| Literature DB >> 26656277 |
Hendrik P N Scholl1, Anthony T Moore2,3, Robert K Koenekoop4, Yuquan Wen5,6, Gerald A Fishman7, L Ingeborgh van den Born8, Ava Bittner1,9, Kristen Bowles1,10, Emily C Fletcher1,11, Frederick T Collison7, Gislin Dagnelie1, Simona Degli Eposti2, Michel Michaelides2, David A Saperstein12,13, Ronald A Schuchard13,14, Claire Barnes13,15, Wadih Zein16, Ditta Zobor17, David G Birch5,18, Janine D Mendola4, Eberhart Zrenner17.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Restoring vision in inherited retinal degenerations remains an unmet medical need. In mice exhibiting a genetically engineered block of the visual cycle, vision was recently successfully restored by oral administration of 9-cis-retinyl acetate (QLT091001). Safety and visual outcomes of a once-daily oral dose of 40 mg/m2/day QLT091001 for 7 consecutive days was investigated in an international, multi-center, open-label, proof-of-concept study in 18 patients with RPE65- or LRAT-related retinitis pigmentosa. Eight of 18 patients (44%) showed a ≥20% increase and 4 of 18 (22%) showed a ≥40% increase in functional retinal area determined from Goldmann visual fields; 12 (67%) and 5 (28%) of 18 patients showed a ≥5 and ≥10 ETDRS letter score increase of visual acuity, respectively, in one or both eyes at two or more visits within 2 months of treatment. In two patients who underwent fMRI, a significant positive response was measured to stimuli of medium contrast, moving, pattern targets in both left and right hemispheres of the occipital cortex. There were no serious adverse events. Treatment-related adverse events were transient and the most common included headache, photophobia, nausea, vomiting, and minor biochemical abnormalities. Measuring the outer segment length of the photoreceptor layer with high-definition optical coherence tomography was highly predictive of treatment responses with responders having a significantly larger baseline outer segment thickness (11.7 ± 4.8 μm, mean ± 95% CI) than non-responders (3.5 ± 1.2 μm). This structure-function relationship suggests that treatment with QLT091001 is more likely to be efficacious if there is sufficient photoreceptor integrity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01014052.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26656277 PMCID: PMC4687523 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143846
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1CONSORT Flow Diagram for the RET IRD 01 Study.
Patient Characteristics, Genetic Information, Visual Field and Visual Acuity Response Profile by Patient.
| Patient Number | Age (yrs)/ Gender | Gene | Zygosity (homozygous/ compound heterozygous) | cDNA | Protein | Baseline VA ETDRS Letter Score | VA Response | Baseline GVF Retinal area (mm2) | GVF Response | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OD | OS | OD | OS | OD | OS | OD | OS | ||||||
| 110 | 28/M |
| homozygous | c.525T>A | p.Ser175Arg | 70.5 | 59.5 | 8.9 | 10.5 | 42 | 17 | 68% | 331% |
| 111 | 41/M |
| homozygous | c.181T>A | p.Tyr61Asp | 0 | 1.5 | No | 16.0 | 288 | 288 | No | No |
| 117 | 6/M |
| homozygous | c.427_428delCG | p.Arg143ValfsX3 | 37 | 39.5 | 14.2 | 11.8 | 263 | 251 | 52% | 42% |
| 118 | 11/M |
| homozygous | c.887InsA | p.Arg296LysfsX6 | 40.5 | 19 | No | No | 12 | 4 | 31% | 160% |
| 201 | 30/M |
| homozygous | c.1102T>C | p.Tyr368His | 64 | 51 | 5.3 | No | 145 | 76 | No | No |
| 202 | 20/F |
| homozygous | c.519delG | p.Ile174SerfsX12 | 60.5 | 40 | No | 9.5 | 34 | 25 | No | No |
| 301 | 37/M |
| homozygous | c.179T>C | p.Leu60Pro | 13.5 | 22 | 6.8 | 5.5 | 339 | 339 | No | 32% |
| 302 | 55/F |
| homozygous | c.40_41delGAinsTT | p.Glu14Leu | 53 | 27.5 | No | No | 145 | 120 | No | No |
| 303 | 29/M |
| homozygous | c.179T>C | p.Leu60Pro | 63.5 | 59 | No | No | 204 | 195 | No | No |
| 304 | 36/F |
| homozygous | c.179T>C | p.Leu60Pro | 11.5 | 11.5 | No | No | 30 | 39 | No | No |
| 401 | 28/F |
| homozygous | c.304G>T | p.Glu102X | 0 | 0 | 1.0 | 2.5 | 3 | 3 | No | No |
| 402 | 30/F |
| heterozygous | c.11+5G>A; 725+2T>A | [splice];[splice] | 39 | 10.5 | No | 14.6 | 12 | 59 | No | No |
| 403 | 21/F |
| heterozygous | c.11+5G>A;c.1102T>C | [splice]; [p.Tyr368His] | 23 | 50 | No | 8.0 | 25 | 26 | 62% | No |
| 501 | 40/M |
| homozygous | c.495+1 insG | p.Gln165fsX2 | 11 | 3 | No | No | 126 | 74 | No | 59% |
| 502 | 24/F |
| heterozygous | c.118G>A; c.272G>A | p.Gly40Ser; p.Arg 91Gln | 33 | 29.5 | No | No | 145 | 35 | 38% | 54% |
| 503 | 26/F |
| heterozygous | c.1444delGAT; c.250A>T | p.Asp482del; p.Ile84Phe | 3 | 45 | 6.0 | No | 191 | 135 | No | No |
| 601 | 21/M |
| heterozygous | c.986G>A; c.1102T>C | p.Cys329Tyr; p.Tyr368His | 8 | 16.5 | No | 9.3 | 100 | 174 | 81% | 51% |
| 701 | 23/M |
| heterozygous | c.1067insT; c.1178C>G | p.Asn356LysfsX8; p.Ala393Glu | 17 | 61.5 | 11.7 | No | 68 | 54 | No | No |
a In this study, we defined visual acuity (VA) response as improvement in VA ≥0·1 logMAR (≥5 letter score, or from 0 to seeing any letters) on at least 2 consecutive visits starting by Month 2. The VA response is the mean VA change from baseline across the responding visits.
b GVF response was defined as improvements in GVF retinal area ≥20% on at least 2 consecutive visits starting by Month 2. The GVF response is the mean percent change from baseline in retinal area across the responding visits.
c Patient 401 was considered a responder because she had no measurable VA at baseline but did have measurable VA after treatment.
Fig 2Percent of Treatment Responders for Functional Retinal Area (A, top) and Visual Acuity (B, bottom).
Response in functional retina area was defined as an increase in visual field area from baseline of ≥20% increase in the visual field area in the primary isopter in one or both eyes at two or more visits within 2 months of treatment. Visual acuity response was defined as an increase from baseline in visual acuity of ≥5 ETDRS letter score at two or more visits within 2 months of treatment.
Functional Retinal Area Responders for Primary Isopter (top) and Visual Acuity Responders (bottom).
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
| LRAT | 5 | 2 | (40%) | 2 | (40%) | 1 | (20%) | 1 | (20%) |
| RPE65 | 13 | 6 | (46%) | 3 | (23%) | 3 | (23%) | 1 | (8%) |
|
| |||||||||
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
| LRAT | 5 | 4 | (80%) | 2 | (40%) | 2 | (40%) | 0 | |
| RPE65 | 13 | 8 | (62%) | 2 | (15%) | 3 | (23%) | 1 | (8%) |
a For at least 2 consecutive visits starting within 2 months from the start of QLT091001 treatment.
Note: The responder categories include one patient who was not able to read any letters on the ETDRS chart at baseline but who was on-chart post-treatment (both eyes of patient 401 with RPE65 deficiency); inclusion criteria required either best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of at least 3 letter score or evidence from OCT/FAF of a viable photoreceptor layer.
Fig 3Goldmann Visual Fields and Respective SD-OCT scans of the Central Retina in a Treatment Responder and a Non-Responder.
(A) Normal subject. The horizontal midline scan shows segmentation lines separating Vitreous/Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer (RNFL), RNFL/Retinal Ganglion Cell Layer (RGC), Inner Plexiform Layer (IPL)/Inner Nuclear Layer (INL), INL/Outer Plexiform Layer (OPL), Inner segment (IS)/Outer segment (OS), OS/ Retinal Pigment Epithelium (RPE), Bruch’s Membrane (BM)/Choroid. The OS layer lies between the IS/OS line and the OS/RPE line (see Hood et al. 2009 Ref 19). (B) SD-OCT foveal scan at screening (length of OS layer in the central 20° was 23.1 μm), (C) Goldmann Visual Field (GVF) at screening visit (retinal area of primary isopter = 26 mm2) and at month 1.5 (D) (retinal area of primary isopter = 81 mm2) in a RP patient who showed a treatment response (subject 110 OS, see Table 1). (E) SD-OCT foveal scan at screening (length of OS layer in the central 20° was 6.2 μm), (F) Goldmann Visual Field (GVF) at screening visit (retinal area of primary isopter = 55 mm2) and at month 1 (G) (retinal area of primary isopter was 44 mm2) of a non-responder (subject 402 OS, see Table 1).
Duration of Functional Retinal Area Response for Primary Isopter (top) and Visual Acuity Response (bottom).
|
| |||||||
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| LRAT eyes | 10 | 4 | 123 | 22–253 | 2 | 104 | 34–174 |
| RPE65 eyes | 26 | 9 | 49 | 7–107 | 4 | 67 | 16–107 |
|
| |||||||
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| LRAT eyes | 10 | 6 | 194 | 47–246 | 2 | 129 | 125–132 |
| RPE65 eyes | 26 | 10 | 84 | 13–226 | 4 | 104 | 13–206 |
a For at least 2 consecutive visits starting within 2 months from the start of QLT091001 treatment.
Fig 4Functional MRI for Two Patients (110 and 111) in Response to Patterned Moving Stimuli Varying from High to Low Luminance Contrast.
(A) Depiction of the stimuli at three contrasts, high to low from left to right. (B) For patient 111, before treatment, the visual cortical response was robust for high contrast, modest for medium contrast, and negligible for low contrast. After treatment, the response to medium and low contrast stimuli increased noticeably. The statistical maps for the first (before treatment) and the fourth (after treatment) session are shown (0.01 < p < 0.0001, FDR), each on a flattened representation of the posterior cortex, for both left and right hemisphere. The occipital pole is marked in the lower left panel with a green asterisk for orientation; v-shaped margin of cortex represents the split calcarine sulcus. (C) For patient 111, for medium contrast stimulus, the regions in medial occipital cortex that show significant increased response for all post-treatment scans compared to all pre-treatment scans are shown on medial view inflated brain. (D) Similar results were also obtained for patient 110.