Trial · NCT03622580
A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Participants With Diabetic Macular Edema (YOSEMITE)
NCT03622580, Phase 3, Completed, Hoffmann-La Roche; results first posted 2022-03-22
3 sourcestrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0
Download JSON
Cite this record
ConductScience Library. A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Participants With Diabetic Macular Edema (YOSEMITE). Trials, record NCT03622580. Release trials-2026-11-12-0.5.0, 12 Nov 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/trials/NCT03622580
On this page
Trial
As registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, in the graph's capture of the registry.
- Title
- A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Participants With Diabetic Macular Edema (YOSEMITE)
- NCT number
- NCT03622580
- Status
- Completed
- Phases
- Phase 3
- Enrollment
- 940 participants, actual
- Lead sponsor
- Hoffmann-La Roche
- Conditions
- Diabetic Macular Edema
- Interventions
- Aflibercept, Faricimab, Sham Procedure
- First posted
- 2018-08-09
- Last updated
- 2025-07-11
- Other registries' IDs
- eudract:2017-005104-10
- Results first posted
- 2022-03-22
- Limitations and caveats
- All secondary outcome measures were unpowered for statistical analysis, and the results should be interpreted with caution.
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Registered outcomes60
Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
| List | Outcome | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | From Baseline through Week 56 | 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 letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), baseline BCVA (\<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 97.5% CI is a rounding of 97.52% CI. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | Baseline and Week 52 | The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) classifies diabetic retinopathy into 12 severity steps ranging from absence of retinopathy to advanced proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ocular imaging assessments were made independently by a central reading center. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. \<64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world regions were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. 97.5% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 97.52% CI. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | 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 letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment arm, visit, visit-by-treatment arm interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), baseline BCVA (\<64 vs. ≥64 letters), prior intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% CI is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | 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 attainable), and a gain in BCVA letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. For the Mixed Model for Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis, the model adjusted for treatment group, visit, visit-by-treatment group interaction, baseline BCVA (continuous), baseline BCVA (\<64 vs. ≥64 letters), and region of enrollment. An unstructured covariance structure was used. Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were implicitly imputed by MMRM. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Gaining Greater Than or Equal to (≥)15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT Population | Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56 | BCVA was measured on the 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. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. \<64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | 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 letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. \<64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | 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 letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. \<64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | 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 letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. \<64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | 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 letter score from baseline indicates an improvement in visual acuity. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. \<64 letters), prior IVT anti-VEGF therapy (yes vs. no), and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world; Asia and rest of the world were combined). Treatment policy strategy (i.e., all observed values used) and hypothetical strategy (i.e., all values censored after the occurrence of the intercurrent event) were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded from analysis. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, Treatment-Naive Population | Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56 | BCVA was measured on the 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. For each participant, an average BCVA value was calculated across the three visits, and this averaged value was then used to determine if the endpoint was met. The results were summarized as the percentage of participants per treatment arm who met the endpoint. The weighted estimates of the percentage of participants were based on the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel (CMH) weights stratified by baseline BCVA (≥64 vs. \<64 letters) and region (U.S. and Canada vs. rest of the world). Treatment policy strategy and hypothetical strategy were applied to non-COVID-19 related and COVID-19 related intercurrent events, respectively. Missing data were not imputed. Invalid BCVA values were excluded. 95% confidence interval (CI) is a rounding of 95.04% CI. |
1 to 10 of 60Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 60 registered outcomesOutcomes60
Each outcome the trial posted results for, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
| Type | Outcome | Time frame | Population | Units | Measured as |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY | Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | From Baseline through Week 56 | ITT Population and Treatment-Naive Population | ETDRS Letters | MEAN |
| SECONDARY | Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | Baseline and Week 52 | ITT Population and Treatment-Naive Population. Only participants with non-missing, valid assessments at Baseline and Week 52 were included in the analysis. | Percentage of participants | NUMBER |
| SECONDARY | Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | ITT Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | ETDRS Letters | MEAN |
| SECONDARY | Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | Treatment-Naive Population: all participants randomized in the study who had not received any intravitreal anti-VEGF agents in the study eye prior to randomization. Participants were grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. | ETDRS Letters | MEAN |
| SECONDARY | Percentage of Participants Gaining Greater Than or Equal to (≥)15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT Population | Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56 | ITT Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. Only participants with at least one non-missing, valid assessment at Weeks 48, 52, or 56 were included in the analysis. | Percentage of participants | NUMBER |
| SECONDARY | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | ITT Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. At each timepoint, only participants with non-missing, valid assessments were included in the analysis. | Percentage of participants | NUMBER |
| SECONDARY | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | ITT Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. At each timepoint, only participants with non-missing, valid assessments were included in the analysis. | Percentage of participants | NUMBER |
| SECONDARY | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | ITT Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. At each timepoint, only participants with non-missing, valid assessments were included in the analysis. | Percentage of participants | NUMBER |
| SECONDARY | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT Population | Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, and 100 | ITT Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. At each timepoint, only participants with non-missing, valid assessments were included in the analysis. | Percentage of participants | NUMBER |
| SECONDARY | Percentage of Participants Gaining ≥15, ≥10, ≥5, or ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, Treatment-Naive Population | Baseline, average of Weeks 48, 52, and 56 | Treatment-Naive Population: all participants randomized in the study who had not received any intravitreal anti-VEGF agents in the study eye prior to randomization. Participants were grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization. Only participants with at least one non-missing, valid assessment at Weeks 48, 52, or 56 were included in the analysis. | Percentage of participants | NUMBER |
1 to 10 of 60Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 60 outcomesResults by group2,282
Each measurement the trial posted, group by group, in the words and numbers it posted.
| Outcome | Group | Category | Value | Spread | Units |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | ITT Population | 10.7 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 9.4 to 12.0 | ETDRS Letters |
| Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | ITT Population | 11.6 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 10.3 to 12.9 | ETDRS Letters |
| Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | ITT Population | 10.9 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 9.6 to 12.2 | ETDRS Letters |
| Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | Treatment-Naive Population | 10.6 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 9.1 to 12.1 | ETDRS Letters |
| Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | Treatment-Naive Population | 11.4 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 9.9 to 12.8 | ETDRS Letters |
| Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | Treatment-Naive Population | 11.3 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 9.8 to 12.8 | ETDRS Letters |
| Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | ITT Population | 46.0 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 38.8 to 53.1 | Percentage of participants |
| Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | ITT Population | 42.5 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 35.5 to 49.5 | Percentage of participants |
| Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | ITT Population | 35.8 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 29.1 to 42.5 | Percentage of participants |
| Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | Treatment-Naive Population | 49.7 | 97.5% Confidence Interval 41.2 to 58.2 | Percentage of participants |
1 to 10 of 2,282Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 2,282 results by groupParticipant flow15
How many started, completed or left each group, period by period.
| Period | Milestone | Group | Participants | Units counted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | STARTED | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 315 | |
| Overall Study | STARTED | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 313 | |
| Overall Study | STARTED | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 312 | |
| Overall Study | Received at Least One Dose of Study Drug | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 313 | |
| Overall Study | Received at Least One Dose of Study Drug | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 313 | |
| Overall Study | Received at Least One Dose of Study Drug | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 311 | |
| Overall Study | Completed up to Week 56 | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 291 | |
| Overall Study | Completed up to Week 56 | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 289 | |
| Overall Study | Completed up to Week 56 | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 292 | |
| Overall Study | COMPLETED | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 263 |
1 to 10 of 15Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 15 participant flowAdverse events822
Each adverse event the trial posted, group by group: the participants affected out of those at risk.
| Type | Event | Organ system | Group | Affected | At risk | Events |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| other | Cataract | Eye disorders | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 58 | 313 | 84 |
| other | Cataract | Eye disorders | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 47 | 313 | 65 |
| other | Cataract | Eye disorders | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 55 | 311 | 82 |
| other | Conjunctival haemorrhage | Eye disorders | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 25 | 313 | 35 |
| other | Conjunctival haemorrhage | Eye disorders | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 33 | 313 | 41 |
| other | Conjunctival haemorrhage | Eye disorders | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 24 | 311 | 32 |
| other | Diabetic retinal oedema | Eye disorders | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 20 | 313 | 27 |
| other | Diabetic retinal oedema | Eye disorders | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 29 | 313 | 37 |
| other | Diabetic retinal oedema | Eye disorders | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 33 | 311 | 40 |
| other | Vitreous detachment | Eye disorders | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 20 | 313 | 25 |
1 to 10 of 822Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 822 adverse eventsAdverse event totals9
The totals the trial posted for each group.
| Total | Group | Affected | At risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total, all-cause mortality | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 16 | 313 |
| Total, all-cause mortality | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 21 | 313 |
| Total, all-cause mortality | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 13 | 311 |
| Total, other adverse events | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 161 | 313 |
| Total, other adverse events | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 163 | 313 |
| Total, other adverse events | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 163 | 311 |
| Total, serious adverse events | A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W | 111 | 313 |
| Total, serious adverse events | B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI | 117 | 313 |
| Total, serious adverse events | C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W | 93 | 311 |
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Papers11
The papers the trial lists on ClinicalTrials.gov.
Grants0
The grants NIH RePORTER links to the trial, newest funded first: NIH's, and some of AHRQ's, CDC's, FDA's and VA's. Each shows its title, principal investigators, organization and funder in its newest year.
None in this release.
Trial comparisons0
Comparisons of the trial's two groups, calculated by ConductScience from the counts it posted.
None in this release.
Tests0
The ConductCognition tests this trial's registered outcomes name, as ScienceGraph matched them in trial-tests-2026-11-12-0.2.1.
None in this release.
Data dates
The day each source was copied for this release.
Sources 3
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain (NIH RePORTER)
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions.
For software
Read this trial from software.
The record and each of its lists are JSON, twenty rows a page. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT03622580
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT03622580/registered?page=2