Scott Xiao1, Endri Angjeli1, Hank C Wu1, Eric D Gaier2, Stephanie Gomez1, Dean A Travers1, Gil Binenbaum3, Robert Langer4, David G Hunter1, Michael X Repka5. 1. Luminopia, Inc, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 2. Luminopia, Inc, Cambridge, Massachusetts; Picower Institute for Learning and Memory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 3. Division of Ophthalmology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Chemical Engineering and the Koch Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 5. Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Digital therapeutics are a new class of interventions that are software driven and are intended to treat various conditions. We developed and evaluated a dichoptic digital therapeutic for amblyopia, a neurodevelopmental disorder for which current treatments may be limited by poor adherence and residual vision deficits. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred five children 4 to 7 years of age with amblyopia were enrolled at 21 academic and community sites in the United States. Participants were randomized 1:1 to the treatment or comparison group, stratified by site. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3 randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a dichoptic digital therapeutic for amblyopia. Participants in the treatment group used the therapeutic at home for 1 hour per day, 6 days per week and wore glasses full-time. Participants in the comparison group continued wearing glasses full-time alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy outcome was change in amblyopic eye visual acuity (VA) from baseline at 12 weeks, and VA was measured by masked examiners. Safety was evaluated using the frequency and severity of study-related adverse events. Primary analyses were conducted using the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between January 16, 2019, and January 15, 2020, 105 participants were enrolled; 51 were randomized to the treatment group and 54 were randomized to the comparison group. At 12 weeks, amblyopic eye VA improved by 1.8 lines (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-2.3 lines; n = 45) in the treatment group and by 0.8 lines (95% CI, 0.4-1.3 lines; n = 45) in the comparison group. At the planned interim analysis (adjusted α = 0.0193), the difference between groups was significant (1.0 lines; P = 0.0011; 96.14% CI, 0.33-1.63 lines) and the study was stopped early for success, according to the protocol. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the value of the therapeutic in clinical practice as an effective treatment. Future studies should evaluate the therapeutic compared with other methods and in additional patient populations.
PURPOSE: Digital therapeutics are a new class of interventions that are software driven and are intended to treat various conditions. We developed and evaluated a dichoptic digital therapeutic for amblyopia, a neurodevelopmental disorder for which current treatments may be limited by poor adherence and residual vision deficits. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred five children 4 to 7 years of age with amblyopia were enrolled at 21 academic and community sites in the United States. Participants were randomized 1:1 to the treatment or comparison group, stratified by site. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3 randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a dichoptic digital therapeutic for amblyopia. Participants in the treatment group used the therapeutic at home for 1 hour per day, 6 days per week and wore glasses full-time. Participants in the comparison group continued wearing glasses full-time alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy outcome was change in amblyopic eye visual acuity (VA) from baseline at 12 weeks, and VA was measured by masked examiners. Safety was evaluated using the frequency and severity of study-related adverse events. Primary analyses were conducted using the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between January 16, 2019, and January 15, 2020, 105 participants were enrolled; 51 were randomized to the treatment group and 54 were randomized to the comparison group. At 12 weeks, amblyopic eye VA improved by 1.8 lines (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-2.3 lines; n = 45) in the treatment group and by 0.8 lines (95% CI, 0.4-1.3 lines; n = 45) in the comparison group. At the planned interim analysis (adjusted α = 0.0193), the difference between groups was significant (1.0 lines; P = 0.0011; 96.14% CI, 0.33-1.63 lines) and the study was stopped early for success, according to the protocol. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the value of the therapeutic in clinical practice as an effective treatment. Future studies should evaluate the therapeutic compared with other methods and in additional patient populations.
Authors: Reed M Jost; Lindsey A Hudgins; Lori M Dao; David R Stager; Becky Luu; Cynthia L Beauchamp; Jeffrey S Hunter; Prashanthi Giridhar; Yi-Zhong Wang; Eileen E Birch Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-03-09 Impact factor: 4.379