Presbyopia
Conditions
Brief summary
A study to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of pilocarpine hydrochloride (HCl) ophthalmic solution (AGN-190584) when administered bilaterally, once daily for 30 days in participants with presbyopia.
Interventions
OTHERVehicle
Vehicle, one drop in each eye, once daily, for up to 30 days.
Pilocarpine HCl ophthalmic solution 1.25%, one drop in each eye, once daily, for up to 30 days.
Sponsors
Allergan
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to 55 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
\- Subjective complaints of poor near vision that impact activities of daily living
Exclusion criteria
* History of cataract surgery, phakic intraocular lens surgery, corneal inlay surgery, radial keratotomy, or any intraocular surgery * Use of any topical ophthalmic medications, including artificial tears other than the study medications during the study * Use of temporary or permanent punctal plugs or history of punctal cautery in one or both eyes * Corneal abnormalities (including keratoconus, corneal scar, Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy, guttata, or edema) in either eye that are likely to interfere with visual acuity * Narrow iridocorneal angles (Shaffer grade ≤2 or lower on gonioscopy examination), history of angle-closure glaucoma, or previous iridotomy * Diagnosis of any type of glaucoma or ocular hypertension
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 3 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3) | Visual acuity for near (40 centimeters (cm)) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 candelas per square meter (cd/m\^2) measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast DCNVA are reported. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 8 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 8) | Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 candelas per square meter measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast DCNVA are reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.5 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 0.5) | Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement in visual acuity. Mixed effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) was used for analyses. |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 1 | Day 30 (Hour 1) | Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in photopic conditions using an eye chart. Photopic condition was defined as high lighting ≥80 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. Percentage of participants achieving 20/40 or better in photopic, high-contrast, binocular, DCNVA are reported. |
| Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic Near Vision Presbyopia Task-based Questionnaire (NVPTQ) Performance Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3) | NVPTQ had 12 questions on 4 reading tasks(reading a paragraph from book, excerpts from an article in newspaper, portion of a nutrition label, and a section from restaurant menu). Participants completed specific reading tasks under mesopic conditions without any near-vision correction and answered 3 questions for each task, rating their vision-related reading ability as 0=I could not read any text due to problems seeing up close,1=poor,2=fair,3=good,4=very good,5=excellent;impact of squinting on performance as 0=No,I did not squint, 1=Yes,squinting helped me read some/all text, 2=Yes,but I still could not read any of the text; and satisfaction as 0=very dissatisfied to 4=very satisfied. The score based on vision related ability and impact of squinting=(Book testlet+Newspaper testlet+Menu testlet+Nutrition Label testlet)/(testlets with non-missing responses), total possible score of 0-5. Higher scores=better outcomes;positive change from Baseline=improved performance(reading ability). |
| Change From Baseline in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA) Letters at Day 30, Hour 3 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3) | Visual acuity for intermediate (66 cm) target was measured in photopic conditions using an eye chart. Photopic condition was defined as high lighting ≥80 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement in visual acuity. MMRM was used for analyses. |
| Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 6 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 6) | Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 candelas per square meter measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast DCNVA are reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.25 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 0.25) | Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement in visual acuity. MMRM was used for analyses. |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 3 | Day 30 (Hour 3) | Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Photopic condition was defined as high lighting ≥80 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. Percentage of participants achieving 20/40 or better in photopic, high-contrast, binocular, DCNVA are reported. |
| Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic NVPTQ Satisfaction Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3) | NVPTQ had 12 questions on 4 reading tasks(reading a paragraph from book, excerpts from an article in newspaper, portion of a nutrition label, and a section from restaurant menu). Participants completed specific reading tasks under mesopic conditions without any near-vision correction and answered 3 questions for each task, rating their vision-related reading ability as 0=I could not read any text due to problems seeing up close to 5=excellent; impact of squinting on performance as 0=No, I did not squint, 1=Yes, squinting helped me read some/all text, 2=Yes, but I still could not read any of the text; and satisfaction as 0=very dissatisfied,1=dissatisfied,2=neither satisfied nor dissatisfied,3=satisfied, 4=very satisfied. The score based on satisfaction items=(Book testlet+Newspaper testlet+Menu testlet+Nutrition Label testlet)/(testlets with non-missing responses) for a total possible score of 0 to 4. Higher scores=better outcomes; a positive change from Baseline=higher satisfaction. |
| Mean Change From Baseline in Presbyopia Impact and Coping Questionnaire (PICQ) Coping Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3) | PICQ=20 questions about impact experienced by participants due to their problems over past 7 days.PICQ Coping domain had 8 items: 1:Normal-sized text,2:Small-sized text,3:Information on a computer,4:Information on a cell phone,5:Increase font size,6:Use glasses to read close,12:Hold reading materials farther out/closer,13:Squint to read. Each item had response categories:0=never to 4=all the time. Items 3, 4, 5, and 6 had additional response categories with values of 9/10 to indicate the question is not applicable to participant and were assigned missing values.PICQ Coping Score:(Item 1,2 Testlet+Item 3,4 Testlet+Item 5+Item 6+Item 12+Item 13)/non-missing responses to the 6 components of coping score where Items 1,2 Testlet=(Item1+Item2)/non-missing responses to Items 1,2;Items 3,4 Testlet=(Item3+Item4)/non-missing responses to Items 3, 4. Score ranges:0=to least amount of coping to 4=greatest amount of coping. Higher scores=poorer outcome; a negative change from Baseline=improvement. |
| Mean Change From Baseline in PICQ Impact Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3) | PICQ had 20 questions about impact experienced by participants due to their problems seeing up over past 7 days. PICQ Impact domain had 6 items: Item 9:Rely on others,15:rest eyes,16:Feel older,17:Feel self-conscious,19:Take longer to complete a task,20:Inconvenient. First 5 impacts items included response categories: 0=never to 4=all the time. Item 20 had response categories: 0=not at all to 4=extremely. Item 9 included an additional response category with a value of 9 to indicate question was not applicable to participant and the responses were assigned missing values. PICQ Impacts Score=\[(Item9+Item15+Items16,17Testlet+Item19+Item20)/(nonmissing responses to 5 components of impacts score)\] where Items 16,17 Testlet=(Item16+Item17)/non-missing responses to Items 16 and 17. PICQ Impact score ranges from 0 to 4; with 0=least amount of impacts to 4=greatest amount of impacts. Higher scores correspond to poorer outcomes. A negative change from Baseline=improvement. |
| Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 10 | Baseline (Day1) to Day 30 (Hour 10) | Visual acuity for near (40cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 cd/m\^2measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast, binocular DCNVA are reported. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Vehicle Participants received one drop of vehicle in each eye, once daily, for up to 30 days. | 160 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution Participants received one drop of pilocarpine HCl ophthalmic solution 1.25% in each eye, once daily, for up to 30 days. | 163 |
| Total | 323 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Adverse Event | 2 | 2 |
| Overall Study | Lost to Follow-up | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Physician Decision | 2 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 2 | 0 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Total | Vehicle |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 49.5 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.81 | 49.6 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.53 | 49.7 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.23 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 31 Participants | 57 Participants | 26 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 132 Participants | 266 Participants | 134 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 2 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 2 Participants | 3 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 13 Participants | 25 Participants | 12 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 148 Participants | 292 Participants | 144 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 113 Participants | 235 Participants | 122 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 50 Participants | 88 Participants | 38 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 160 | 0 / 163 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 15 / 159 | 23 / 163 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 159 | 0 / 163 |
Outcome results
Primary
Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 3
Visual acuity for near (40 centimeters (cm)) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 candelas per square meter (cd/m\^2) measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast DCNVA are reported.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3)
Population: Intent-to-treat (ITT) Population included all randomized participants. Missing data was imputed as non-responders.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 3 | 8.1 percentage of participants |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 3 | 30.7 percentage of participants |
p-value: <0.000195% CI: [14.3, 30.8]Chi-squared
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.25
Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement in visual acuity. MMRM was used for analyses.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 0.25)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.25 | 3.7 letters correctly read | Standard Error 0.5 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.25 | 6.3 letters correctly read | Standard Error 0.49 |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [1.3, 3.9]MMRM
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.5
Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement in visual acuity. Mixed effect model for repeated measures (MMRM) was used for analyses.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 0.5)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.5 | 4.2 letters read correctly | Standard Error 0.55 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Change From Baseline in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular DCNVA Letters at Day 30, Hour 0.5 | 9.3 letters read correctly | Standard Error 0.54 |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [3.7, 6.5]MMRM
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA) Letters at Day 30, Hour 3
Visual acuity for intermediate (66 cm) target was measured in photopic conditions using an eye chart. Photopic condition was defined as high lighting ≥80 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement in visual acuity. MMRM was used for analyses.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Change From Baseline in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA) Letters at Day 30, Hour 3 | 3.1 letters read correctly | Standard Error 0.42 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Change From Baseline in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA) Letters at Day 30, Hour 3 | 6.6 letters read correctly | Standard Error 0.41 |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [2.4, 4.6]MMRM
Secondary
Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic Near Vision Presbyopia Task-based Questionnaire (NVPTQ) Performance Score at Day 30, Hour 3
NVPTQ had 12 questions on 4 reading tasks(reading a paragraph from book, excerpts from an article in newspaper, portion of a nutrition label, and a section from restaurant menu). Participants completed specific reading tasks under mesopic conditions without any near-vision correction and answered 3 questions for each task, rating their vision-related reading ability as 0=I could not read any text due to problems seeing up close,1=poor,2=fair,3=good,4=very good,5=excellent;impact of squinting on performance as 0=No,I did not squint, 1=Yes,squinting helped me read some/all text, 2=Yes,but I still could not read any of the text; and satisfaction as 0=very dissatisfied to 4=very satisfied. The score based on vision related ability and impact of squinting=(Book testlet+Newspaper testlet+Menu testlet+Nutrition Label testlet)/(testlets with non-missing responses), total possible score of 0-5. Higher scores=better outcomes;positive change from Baseline=improved performance(reading ability).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was used for analysis.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic Near Vision Presbyopia Task-based Questionnaire (NVPTQ) Performance Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | 0.6 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic Near Vision Presbyopia Task-based Questionnaire (NVPTQ) Performance Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | 1.4 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [0.6, 1.1]ANCOVA
Secondary
Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic NVPTQ Satisfaction Score at Day 30, Hour 3
NVPTQ had 12 questions on 4 reading tasks(reading a paragraph from book, excerpts from an article in newspaper, portion of a nutrition label, and a section from restaurant menu). Participants completed specific reading tasks under mesopic conditions without any near-vision correction and answered 3 questions for each task, rating their vision-related reading ability as 0=I could not read any text due to problems seeing up close to 5=excellent; impact of squinting on performance as 0=No, I did not squint, 1=Yes, squinting helped me read some/all text, 2=Yes, but I still could not read any of the text; and satisfaction as 0=very dissatisfied,1=dissatisfied,2=neither satisfied nor dissatisfied,3=satisfied, 4=very satisfied. The score based on satisfaction items=(Book testlet+Newspaper testlet+Menu testlet+Nutrition Label testlet)/(testlets with non-missing responses) for a total possible score of 0 to 4. Higher scores=better outcomes; a positive change from Baseline=higher satisfaction.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses. ANCOVA was used for analysis.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic NVPTQ Satisfaction Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | 0.6 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Mean Change From Baseline in Mesopic NVPTQ Satisfaction Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | 1.4 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [0.5, 1.1]ANCOVA
Secondary
Mean Change From Baseline in PICQ Impact Score at Day 30, Hour 3
PICQ had 20 questions about impact experienced by participants due to their problems seeing up over past 7 days. PICQ Impact domain had 6 items: Item 9:Rely on others,15:rest eyes,16:Feel older,17:Feel self-conscious,19:Take longer to complete a task,20:Inconvenient. First 5 impacts items included response categories: 0=never to 4=all the time. Item 20 had response categories: 0=not at all to 4=extremely. Item 9 included an additional response category with a value of 9 to indicate question was not applicable to participant and the responses were assigned missing values. PICQ Impacts Score=\[(Item9+Item15+Items16,17Testlet+Item19+Item20)/(nonmissing responses to 5 components of impacts score)\] where Items 16,17 Testlet=(Item16+Item17)/non-missing responses to Items 16 and 17. PICQ Impact score ranges from 0 to 4; with 0=least amount of impacts to 4=greatest amount of impacts. Higher scores correspond to poorer outcomes. A negative change from Baseline=improvement.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses. ANCOVA was used for analysis.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Mean Change From Baseline in PICQ Impact Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | -0.4 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Mean Change From Baseline in PICQ Impact Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | -0.7 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [-0.4, -0.1]ANCOVA
Secondary
Mean Change From Baseline in Presbyopia Impact and Coping Questionnaire (PICQ) Coping Score at Day 30, Hour 3
PICQ=20 questions about impact experienced by participants due to their problems over past 7 days.PICQ Coping domain had 8 items: 1:Normal-sized text,2:Small-sized text,3:Information on a computer,4:Information on a cell phone,5:Increase font size,6:Use glasses to read close,12:Hold reading materials farther out/closer,13:Squint to read. Each item had response categories:0=never to 4=all the time. Items 3, 4, 5, and 6 had additional response categories with values of 9/10 to indicate the question is not applicable to participant and were assigned missing values.PICQ Coping Score:(Item 1,2 Testlet+Item 3,4 Testlet+Item 5+Item 6+Item 12+Item 13)/non-missing responses to the 6 components of coping score where Items 1,2 Testlet=(Item1+Item2)/non-missing responses to Items 1,2;Items 3,4 Testlet=(Item3+Item4)/non-missing responses to Items 3, 4. Score ranges:0=to least amount of coping to 4=greatest amount of coping. Higher scores=poorer outcome; a negative change from Baseline=improvement.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 3)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses. ANCOVA was used for analysis.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Mean Change From Baseline in Presbyopia Impact and Coping Questionnaire (PICQ) Coping Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | -0.5 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Mean Change From Baseline in Presbyopia Impact and Coping Questionnaire (PICQ) Coping Score at Day 30, Hour 3 | -1.0 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [-0.6, -0.3]ANCOVA
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 1
Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in photopic conditions using an eye chart. Photopic condition was defined as high lighting ≥80 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. Percentage of participants achieving 20/40 or better in photopic, high-contrast, binocular, DCNVA are reported.
Time frame: Day 30 (Hour 1)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at Baseline and the timepoint.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 1 | 73.9 percentage of participants |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 1 | 92.5 percentage of participants |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [10.6, 26.7]Chi-squared
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 3
Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Photopic condition was defined as high lighting ≥80 cd/m\^2 measured at the target. Percentage of participants achieving 20/40 or better in photopic, high-contrast, binocular, DCNVA are reported.
Time frame: Day 30 (Hour 3)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at Baseline and the timepoint.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 3 | 71.9 percentage of participants |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Percentage of Participants Achieving 20/40 or Better in Photopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 3 | 84.5 percentage of participants |
p-value: 0.017195% CI: [3.5, 21.6]Chi-squared
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 10
Visual acuity for near (40cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 cd/m\^2measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast, binocular DCNVA are reported.
Time frame: Baseline (Day1) to Day 30 (Hour 10)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at Baseline and the timepoint.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 10 | 8.6 percentage of participants |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 10 | 7.5 percentage of participants |
p-value: 195% CI: [-7.1, 5]Chi-squared
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 8
Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 candelas per square meter measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast DCNVA are reported.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 8)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Overall number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at Baseline and the timepoint.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 8 | 8.5 percentage of participants |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3-lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular, DCNVA at Day 30, Hour 8 | 10.6 percentage of participants |
p-value: 195% CI: [-4.4, 8.5]Chi-squared
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 6
Visual acuity for near (40 cm) target was measured in mesopic conditions using an eye chart. Mesopic condition was defined as low lighting 3.2 to 3.5 candelas per square meter measured at the target. Percentage of participants with 3 lines or more improvement from Baseline in mesopic, high-contrast DCNVA are reported.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) to Day 30 (Hour 6)
Population: ITT Population included all randomized participants. Missing data was imputed as non-responders.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vehicle | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 6 | 8.8 percentage of participants |
| Pilocarpine HCl Ophthalmic Solution | Percentage of Participants Gaining 3 Lines or More in Mesopic, High-contrast, Binocular Distance-Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA) at Day 30, Hour 6 | 18.4 percentage of participants |
p-value: 0.011495% CI: [2.3, 17]Chi-squared