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-4 grading scale. The grading scale was based on the Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit Grading Scale where 0 = none, 1 = very slight, 2 = slight, 3 = moderate and 4 = severe.
Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Bulbar Conjunctival Hyperemia at Visit 4 (Day 15)Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)Comparison of mean bulbar conjunctival hyperemia between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-4 grading scale. The grading scale was based on the Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit Grading Scale where 0 = none, 1 = very slight, 2 = slight, 3 = moderate and 4 = severe.
Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) Using 7 Day MeanBaseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) to Visit 4 (Day 15)Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse.
Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Corneal Fluorescein Staining Score at Visit 4 (Day 15)Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) to Visit 4 (Day 15)Comparison of mean corneal fluorescein staining between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using methods developed by the National Eye Institute (NEI) Dry Eye Workshop in evaluating 5 regions of the cornea (superior, inferior, nasal, temporal and central) using a 0-3 grading scale, where 0 = no visible staining, 1 = Mild, 2 = moderate and 3 = severe.
Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 3 (Day 8)Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) to Visit 3 (Day 8)Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

901 subjects were randomized and all were included in the ITT population.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic Suspension
KPI-121 Ophthalmic Suspension: KPI-121 Ophthalmic Suspension
447
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic Suspension
Vehicle: Vehicle for KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension
454
Total901

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicKPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionTotalVehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic Suspension
Age, Continuous57.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.26
57.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.39
57.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.53
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
26 Participants63 Participants37 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
71 Participants144 Participants73 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
2 Participants3 Participants1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
348 Participants689 Participants341 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
447 participants901 participants454 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
339 Participants669 Participants330 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
108 Participants232 Participants124 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 4490 / 452
other
Total, other adverse events
39 / 44926 / 452
serious
Total, serious adverse events
3 / 4491 / 452

Outcome results

Primary

Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15)

Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse.

Time frame: Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)

Population: Intent to Treat population minus subjects in each treatment group that discontinued the study by this time point or otherwise did not have this assessment completed

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15)-13.58 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.379
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15)-8.91 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.579
Primary

Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) in the Subgroup of Participants With More Severe Ocular Discomfort

Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse, in a sub-group of participants with more severe ocular discomfort at baseline.

Time frame: Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)

Population: Sub-group of Intent to Treat population with more severe ocular discomfort minus subjects in each treatment group that discontinued the study by this time point or otherwise did not have this assessment completed.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) in the Subgroup of Participants With More Severe Ocular Discomfort-15.59 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.373
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) in the Subgroup of Participants With More Severe Ocular Discomfort-10.15 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.739
Secondary

Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Bulbar Conjunctival Hyperemia at Visit 4 (Day 15)

Comparison of mean bulbar conjunctival hyperemia between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-4 grading scale. The grading scale was based on the Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit Grading Scale where 0 = none, 1 = very slight, 2 = slight, 3 = moderate and 4 = severe.

Time frame: Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)

Population: Intent to Treat population minus subjects in each treatment group that discontinued the study by this time point or otherwise did not have this assessment completed

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Bulbar Conjunctival Hyperemia at Visit 4 (Day 15)-0.35 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.575
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Bulbar Conjunctival Hyperemia at Visit 4 (Day 15)-0.18 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.546
Secondary

Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Corneal Fluorescein Staining Score at Visit 4 (Day 15)

Comparison of mean corneal fluorescein staining between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using methods developed by the National Eye Institute (NEI) Dry Eye Workshop in evaluating 5 regions of the cornea (superior, inferior, nasal, temporal and central) using a 0-3 grading scale, where 0 = no visible staining, 1 = Mild, 2 = moderate and 3 = severe.

Time frame: Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) to Visit 4 (Day 15)

Population: Intent to Treat population minus subjects in each treatment group that discontinued the study by this time point or otherwise did not have this assessment completed

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Corneal Fluorescein Staining Score at Visit 4 (Day 15)-0.53 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Corneal Fluorescein Staining Score at Visit 4 (Day 15)-0.43 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.739
Secondary

Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 3 (Day 8)

Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse.

Time frame: Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) to Visit 3 (Day 8)

Population: Intent to Treat population minus subjects in each treatment group that discontinued the study by this time point or otherwise did not have this assessment completed.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)Dispersion
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 3 (Day 8)-8.05 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.009
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 3 (Day 8)-5.83 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.176
Secondary

Change From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) Using 7 Day Mean

Comparison of mean ocular discomfort severity between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-100 visual analog grading scale where 0 was better and 100 was worse.

Time frame: Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) to Visit 4 (Day 15)

Population: Intent to Treat population minus subjects in each treatment group that discontinued the study by this time point or otherwise did not have this assessment completed.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) Using 7 Day Mean-11.76 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.035
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange From Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) in Ocular Discomfort Severity at Visit 4 (Day 15) Using 7 Day Mean-7.91 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.298
Secondary

Change in Conjunctival Hyperemia Scores at Visit 4 (Day 15) by Alternate Assessor

Comparison of mean bulbar conjunctival hyperemia between the KPI-121 0.25% ophthalmic suspension group and the vehicle group using a 0-4 grading scale. The grading scale was based on the Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit Grading Scale where 0 = none, 1 = very slight, 2 = slight, 3 = moderate and 4 = severe.

Time frame: Baseline/Visit 2 (Day 1) and to Visit 4 (Day 15)

Population: Intent to Treat population minus subjects in each treatment group that discontinued the study by this time point or otherwise did not have this assessment completed

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange in Conjunctival Hyperemia Scores at Visit 4 (Day 15) by Alternate Assessor-0.61 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.646
Vehicle of KPI-121 0.25% Ophthalmic SuspensionChange in Conjunctival Hyperemia Scores at Visit 4 (Day 15) by Alternate Assessor-0.48 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.657

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026