Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-000441-13 | EudraCT Number |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Chugai Pharmaceutical | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This is a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, active comparator-controlled, parallel-group study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of faricimab administered by intravitreal (IVT) injection at 4-week intervals until Week 24, followed by a double-masked period of study without active control to evaluate faricimab administered according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen in patients with macular edema due to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) or hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO).
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm A: Faricimab Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | Experimental | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm A will receive faricimab 6 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
| Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | Active Comparator | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Faricimab | Drug | Faricimab will be administered by intravitreal (IVT) injection as specified in each treatment arm. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Part 1: Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | From Baseline through Week 24 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Part 1: Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Ocular Exclusion Criteria for Study Eye:
Ocular Exclusion Criteria for Both Eyes:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical Trials | Hoffmann-La Roche | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barnet Dulaney Perkins Eye Center | Mesa | Arizona | 85206 | United States | ||
| Retinal Research Institute, LLC |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40107501 | Derived | Danzig CJ, Dinah C, Ghanchi F, Hattenbach LO, Khanani AM, Lai TYY, Shimura M, Abreu F, Arrisi P, Liu Y, Paris LP, Retiere AC, Willis JR, Schlottmann PG; BALATON and COMINO Investigators. Faricimab Treat-and-Extend Dosing for Macular Edema Due to Retinal Vein Occlusion: 72-Week Results from the BALATON and COMINO Trials. Ophthalmol Retina. 2025 Sep;9(9):848-859. doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2025.03.005. Epub 2025 Mar 17. | |
| 38280653 |
Not provided
Not provided
For eligible studies, qualified researchers may request access to individual patient level clinical data. See Roche's commitment to transparency of clinical study information here: https://go.roche.com/data\_sharing
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Arm A: Faricimab Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm A will receive faricimab 6 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 1 (Baseline up to Week 24) |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot | Yes | No | No | Study Protocol | Nov 17, 2020 | Nov 22, 2023 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Aflibercept | Drug | Aflibercept 2 mg will be administered by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
| Sham Procedure | Procedure | The sham is a procedure that mimics an IVT injection, but involves the blunt end of an empty syringe (without a needle) being pressed against the anesthetized eye. It will be administered to participants in both treatments arms at applicable visits to maintain masking. |
|
| Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | From Baseline through Week 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining >0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥84 Letters in BCVA (20/20 Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥69 Letters in BCVA (20/40 or Better Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants With ≤38 Letters in BCVA (20/200 or Worse Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (>38 and ≤38 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world). All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and the Bruch's membrane (BM) using optical coherence tomography (OCT), as assessed by the central reading center. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline CST (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Macular Edema in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Absence of diabetic macular edema was defined as achieving a central subfield thickness of <325 microns in the study eye. Central subfield thickness was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Intraretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Subretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid and Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid were measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| Part 1: Change From Baseline in National Eye Institute 25-Item Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) Composite Score at Week 24 | The NEI VFQ-25 captures a patient's perception of vision-related functioning and vision-related quality of life. The core measure includes 25 items that comprise 11 vision-related subscales and 1 item on general health. The composite score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better vision-related functioning. For the ANCOVA analysis, the model uses the non-missing change from baseline in BCVA at Weeks 24 as the response variables adjusted for the treatment group, baseline NEI VFQ-25 Composite Score (continuous), baseline BCVA score (≥55 and ≤54 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and the rest of the world). Observed NEI VFQ-25 assessments were used regardless of the occurrence of intercurrent events. Missing data were not imputed. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline and Week 24 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining >0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥84 Letters in BCVA (20/20 Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥69 Letters in BCVA (20/40 or Better Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With ≤38 Letters in BCVA (20/200 or Worse Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (>38 and ≤38 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world). All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Change From Baseline in NEI VFQ-25 Questionnaire Composite Score at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | The NEI VFQ-25 captures a patient's perception of vision-related functioning and vision-related quality of life. The core measure includes 25 items that comprise 11 vision-related subscales and 1 item on general health. The composite score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better vision-related functioning. For the MMRM analysis, the model adjusted for the treatment group, visit, visit-by-treatment group interaction, baseline NEI VFQ-25 Composite Score continuous), baseline BCVA score (≥55 and ≤54 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and the rest of the world). Observed NEI VFQ-25 assessments were used regardless of the occurrence of intercurrent events. Missing data were implicitly imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 24, 48, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) using optical coherence tomography (OCT), as assessed by the central reading center. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline CST (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Macular Edema in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Absence of diabetic macular edema was defined as achieving a central subfield thickness of <325 microns in the study eye. Central subfield thickness was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Intraretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Subretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid and Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid were measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Part 2: Change From Week 24 in BCVA in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of >0 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| Part 2: Percentage of Participants on Different Treatment Intervals at Week 68 | In Part 2 of the study, participants in both the faricimab Q4W and aflibercept Q4W arms in Part 1 received 6 mg faricimab intravitreal injections administered according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen in intervals between Q4W and Q16W. At faricimab dosing visits, treatment intervals were maintained or adjusted (i.e., increased by 4 weeks or decreased by 4, 8, or 12 weeks), based on central subfield thickness (CST) and BCVA values. | Week 68 |
| Part 2: Number of Study Drug Injections Received in the Study Eye From Week 24 Through Week 72 | From Week 24 to Week 72 |
| Incidence and Severity of Ocular Adverse Events in the Study Eye, With Severity Determined According to Adverse Event Severity Grading Scale | This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes ocular AEs that occurred in the study eye. Investigators sought information on AEs at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. Ocular AEs of special interest included the following: Suspected transmission of an infectious agent by the study drug; Sight-threatening AEs that cause a drop in visual acuity (VA) score ≥30 letters lasting more than 1 hour, require surgical or medical intervention to prevent permanent loss of sight, or are associated with severe intraocular inflammation (IOI). | Part 1: From first dose up to Week 24; Part 2: from Week 24 through Week 72 |
| Incidence of Ocular Adverse Events in the Fellow Eye | This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes ocular AEs that occurred in the fellow eye. Investigators sought information on AEs at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. Ocular AEs of special interest included the following: Suspected transmission of an infectious agent by the study drug; Sight-threatening AEs that cause a drop in visual acuity (VA) score ≥30 letters lasting more than 1 hour, require surgical or medical intervention to prevent permanent loss of sight, or are associated with severe intraocular inflammation (IOI). | Part 1: From first dose up to Week 24; Part 2: from Week 24 through Week 72 |
| Incidence of Non-Ocular Adverse Events | This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes non-ocular (systemic) AEs. Investigators sought information on adverse events (AEs) at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. The non-ocular AE of special interest was: Cases of potential drug-induced liver injury that include an elevated ALT or AST in combination with either an elevated bilirubin or clinical jaundice, as defined by Hy's Law. | Part 1: From first dose up to Week 24; Part 2: from Week 24 through Week 72 |
| Plasma Concentration of Faricimab Over Time | Predose at Day 1 (Baseline), Weeks 4, 24, 28, 52, and 72 |
| Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) to Faricimab at Baseline and Post-Baseline During the Study | Anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against fariciamb were detected in plasma using a validated bridging enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The number of participants with treatment-emergent ADA-positive samples includes post-baseline evaluable participants with at least one treatment-induced (defined as having an ADA-negative sample or missing sample at baseline and any positive post-baseline sample) or treatment-boosted (defined as having an ADA-positive sample at baseline and any positive post-baseline sample with a titer that is equal to or greater than 4-fold baseline titer) ADA-positive sample during the study treatment period. Treatment-unaffected ADA-positive is a post-baseline sample with a titer that is lower than 4-fold the ADA-positive baseline titer (faricimab arm) or the ADA-positive titer prior to first faricimab injection (aflibercept arm). | Predose at Day 1 (Baseline), Weeks 4, 24, 28, 52, and 72 |
| Phoenix |
| Arizona |
| 85014 |
| United States |
| Retina Associates Southwest PC | Tucson | Arizona | 85704 | United States |
| Retinal Diagnostic Center | Campbell | California | 95008 | United States |
| The Retina Partners | Encino | California | 91436 | United States |
| Retina Consultants of Orange County | Fullerton | California | 92835-3424 | United States |
| Northern California Retina Vitreous Associates | Mountain View | California | 94040 | United States |
| East Bay Retina Consultants | Oakland | California | 94609 | United States |
| California Eye Specialists Medical group Inc. | Pasadena | California | 91107 | United States |
| Retina Consultants, San Diego | Poway | California | 92064 | United States |
| West Coast Retina Medical Group | San Francisco | California | 94109 | United States |
| Retina Consultants of Southern Colorado PC | Colorado Springs | Colorado | 80909 | United States |
| Colorado Retina Associates, PC | Lakewood | Colorado | 80228 | United States |
| Retina Group of New England | Waterford | Connecticut | 06385 | United States |
| Advanced Research | Deerfield Beach | Florida | 33064 | United States |
| Rand Eye | Deerfield Beach | Florida | 33064 | United States |
| Florida Eye Associates | Melbourne | Florida | 32901 | United States |
| Fort Lauderdale Eye Institute | Plantation | Florida | 33324 | United States |
| Retina Vitreous Assoc of FL | St. Petersburg | Florida | 33711 | United States |
| Retina Associates of Florida, LLC | Tampa | Florida | 33609 | United States |
| Southeast Retina Center | Augusta | Georgia | 30909 | United States |
| Georgia Retina PC | Marietta | Georgia | 30060-1137 | United States |
| Retina Consultants of Hawaii | ‘Aiea | Hawaii | 96701 | United States |
| Northwestern Medical Group/Northwestern University | Chicago | Illinois | 60611 | United States |
| Retina Associated Ltd | Elmhurst | Illinois | 60126 | United States |
| University Retina and Macula Associates, PC | Oak Forest | Illinois | 60452 | United States |
| Prairie Retina Center | Springfield | Illinois | 62704 | United States |
| Retina Associates | Lenexa | Kansas | 66215 | United States |
| Johns Hopkins Med; Wilmer Eye Inst | Baltimore | Maryland | 21287 | United States |
| Retina Group of Washington | Chevy Chase | Maryland | 20815 | United States |
| Cumberland Valley Retina PC | Hagerstown | Maryland | 21740 | United States |
| Assoc Retinal Consultants PC | Royal Oak | Michigan | 48073 | United States |
| VitreoRetinal Surgery, PLLC.; DBA Retina Consultants of Minnesota | Edina | Minnesota | 55435 | United States |
| Midwest Vision Research Foundation | Chesterfield | Missouri | 63017 | United States |
| Sierra Eye Associates | Reno | Nevada | 89502 | United States |
| Long Is. Vitreoretinal Consult | Hauppauge | New York | 11788 | United States |
| Retina Vit Surgeons/Central NY | Liverpool | New York | 13088 | United States |
| Retina Assoc of Western NY | Rochester | New York | 14620 | United States |
| Cincinnati Eye Institute | Cincinnati | Ohio | 45242 | United States |
| Retina Northwest | Portland | Oregon | 97221 | United States |
| Cascade Medical Research Institute LLC | Springfield | Oregon | 97477 | United States |
| Mid Atlantic Retina - Wills Eye Hospital | Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | 19107 | United States |
| Charleston Neuroscience Institute | Ladson | South Carolina | 29456 | United States |
| Palmetto Retina Center | West Columbia | South Carolina | 29169 | United States |
| Black Hills Eye Institute | Rapid City | South Dakota | 57701 | United States |
| Charles Retina Institute | Germantown | Tennessee | 38138 | United States |
| Tennessee Retina PC | Nashville | Tennessee | 37203 | United States |
| Retina Res Institute of Texas | Abilene | Texas | 79606 | United States |
| Austin Retina Associates | Austin | Texas | 78705-1169 | United States |
| Austin Clinical Research LLC | Austin | Texas | 78750 | United States |
| Retina & Vitreous of Texas | Bellaire | Texas | 77401-3510 | United States |
| Texas Retina Associates | Dallas | Texas | 75231 | United States |
| Retina Consultants of Texas | The Woodlands | Texas | 77384-4167 | United States |
| Strategic Clinical Research Group, LLC | Willow Park | Texas | 76087 | United States |
| Retina Associates of Utah, PLLC | Salt Lake City | Utah | 84107 | United States |
| Piedmont Eye Center | Lynchburg | Virginia | 24502 | United States |
| West Virginia University Eye Institute | Morgantown | West Virginia | 26506 | United States |
| Fundacion Zambrano | CABA | C1017AAO | Argentina |
| Centro Oftalmológico Dr. Charles S.A. | Capital Federal | C1015ABO | Argentina |
| Oftalmos | Capital Federal | C1120AAN | Argentina |
| Hospital Italiano; Ophtalmology | Capital Federal | C1199ABC | Argentina |
| Buenos Aires Mácula | Ciudad Autonoma Buenos Aires | C1061AAE | Argentina |
| Oftar | Mendoza | M5500GGK | Argentina |
| Centro Oftalmólogos Especialistas | Rosario | S2000ANJ | Argentina |
| Grupo Laser Vision | Rosario | S2000DLA | Argentina |
| Organizacion Medica de Investigacion | San Nicolás | C1015ABO | Argentina |
| Eyeclinic Albury Wodonga | Albury | New South Wales | 2640 | Australia |
| Strathfield Retina Clinic | Strathfield | New South Wales | 2135 | Australia |
| Save Sight Institute | Sydney | New South Wales | 2000 | Australia |
| Sydney Retina Clinic and Day Surgery | Sydney | New South Wales | 2000 | Australia |
| Centre For Eye Research Australia | East Melbourne | Victoria | 3002 | Australia |
| Retina Specialists Victoria | Rowville | Victoria | 3178 | Australia |
| The Lions Eye Institute | Nedlands | Western Australia | 6009 | Australia |
| LKH-Univ.Klinikum Graz; Universitäts-Augenklinik | Graz | 8036 | Austria |
| Medizinische Universität Wien; Universitätsklinik für Augenheilkunde und Optometrie | Vienna | 1090 | Austria |
| Hospital de Olhos de Aparecida - HOA | Aparecida de Goiânia | Goiás | 74980-010 | Brazil |
| Hospital das Clinicas - UFRGS | Porto Alegre | Rio Grande do Sul | 90035-903 | Brazil |
| Botelho Hospital da Visao | Blumenau | Santa Catarina | 89052-504 | Brazil |
| Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo - UNIFESP*X; Oftalmologia | São Paulo | São Paulo | 04023-062 | Brazil |
| Hosp de Olhos de Sorocaba | Sorocaba | São Paulo | 18031-060 | Brazil |
| Beijing Hospital of Ministry of Health | Beijing | 100730 | China |
| The Second Hospital of Jilin University | Changchun | 130041 | China |
| West China Hospital, Sichuan University | Chengdu | 610041 | China |
| Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University | Guangzhou | 510060 | China |
| The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine | Hangzhou | 310009 | China |
| The 2nd Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University | Harbin | 150001 | China |
| Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital | Shanghai | 200072 | China |
| Shanghai First People's Hospital | Shanghai | 200080 | China |
| He Eye Specialist Shenyang Hospital | Shenyang | 110034 | China |
| The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital; Local Ethic Committee | Shenzhen | 518053 | China |
| Tianjin Eye Hospital | Tianjin | 300050 | China |
| Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital | Tianjin | 300070 | China |
| Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University | Wenzhou | 325027 | China |
| Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University | Wuhan | 430060 | China |
| Henan Provincial Eye Hosptial | Zhengzhou | China |
| General Teaching Hospital Prague; Ophthalmology clinic | Prague | 128 08 | Czechia |
| AXON Clinical | Prague | Czechia |
| Chi De Creteil; Ophtalmologie | Créteil | 94010 | France |
| Hopital Lariboisiere; Ophtalmologie | Paris | 75010 | France |
| Centre Ophtalmologique; Imagerie et laser | Paris | 75015 | France |
| Centres Ophtalmologique St Exupéry; Ophtalmologie | Saint-Cyr-sur-Loire | 37540 | France |
| Internationale Innovative Ophthalmochirurgie GbR; c/o Makula-Netzhaut-Zentrum Breyer Kaymak Klabe | Düsseldorf-Oberkassel | 40549 | Germany |
| Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Klinik für Augenheilkunde | Freiburg im Breisgau | 79106 | Germany |
| Klinikum der Stadt Ludwigshafen am Rhein gGmbH; Augenklinik | Ludwigshafen | 67063 | Germany |
| Queen Mary Hospital; Department of Ophthalmology | Hong Kong | Hong Kong |
| Hong Kong Eye Hospital; CUHK Eye Centre | Mong Kok | Hong Kong |
| Bajcsy-Zsilinszky Hospital | Budapest | 1106 | Hungary |
| Budapest Retina Associates Kft. | Budapest | 1133 | Hungary |
| Debreceni Egyetem Klinikai Kozpont; Szemeszeti Klinika | Debrecen | 4032 | Hungary |
| Szegedi Tudományegyetem ÁOK; Department of Ophtalmology | Szeged | 6720 | Hungary |
| Zala Megyei Kórház; SZEMESZET | Zalaegerszeg | 8900 | Hungary |
| Rambam Medical Center; Opthalmology | Haifa | 3109601 | Israel |
| Hadassah MC; Ophtalmology | Jerusalem | 9112001 | Israel |
| Rabin MC; Ophtalmology | Petah Tikva | 4941492 | Israel |
| Kaplan Medical Center; Ophtalmology | Rehovot | 7660101 | Israel |
| Tel Aviv Sourasky MC; Ophtalmology | Tel Aviv | 6423906 | Israel |
| Fondazione G.B. Bietti Per Lo Studio E La Ricerca in Oftalmologia-Presidio Ospedaliero Britannico | Rome | Lazio | 00198 | Italy |
| Irccs Ospedale San Raffaele;U.O. Oculistica | Milan | Lombardy | 20132 | Italy |
| Sugita Eye Hospital | Aichi | 460-0008 | Japan |
| Nagoya University Hospital | Aichi | 466-8560 | Japan |
| Nagoya City University Hospital | Aichi | 467-8602 | Japan |
| Aichi Medical University Hospital | Aichi | 480-1195 | Japan |
| Toho University Sakura Medical Center | Chiba | 285-8741 | Japan |
| Hayashi Eye Hospital | Fukuoka | 812-0011 | Japan |
| Kurume University Hospital | Fukuoka | 830-0011 | Japan |
| Asahikawa Medical University Hospital | Hokkaido | 078-8510 | Japan |
| Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center (Hyogo AGMC) | Hyōgo | 660-8550 | Japan |
| Hyogo Medical University Hospital | Hyōgo | 663-8501 | Japan |
| Kozawa eye hospital and diabetes center | Ibaraki | 310-0845 | Japan |
| Kagawa University Hospital | Kagawa | 761-0793 | Japan |
| Kagoshima University Hospital | Kagoshima | 890-8520 | Japan |
| Mie University Hospital | Mie | 514-8507 | Japan |
| Fukushima Medical University Hospital | Miyagi | 960-1295 | Japan |
| Shinshu University Hospital | Nagano | 390-8621 | Japan |
| Osaka Metropolitan University Hospital | Osaka | 545-8586 | Japan |
| Kansai Medical University Medical Center | Osaka | 570-8507 | Japan |
| Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital | Tokyo | 162-8666 | Japan |
| Tokyo Medical University Hachioji Medical Center | Tokyo | 193-0998 | Japan |
| Szpital sw. Lukasza | Bielsko-Biala | 43-309 | Poland |
| OFTALMIKA Sp. z o.o | Bydgoszcz | 85-631 | Poland |
| Specjalistyczny O?rodek Okulistyczny Oculomedica | Bydgoszcz | 85-870 | Poland |
| Szpital Specjalistyczny nr 1; Oddzial Okulistyki | Bytom | 41-902 | Poland |
| Dobry Wzrok Sp Z O O | Gda?sk | 80-402 | Poland |
| Optimum Profesorskie Centrum Okulistyki | Gda?sk | 80-809 | Poland |
| Poradnia Okulistyczna i Salon Optyczny w Gliwicach- PRYZMAT | Gliwice | 44-100 | Poland |
| Gabinet Okulistyczny Prof Edward Wylegala | Katowice | 40-594 | Poland |
| Centrum Medyczne Dietla 19 Sp. Z O.O. | Krakow | 31-070 | Poland |
| SP ZOZ Szpital Uniwersytecki w Krakowie Oddzia? Kliniczny Okulistyki i Onkologii Okulistycznej | Krakow | 31-501 | Poland |
| MT Medic Krosno | Krosno | 38-400 | Poland |
| O?rodek Chirurgii Oka Prof. Zagórskiego Na??czów | Na??czów | 24-140 | Poland |
| Centrum Medyczne Pulawska SP. z o.o. | Piaseczno | 05-500 | Poland |
| Lens Clinic | Rybnik | 44-203 | Poland |
| Caminomed | Tarnowskie Góry | 42-600 | Poland |
| Centrum Zdrowia MDM | Warsaw | 00-189 | Poland |
| SPEKTRUM Osrodek Okulistyki Klinicznej | Wroclaw | 53-334 | Poland |
| Centro Hospitalar E Universitário de Coimbra EPE - Serviço Oftalmologia; Serviço Oftalmologia | Coimbra | 3000-075 | Portugal |
| Espaco Medico Coimbra | Coimbra | 3030-163 | Portugal |
| Hospital de Santa Maria; Servico de Oftalmologia | Lisbon | 1649-035 | Portugal |
| Clinic Optimed | Ufa | Bashkortostan Republic | 450059 | Russia |
| Intersec Research and Technology Complex ?Eye Microsurgery? n.a. S.N. Fyodorov; Cheboksary Branch | Cheboksary | Mariy-El Republic | 428000 | Russia |
| FSBI ?Scientific Research Institute of Eye Diseases? of Russian Academy of medical Sciences | Moscow | Moscow Oblast | 119435 | Russia |
| Medical Military Academy n.a S.M.Kirov | Saint Petersburg | Sankt-Peterburg | 124044 | Russia |
| 1 Saint-Petersburg St. Med. University named after academician I.P.Pavlov; Chair of ophathalmology | Saint Petersburg | Sankt-Peterburg | 197022 | Russia |
| Singapore Eye Research Institute | Singapore | 168751 | Singapore |
| Tan Tock Seng Hospital; Ophthalmology Department | Singapore | 308433 | Singapore |
| Pusan National University Hospital | Busan | 602-739 | South Korea |
| Yeungnam University Medical Center | Daegu | 42415 | South Korea |
| Seoul National University Bundang Hospital | Seongnam-si | 463-707 | South Korea |
| Kyung Hee University Hospital | Seoul | 02447 | South Korea |
| Seoul National University Hospital | Seoul | 03080 | South Korea |
| Asan Medical Center | Seoul | 05505 | South Korea |
| Samsung Medical Center | Seoul | 06351 | South Korea |
| Kim's Eye Hospital | Seoul | 07301 | South Korea |
| Hospital Universitario de Bellvitge | L'Hospitalet de Llobregat | Barcelona | 08907 | Spain |
| Hospital General de Catalunya | San Cugat Del Valles | Barcelona | 08195 | Spain |
| Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro | Majadahonda | Madrid | 28222 | Spain |
| Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra; Servicio de oftalmologia | Pamplona | Navarre | 31008 | Spain |
| Centro de Oftalmologia Barraquer; Servicio Oftalmologia | Barcelona | 08021 | Spain |
| Hospital Clinic de Barcelona; Consultas Externas Oftalmologia | Barcelona | 08028 | Spain |
| Hospital de Santa Creu I Sant Pau; Servicio de Oftalmologia | Barcelona | 08041 | Spain |
| Hospital Universitario Rio Hortega; Servicio de Oftalmologia | Valladolid | 47012 | Spain |
| Changhua Christian Hospital; Department of Ophthalmology | Changhua | 500 | Taiwan |
| Taipei Veterans General Hospital; Ophthalmology | Taipei | 11217 | Taiwan |
| Chang Gung Medical Foundation - Linkou; Ophthalmology | Taoyuan | 333 | Taiwan |
| Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL | Belfast | BT12 6BA | United Kingdom |
| Birmingham Midland Eye Centre | Birmingham | B18 7QH | United Kingdom |
| Opthalmology Research Office | Bradford | BD9 6RJ | United Kingdom |
| Bristol Eye Hospital;Retinal Treatment and Research Unit | Bristol | BS1 2LX | United Kingdom |
| University Hospital of Wales | Cardiff | CF14 4XW | United Kingdom |
| St James University Hospital | Leeds | LS9 7TF | United Kingdom |
| Royal Liverpool University Hospital; St Paul's Clinical Eye Research Centre | Liverpool | L7 8YE | United Kingdom |
| Central Middlesex Hospital | London | NW10 7NS | United Kingdom |
| Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust | Maidstone | ME16 9QQ | United Kingdom |
| Royal Victoria Infirmary | Newcastle upon Tyne | NE1 4LP | United Kingdom |
| Derived |
| Tadayoni R, Paris LP, Danzig CJ, Abreu F, Khanani AM, Brittain C, Lai TYY, Haskova Z, Sakamoto T, Kotecha A, Schlottmann PG, Liu Y, Seres A, Retiere AC, Willis JR, Yoon YH; BALATON and COMINO Investigators. Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab for Macular Edema due to Retinal Vein Occlusion: 24-Week Results from the BALATON and COMINO Trials. Ophthalmology. 2024 Aug;131(8):950-960. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.01.029. Epub 2024 Jan 26. |
| FG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
| Received at Least One Dose of Study Drug | Safety-Evaluable Population |
|
| COMPLETED | Completed Part 1 |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
| Part 2 (Week 24 to Week 72) |
|
|
ITT Population: All global participants who were randomized in the study, according to the assigned treatment.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Arm A: Faricimab Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm A will receive faricimab 6 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
| BG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | Years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Region of Enrollment | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Number of Participants by the Eye (Left or Right) Chosen as the Study Eye | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Letter Score in the Study Eye | Mean | Standard Deviation | ETDRS Letters |
| |||||||||||||||
| Number of Participants by the BCVA Letter Score Categories in the Study Eye | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Part 1: Change From Baseline in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) in the Study Eye at Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | ETDRS Letters | From Baseline through Week 24 |
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | ETDRS Letters | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | From Baseline through Week 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Gaining >0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥84 Letters in BCVA (20/20 Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥69 Letters in BCVA (20/40 or Better Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants With ≤38 Letters in BCVA (20/200 or Worse Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (>38 and ≤38 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world). All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and the Bruch's membrane (BM) using optical coherence tomography (OCT), as assessed by the central reading center. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline CST (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | microns | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Macular Edema in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Absence of diabetic macular edema was defined as achieving a central subfield thickness of <325 microns in the study eye. Central subfield thickness was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Intraretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Subretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid and Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 24 | Intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid were measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 1: Change From Baseline in National Eye Institute 25-Item Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) Composite Score at Week 24 | The NEI VFQ-25 captures a patient's perception of vision-related functioning and vision-related quality of life. The core measure includes 25 items that comprise 11 vision-related subscales and 1 item on general health. The composite score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better vision-related functioning. For the ANCOVA analysis, the model uses the non-missing change from baseline in BCVA at Weeks 24 as the response variables adjusted for the treatment group, baseline NEI VFQ-25 Composite Score (continuous), baseline BCVA score (≥55 and ≤54 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and the rest of the world). Observed NEI VFQ-25 assessments were used regardless of the occurrence of intercurrent events. Missing data were not imputed. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. Only participants with non-missing Baseline and Week 24 assessments were included for analysis. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | score on a scale | Baseline and Week 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | ETDRS Letters | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Gaining >0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥84 Letters in BCVA (20/20 Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants Achieving ≥69 Letters in BCVA (20/40 or Better Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With ≤38 Letters in BCVA (20/200 or Worse Snellen Equivalent) in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (>38 and ≤38 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world). All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Change From Baseline in NEI VFQ-25 Questionnaire Composite Score at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | The NEI VFQ-25 captures a patient's perception of vision-related functioning and vision-related quality of life. The core measure includes 25 items that comprise 11 vision-related subscales and 1 item on general health. The composite score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better vision-related functioning. For the MMRM analysis, the model adjusted for the treatment group, visit, visit-by-treatment group interaction, baseline NEI VFQ-25 Composite Score continuous), baseline BCVA score (≥55 and ≤54 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and the rest of the world). Observed NEI VFQ-25 assessments were used regardless of the occurrence of intercurrent events. Missing data were implicitly imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | score on a scale | Baseline, Weeks 24, 48, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Change From Baseline in Central Subfield Thickness in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Central subfield thickness (CST) was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) using optical coherence tomography (OCT), as assessed by the central reading center. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline CST (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | microns | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Macular Edema in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Absence of diabetic macular edema was defined as achieving a central subfield thickness of <325 microns in the study eye. Central subfield thickness was defined as the distance between the internal limiting membrane (ILM) and Bruch's membrane (BM) as assessed by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Intraretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Subretinal fluid was measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Parts 1 and 2: Percentage of Participants With Absence of Intraretinal Fluid and Subretinal Fluid in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Intraretinal fluid and subretinal fluid were measured in the study eye using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the central subfield (center 1 mm) by a central reading center. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 2: Change From Week 24 in BCVA in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The Mixed Model of Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis included the categorical covariates of treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), and randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)] as fixed effects. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM model assuming missing at random. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) was applied to all intercurrent events (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. Participants with evaluable Week 24 BCVA were included in the analysis. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | ETDRS Letters | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 2: Percentage of Participants Avoiding a Loss of >0 Letters in BCVA From Week 24 in the Study Eye at Specified Timepoints Through Week 72 | Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was measured on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart at a starting distance of 4 meters. The BCVA letter score ranges from 0 to 100 (best score), and a gain in BCVA from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted percentage of participants was estimated based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by randomization stratification factors [baseline BCVA (≤34, 35-54, and ≥55 letters), and region (U.S. and Canada, Asia, and rest of the world)]. All observed values were used regardless of the occurrence of an intercurrent event (discontinuation of treatment due to AEs or lack of efficacy, use of prohibited therapy). Missing assessments were imputed by last observation carried forward. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.03% CI. | Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 2: Percentage of Participants on Different Treatment Intervals at Week 68 | In Part 2 of the study, participants in both the faricimab Q4W and aflibercept Q4W arms in Part 1 received 6 mg faricimab intravitreal injections administered according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen in intervals between Q4W and Q16W. At faricimab dosing visits, treatment intervals were maintained or adjusted (i.e., increased by 4 weeks or decreased by 4, 8, or 12 weeks), based on central subfield thickness (CST) and BCVA values. | The analysis population included all randomized participants who had not discontinued the study at Week 68 and with available treatment interval information. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Percentage of participants | Week 68 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Part 2: Number of Study Drug Injections Received in the Study Eye From Week 24 Through Week 72 | Safety-Evaluable Population: All participants randomized in the study who received at least one injection of active study drug in the study eye. For Part 2, the safety analysis included: in Arm A, all participants with Week 24 treatment or dose hold, or if none, follow-up beyond Day 168; in Arm B, all participants who received at least one faricimab dose. | Posted | Median | Full Range | Injections | From Week 24 to Week 72 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Incidence and Severity of Ocular Adverse Events in the Study Eye, With Severity Determined According to Adverse Event Severity Grading Scale | This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes ocular AEs that occurred in the study eye. Investigators sought information on AEs at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. Ocular AEs of special interest included the following: Suspected transmission of an infectious agent by the study drug; Sight-threatening AEs that cause a drop in visual acuity (VA) score ≥30 letters lasting more than 1 hour, require surgical or medical intervention to prevent permanent loss of sight, or are associated with severe intraocular inflammation (IOI). | Safety-Evaluable Population: All participants randomized in the study who received at least one injection of active study drug (faricimab or aflibercept) in the study eye. For Part 2, the safety analysis included: in Arm A, all participants with Week 24 treatment or dose hold, or if none, follow-up beyond Day 168; in Arm B, all participants who received at least one faricimab dose. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Part 1: From first dose up to Week 24; Part 2: from Week 24 through Week 72 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Incidence of Ocular Adverse Events in the Fellow Eye | This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes ocular AEs that occurred in the fellow eye. Investigators sought information on AEs at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. Ocular AEs of special interest included the following: Suspected transmission of an infectious agent by the study drug; Sight-threatening AEs that cause a drop in visual acuity (VA) score ≥30 letters lasting more than 1 hour, require surgical or medical intervention to prevent permanent loss of sight, or are associated with severe intraocular inflammation (IOI). | Safety-Evaluable Population: All participants randomized in the study who received at least one injection of active study drug (faricimab or aflibercept) in the study eye. For Part 2, the safety analysis included: in Arm A, all participants with Week 24 treatment or dose hold, or if none, follow-up beyond Day 168; in Arm B, all participants who received at least one faricimab dose. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Part 1: From first dose up to Week 24; Part 2: from Week 24 through Week 72 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Incidence of Non-Ocular Adverse Events | This analysis of adverse events (AEs) only includes non-ocular (systemic) AEs. Investigators sought information on adverse events (AEs) at each contact with the participants. All AEs were recorded and the investigator made an assessment of seriousness, severity, and causality of each AE. The non-ocular AE of special interest was: Cases of potential drug-induced liver injury that include an elevated ALT or AST in combination with either an elevated bilirubin or clinical jaundice, as defined by Hy's Law. | Safety-Evaluable Population: All participants randomized in the study who received at least one injection of active study drug (faricimab or aflibercept) in the study eye. For Part 2, the safety analysis included: in Arm A, all participants with Week 24 treatment or dose hold, or if none, follow-up beyond Day 168; in Arm B, all participants who received at least one faricimab dose. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Part 1: From first dose up to Week 24; Part 2: from Week 24 through Week 72 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Plasma Concentration of Faricimab Over Time | Pharmacokinetic-Evaluable Population: All safety-evaluable participants randomized to faricimab arm or who received faricimab with at least one plasma sample, provided sufficient dosing information (dose and dosing time) was available. The number analyzed indicates all participants who provided a PK sample at a given timepoint. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | microgram per millilitre (μg/mL) | Predose at Day 1 (Baseline), Weeks 4, 24, 28, 52, and 72 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) to Faricimab at Baseline and Post-Baseline During the Study | Anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against fariciamb were detected in plasma using a validated bridging enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The number of participants with treatment-emergent ADA-positive samples includes post-baseline evaluable participants with at least one treatment-induced (defined as having an ADA-negative sample or missing sample at baseline and any positive post-baseline sample) or treatment-boosted (defined as having an ADA-positive sample at baseline and any positive post-baseline sample with a titer that is equal to or greater than 4-fold baseline titer) ADA-positive sample during the study treatment period. Treatment-unaffected ADA-positive is a post-baseline sample with a titer that is lower than 4-fold the ADA-positive baseline titer (faricimab arm) or the ADA-positive titer prior to first faricimab injection (aflibercept arm). | The immunogenicity analysis included all participants with an evaluable ADA sample. At baseline, evaluable participants were those with an ADA sample prior to faricimab injection, including those who did not receive study treatment; post-baseline, evaluable participants were those with an ADA sample after having received at least one dose of faricimab. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Predose at Day 1 (Baseline), Weeks 4, 24, 28, 52, and 72 |
|
Part 1: From first dose up to Week 24; Part 2: from Week 24 through Week 72
Adverse events (AEs) are reported for the safety population, which includes all participants who received ≥1 injection of active study drug (faricimab or aflibercept) in the study eye. For Part 2, safety analysis included: in Arm A, those with Week 24 treatment or dose hold, or if none, follow-up beyond Day 168; in Arm B, those who received ≥1 faricimab dose. For ocular AEs, the number of participants and events reported per term are specified to have occurred in the study eye or the fellow eye.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Arm A: Faricimab Q4W (Part 1) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm A will receive faricimab 6 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). | 1 | 365 | 32 | 365 | 67 | 365 |
| EG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). | 2 | 361 | 34 | 361 | 66 | 361 |
| EG002 | Arm A: Faricimab Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). | 4 | 359 | 55 | 359 | 109 | 359 |
| EG003 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). | 1 | 342 | 51 | 342 | 118 | 342 |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acute myocardial infarction | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bradycardia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac failure | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac failure congestive | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Coronary artery disease | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Myocardial infarction | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thyroid mass | Endocrine disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cataract | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the fellow eye |
|
| Cystoid macular oedema | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Macular ischaemia | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Macular oedema | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Non-infectious endophthalmitis | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Retinal artery embolism | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Retinal artery occlusion | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Retinal ischaemia | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Retinal tear | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Retinal vein occlusion | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Uveitis | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Visual acuity reduced | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Vitreous haemorrhage | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Duodenal bulb deformity | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Duodenitis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastritis erosive | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haematochezia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Inguinal hernia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Obstructive pancreatitis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Peptic ulcer | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bile duct stone | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cholecystitis acute | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gallbladder disorder | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hepatic steatosis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| COVID-19 | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Endophthalmitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Gastroenteritis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Osteomyelitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Osteomyelitis acute | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyelonephritis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Sepsis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Eye injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Fall | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Shunt occlusion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intraocular pressure increased | Investigations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Diabetic ketoacidosis | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Type 2 diabetes mellitus | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intervertebral disc protrusion | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lumbar spinal stenosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Osteonecrosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bladder adenocarcinoma stage unspecified | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Altered state of consciousness | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cerebrovascular accident | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Peripheral sensorimotor neuropathy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Transient ischaemic attack | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute kidney injury | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Calculus urinary | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chronic kidney disease | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urethral stenosis | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Uterine haemorrhage | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dyspnoea | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pickwickian syndrome | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary embolism | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary hypertension | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Respiratory failure | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diabetic foot | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Knee operation | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypertensive crisis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Orthostatic hypotension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Retinal vein occlusion | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the fellow eye |
|
| Aortic valve incompetence | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Arrhythmia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Atrial fibrillation | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Coronary artery stenosis | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Stress cardiomyopathy | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Anaemia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Deficiency anaemia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Mesenteric lymphadenitis | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Macular oedema | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the fellow eye |
|
| Epiretinal membrane | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Glaucoma | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Iridocyclitis | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Iris neovascularisation | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Macular hole | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Posterior capsule opacification | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Retinal detachment | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Retinal neovascularisation | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Vitritis | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Diverticulum intestinal haemorrhagic | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Duodenal ulcer haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric ulcer | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastrointestinal inflammation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Large intestine polyp | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pancreatitis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pancreatitis acute | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Asthenia | General disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Death | General disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Stent-graft endoleak | General disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chest pain | General disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cholecystitis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cholelithiasis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bronchitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| COVID-19 pneumonia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cellulitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Clostridium difficile infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Device related infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Escherichia urinary tract infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Influenza | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Kidney infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lower respiratory tract infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Necrotising fasciitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonia viral | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Respiratory syncytial virus infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Tooth infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urinary tract candidiasis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urinary tract infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urosepsis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Femur fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hip fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lower limb fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rib fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Road traffic accident | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Shunt stenosis | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thermal burn | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dehydration | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypervolaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypokalaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Joint effusion | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Mobility decreased | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Polymyositis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Benign neoplasm of thyroid gland | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bladder cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Breast cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Papillary thyroid cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Prostate cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thyroid cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypoaesthesia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ischaemic stroke | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Presyncope | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Syncope | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cystitis interstitial | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diabetic nephropathy | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| End stage renal disease | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nephrolithiasis | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nephropathy | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Renal failure | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cystocele | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute respiratory failure | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary oedema | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ligament operation | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Renal transplant | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Aortic aneurysm | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Aortic dissection | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Aortic stenosis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haemorrhage | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypertension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Peripheral artery aneurysm | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Secondary hypertension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cataract | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conjunctival haemorrhage | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Vitreous detachment | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| COVID-19 | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intraocular pressure increased | Investigations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Hypertension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cataract | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Cystoid macular oedema | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Macular oedema | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Epiretinal membrane | Eye disorders | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment | AEs occurred in the study eye |
|
| Nasopharyngitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA version 26.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
The Study being conducted under this Agreement is part of the Overall Study. Investigator is free to publish in reputable journals or to present at professional conferences the results of the Study, but only after the first publication or presentation that involves the Overall Study. The Sponsor may request that Confidential Information be deleted and/or the publication be postponed in order to protect the Sponsor's intellectual property rights.
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medical Communications | Hoffmann-La Roche | 800-821-8590 | genentech@druginfo.com |
| Prot_000.pdf |
| SAP | No | Yes | No | Statistical Analysis Plan | Oct 3, 2022 | Nov 22, 2023 | SAP_001.pdf |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D008269 | Macular Edema |
| D012170 | Retinal Vein Occlusion |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D008268 | Macular Degeneration |
| D012162 | Retinal Degeneration |
| D012164 | Retinal Diseases |
| D005128 | Eye Diseases |
| D020246 | Venous Thrombosis |
| D013927 | Thrombosis |
| D016769 | Embolism and Thrombosis |
| D014652 | Vascular Diseases |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| C000723200 | faricimab |
| C533178 | aflibercept |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Adverse Event |
|
| Death |
|
| Other |
|
| Physician Decision |
|
| Non-compliance with study drug |
|
| Male |
|
| Not Hispanic or Latino |
|
| Unknown or Not Reported |
|
| Asian |
|
| Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander |
|
| Black or African American |
|
| White |
|
| More than one race |
|
| Unknown or Not Reported |
|
| USA and Canada |
|
| Asia |
|
| Right Eye |
|
| >34 Letters to <55 Letters |
|
| ≥55 Letters (20/80 or Better) |
|
If the lower bound of a two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in adjusted means of the two treatments (faricimab minus aflibercept) is greater than -4 letters (the non-inferiority margin), then faricimab is considered non-inferior to aflibercept. |
| The final sample size provided >80% power for a 3.5-letter superiority assessment of faricimab over aflibercept (at a two-sided 0.0497 significance level). | Mixed Model of Repeated Measures | 0.6715 | Tested at a two-sided p<0.0497 significance level. | Difference in Adjusted Means | -0.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.04 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.5 | 1.6 | The treatment difference in adjusted means of change from baseline BCVA is the calculated difference of Arm A: Faricimab and Arm B: Aflibercept. MMRM adjustments are listed in the outcome measure description. | Superiority |
| Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1) |
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections).
|
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections).
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
|
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants will receive faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure will be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment is administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
|
|
| Units | Counts |
|---|
| Participants |
|
|
| Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1) |
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
| OG002 | Arm A: Faricimab Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
| OG003 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants randomly assigned to Arm B will receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). |
| OG002 | Arm A: Faricimab Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
| OG003 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
| OG002 | Arm A: Faricimab Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
| OG003 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W to Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
|
|
|
|
| OG001 | Arm B: Aflibercept Q4W (Part 1), Faricimab PTI (Part 2) | In Part 1 (Day 1 through Week 24), participants were randomly assigned to Arm B to receive aflibercept 2 milligrams (mg) by IVT injection once every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Day 1 through Week 20 (a total of 6 injections). In Part 2 (from Week 24 to Week 72), participants received faricimab 6 mg by IVT injection according to a personalized treatment interval (PTI) dosing regimen. To preserve masking for Part 2, a sham procedure was to be administered during study visits at which no faricimab treatment was administered (according to the PTI dosing regimen). |
| OG002 | All Faricimab Participants | This immunogenicity analysis group represents all participants with an evaluable ADA sample. At baseline, evaluable participants were those with an ADA sample prior to faricimab injection, including those who did not receive study treatment; post-baseline, evaluable participants were those with an ADA sample after having received at least one dose of faricimab. |
|
|