Methods
Study rationale
Lenadogene nolparvovec was investigated in four clinical studies (REVEAL, RESCUE, REVERSE, RESTORE) where it was exclusively administered as a unilateral IVT injection. However, LHON is a bilateral disease that typically affects both eyes of a patient in a sequential manner. The REFLECT study was therefore constructed to assess the efficacy and safety of bilateral IVT of lenadogene nolparvovec in MT-ND4 LHON subjects.
Study design
REFLECT (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03293524) is a phase 3, international, multicentre, randomised, double-masked (for the primary analysis up to 1.5 years post-treatment), placebo-controlled, clinical trial conducted in 13 centres located across 7 countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, Taiwan, United Kingdom (1 centre per country) and USA (7 centres)). Eligible subjects, LHON patients with vision loss ≤1 year in one or both eyes caused by the m.11778G>A mutation in the ND4 gene, were randomised into one of two treatment arms, with all patients receiving an IVT of lenadogene nolparvovec in their first affected eye and the second-affected eye randomised to receive IVT of either lenadogene nolparvovec or placebo (online supplemental figure 1). The primary efficacy analysis is the comparison of the change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) reported at 1.5 years post-treatment between the second affected/not-yet-affected eyes receiving lenadogene nolparvovec and placebo.
The study was conducted in accordance with the principles and requirements of the International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice and adhered to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. An independent Data Safety Monitoring Board periodically reviews study data to ensure the continued safe conduct of the trial and protection of subjects.
Patient and public involvement
Patients or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.
Study population
The planned number of subjects to be included in the study was 90 overall (45 in each treatment arm) based on a treatment effect of 0.3 logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (LogMAR) in the change from baseline to 1.5 years in BCVA, an SD of 0.50 and a power of 80% (alpha=0.05, two sided).
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
To be eligible for the REFLECT study, subjects needed to be 15 years of age or older with documented vision loss, to any extent, in at least one eye, documentation of the m.11778G>A mutation, duration of vision loss ≤365 days and a visual acuity of at least hand motion (HM) in each affected eye (online supplemental table 1). Patients using idebenone at screening were required to discontinue this treatment at least 7 days prior to inclusion. Exclusion criteria included contraindications to IVT, previous treatment with an investigational medicinal drug, ocular surgery within 90 days prior or IVT within 30 days prior, or history of recurrent uveitis or active ocular inflammation, and other causes of visual loss (eg, other optic neuropathies, macular disease) not attributable to LHON.
Assessments at baseline
Demographic characteristics were collected before treatment, along with visual function and anatomic parameters. Ophthalmologic assessments included BCVA, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, Goldmann applanation tonometry, funduscopy, contrast sensitivity (CS), automated perimetry, spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and colour fundus photography.
The BCVA was assessed using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts at 1 or 4 m. Subjects who could not read at least three letters on a single line on the ETDRS chart at 1 m were tested for their ability to count the assessor’s fingers (CF), detect HM, and perceive light (light perception (LP)/no LP (NLP)). All BCVAs were expressed in LogMAR according to a standard conversion scale for on-chart values. Off-chart BCVA were assigned LogMAR values of+2.0 and +2.3, respectively, for CF and HM eyes, according to the validated Lange scale,12 and +4.0 and +4.5, respectively, for LP and NLP eyes.
CS was assessed with the Pelli-Robson Low Vision Contrast Sensitivity chart and expressed as a logarithm (LogCS).13 The Contrast Sensitivity score was defined as the last contrast triplet for which at least two of the three letters were read correctly. On-chart eyes were those able to read at least two letters of the first triplet on the chart and had a CS value expressed in logarithm (LogCS). Off-chart eyes were those unable to read at least two letters of the first triplet on the chart and were assigned a LogCS of 0 (worst possible score).
Standard, automated visual field assessment was obtained with an Humphrey Visual Field (HVF) Analyzer II (Carl Zeiss Meditec) using the 30–2 SITA Fast strategy. The HVF test was repeated if considered unreliable (ie, fixation losses ≥15%, false-positive errors ≥20% or false-negative errors ≥33%). The following parameters were collected: mean deviation (MD), pattern SD (PSD) and foveal threshold sensitivity (FT). If HVF foveal threshold was off then it was set to missing, and if the measured foveal threshold was <0, it was set to 0.
SD-OCT was performed using a Spectralis OCT (Heidelberg Engineering). Ganglion cell layer (GCL), temporal quadrant retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness, papillomacular bundle RNFL thickness and average RNFL thickness were measured for the optic nerve and posterior pole as per standard protocols included in the Spectralis software. The OCT assessments were performed using triplicate scans of high quality (Q values >20). Borders of the retinal layers were manually adjusted when automated segmentation errors were detected.
BCVA, HVFs and SD-OCT exams were centrally reviewed, quality checked and graded by a central ophthalmology reading centre (William H. Annesley Jr. EyeBrain Centre (AEBC), Thomas Jefferson University). The AEBC was masked for all analyses.
Statistical analyses
Statistical analyses were carried out using SAS, software V.9.4 (SAS Institute). Summary statistics for continuous variables were described using N, mean, SD and range. The eyes with no vision loss were considered to have a duration of vision loss equal to 0. The predefined baseline for visual function (BCVA, CS, HVF) and anatomic parameters (OCT) was the last available assessment before treatment; for anatomic metrics, the average of values measured at screening and inclusion visits was also calculated.
Regressions between baseline parameters were performed with an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model which includes terms treatment as a fixed effect and with repeated values for eye. The partial correlation coefficient was performed to quantify the impact of one variable on a second variable. From the ANCOVA model the correlation is calculated as:
where for m subjects. and are the model estimates and variances.14