OBJECTIVE: To evaluate photographic measures of cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis as surrogate outcomes for changes in vision in patients with CMV retinitis related to the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. METHODS: Data from 3 clinical trials of CMV retinitis treatments were analyzed. Two photographic assessments of retinitis in eyes involved at baseline were evaluated: progression (lesion border movement > or = 750 microm or occurrence of a new lesion) and change in area of retina involved with retinitis. Vision measures were decline in best-corrected visual acuity and change in visual field. Photographic measures were evaluated as surrogate outcomes based on 4 criteria: (1) association with vision measure; (2) ability to account for treatment-related differences in vision measure; (3) data completeness; and (4) sample size requirements. RESULTS: Data from 1001 involved eyes (666 patients) were analyzed. Progression and change in area involved were predictive of declines in vision measures, accounted for 50% and 66% of the treatment effect on visual field, and were available from 93% and 64% of involved eyes, respectively. Sample size estimates for a clinical trial were smallest with progression as the design outcome. CONCLUSION: Progression and change in area involved met the first and second criteria for surrogate outcomes for visual field loss; a complete evaluation for visual acuity decline was not possible because treatment-related differences were not observed. Progression met the logistical and sample size criteria better than change in area of retina involved with retinitis.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate photographic measures of cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis as surrogate outcomes for changes in vision in patients with CMV retinitis related to the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. METHODS: Data from 3 clinical trials of CMV retinitis treatments were analyzed. Two photographic assessments of retinitis in eyes involved at baseline were evaluated: progression (lesion border movement > or = 750 microm or occurrence of a new lesion) and change in area of retina involved with retinitis. Vision measures were decline in best-corrected visual acuity and change in visual field. Photographic measures were evaluated as surrogate outcomes based on 4 criteria: (1) association with vision measure; (2) ability to account for treatment-related differences in vision measure; (3) data completeness; and (4) sample size requirements. RESULTS: Data from 1001 involved eyes (666 patients) were analyzed. Progression and change in area involved were predictive of declines in vision measures, accounted for 50% and 66% of the treatment effect on visual field, and were available from 93% and 64% of involved eyes, respectively. Sample size estimates for a clinical trial were smallest with progression as the design outcome. CONCLUSION: Progression and change in area involved met the first and second criteria for surrogate outcomes for visual field loss; a complete evaluation for visual acuity decline was not possible because treatment-related differences were not observed. Progression met the logistical and sample size criteria better than change in area of retina involved with retinitis.