A Study to Evaluate the Duration of LASTACAFT® in Acute Allergic Conjunctivitis

January 18, 2013 updated by: Allergan
This study will evaluate the duration of action of LASTACAFT® and Pataday™ as compared to artificial tears (placebo) in the prevention of ocular itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
127

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Pennsylvania
      • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

10 years and older (Child, Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • History of eye allergies within the past 24 months
  • Willing to not wear contact lenses at least 72 hours prior to the study start and during the study period

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Current eye infection
  • Eye surgery within 3 months or vision correction surgery within 6 months
  • Any planned surgery during the study or 30 days after the study

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: LASTACAFT® (alcaftadine 0.25%)
One drop of alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution instilled in each eye at Day 0 and Day 14.
Drug: alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution
One drop of alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution instilled in each eye at Day 0 and Day 14.
Other Names:
  • LASTACAFT®
Active Comparator: Pataday™ (olopatadine 0.2%)
One drop of olopatadine 0.2% ophthalmic solution instilled in each eye at Day 0 and Day 14.
Drug: olopatadine 0.2% ophthalmic solution
One drop of olopatadine 0.2% ophthalmic solution instilled in each eye at Day 0 and Day 14.
Other Names:
  • Pataday™
Placebo Comparator: Placebo (dextran 70 0.1%/hydroxypropyl methylcellulose 0.3%)
One drop of placebo instilled in each eye at Day 0 and Day 14.
Drug: dextran 70 0.1%/hydroxypropyl methylcellulose 0.3%
One drop of placebo instilled in each eye at Day 0 and Day 14.
Other Names:
  • Tears Naturale® II Artificial Tears

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Ocular Itching Evaluated by the Subject at 3, 5, and 7 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 0 at Hour 16
Time Frame: Day 0 Hour 16
Ocular itching evaluated by the subject at 3, 5, and 7 minutes post challenge on Day 0 (Visit 3) at hour 16. Subjects scored their ocular itching on a numeric analog scale ranging from 0=None to 4=Incapacitating Itch with an Irresistible Urge to Rub (0.5 increments were allowed). For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less itching.
Day 0 Hour 16
Ocular Itching Evaluated by the Subject at 3, 5, and 7 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 14 at Hour 24
Time Frame: Day 14 Hour 24
Ocular itching evaluated by the subject at 3, 5, and 7 minutes post challenge on Day 14 (Visit 4) at hour 24. Subjects scored their ocular itching on a numeric analog scale ranging from 0=None to 4=Incapacitating Itch with an Irresistible Urge to Rub (0.5 increments were allowed). For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less itching.
Day 14 Hour 24

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Conjunctival Redness Evaluated by the Investigator at 7, 15, and 20 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 14 at Hour 24
Time Frame: Day 14 Hour 24
Conjunctival redness evaluated by the investigator at 7, 15, and 20 minutes post challenge on Day 14 (Visit 4) at hour 24. Investigators scored conjunctival redness on a numeric analog scale ranging from 0=None to 4=Extremely Severe (0.5 increments were allowed). For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less conjunctival redness.
Day 14 Hour 24
Ciliary Redness Evaluated by the Investigator at 7, 15, and 20 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 14 at Hour 24
Time Frame: Day 14 Hour 24
Ciliary redness evaluated by the investigator at 7, 15, and 20 minutes post challenge on Day 14 (Visit 4) at hour 24. Investigators scored ciliary redness on a numeric analog scale ranging from 0=None to 4=Extremely Severe (0.5 increments were allowed). For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less ciliary redness.
Day 14 Hour 24
Episcleral Redness Evaluated by the Investigator at 7, 15, and 20 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 14 at Hour 24
Time Frame: Day 14 Hour 24
Episcleral redness evaluated by the investigator at 7, 15, and 20 minutes post challenge on Day 14 (Visit 4) at hour 24. Investigators scored episcleral redness on a numeric analog scale ranging from 0=None to 4=Extremely Severe (0.5 increments were allowed). For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less episcleral redness.
Day 14 Hour 24
Chemosis Evaluated by the Investigator at 7, 15, and 20 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 14 at Hour 24
Time Frame: Day 14 Hour 24
Chemosis evaluated by the investigator at 7, 15, and 20 minutes post challenge on Day 14 (Visit 4) at hour 24. Investigators scored chemosis on a numeric analog scale ranging from 0=None to 4=Severe (0.5 increments were allowed). For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less chemosis.
Day 14 Hour 24
Eyelid Swelling Evaluated by the Subject at 7, 15, and 20 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 14 at Hour 24
Time Frame: Day 14 Hour 24
Eyelid swelling evaluated by the subject at 7, 15, and 20 minutes post challenge on Day 14 (Visit 4) at hour 24. Subjects scored eyelid swelling on a numeric analog 4-point scale ranging from 0=None to 3=Severe. For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less lid swelling.
Day 14 Hour 24
Tearing Evaluated by the Subject at 7, 15, and 20 Minutes Post Challenge on Day 14 at Hour 24
Time Frame: Day 14 Hour 24
Tearing evaluated by the subject at 7, 15, and 20 minutes post challenge on Day 14 (Visit 4) at hour 24. Subjects scored tearing on a 5-point numeric analog scale ranging from 0=None/Normal to 4=Very Severe. For each subject, the score for both eyes was averaged (i.e., one score per subject). A lower score was indicative of less tearing.
Day 14 Hour 24

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Allergan

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
October 1, 2011

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
December 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
December 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
November 9, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
November 10, 2011

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
November 11, 2011

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
February 21, 2013

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 18, 2013

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
January 1, 2013

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • GMA-LAS-011-001

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Conjunctivitis, Allergic

Clinical Trials on alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings