ConductScience.org, home

Trial · NCT03622593

A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Faricimab (RO6867461) in Participants With Diabetic Macular Edema

NCT03622593, 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. Trials, record NCT03622593. Release trials-2026-11-12-0.5.0, 12 Nov 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/trials/NCT03622593

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
NCT number
NCT03622593
Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Enrollment
951 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:2017-005105-12
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.

ListOutcomeTime frameDescription
PrimaryChange From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsFrom 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 (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) 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.
SecondaryChange From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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.
SecondaryChange From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive PopulationBaseline, 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.
SecondaryPercentage 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 PopulationBaseline, 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.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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.
SecondaryPercentage 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 PopulationBaseline, 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.

Outcomes60

Each outcome the trial posted results for, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.

TypeOutcomeTime framePopulationUnitsMeasured as
PRIMARYChange From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsFrom Baseline through Week 56ITT Population and Treatment-Naive PopulationETDRS LettersMEAN
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
Baseline and Week 52ITT Population and Treatment-Naive Population. Only participants with non-missing, valid assessments at Baseline and Week 52 were included in the analysis.Percentage of participantsNUMBER
SECONDARYChange From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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 100ITT Population: all participants who were randomized in the study, grouped according to the treatment assigned at randomization.ETDRS LettersMEAN
SECONDARYChange From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Over Time, Treatment-Naive PopulationBaseline, 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 (TN) 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. One participant in Arm B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI was excluded from the TN Population for the final analysis due to a late report of prior anti-VEGF treatment.
ETDRS LettersMEAN
SECONDARYPercentage 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 PopulationBaseline, 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 participantsNUMBER
SECONDARYPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥15 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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 participantsNUMBER
SECONDARYPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥10 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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 participantsNUMBER
SECONDARYPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥5 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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 participantsNUMBER
SECONDARYPercentage of Participants Gaining ≥0 Letters in BCVA From Baseline in the Study Eye Over Time, ITT PopulationBaseline, 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 participantsNUMBER
SECONDARYPercentage 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 PopulationBaseline, 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 participantsNUMBER

Results by group2,279

Each measurement the trial posted, group by group, in the words and numbers it posted.

OutcomeGroupCategoryValueSpreadUnits
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8WITT Population11.897.5% Confidence Interval 10.6 to 13.0ETDRS Letters
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsB: Faricimab 6 mg PTIITT Population10.897.5% Confidence Interval 9.6 to 11.9ETDRS Letters
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8WITT Population10.397.5% Confidence Interval 9.1 to 11.4ETDRS Letters
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8WTreatment-Naive Population11.797.5% Confidence Interval 10.4 to 13.0ETDRS Letters
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsB: Faricimab 6 mg PTITreatment-Naive Population11.297.5% Confidence Interval 9.9 to 12.4ETDRS Letters
Change From Baseline in BCVA in the Study Eye Averaged Over Weeks 48, 52, and 56, ITT and Treatment-Naive PopulationsC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8WTreatment-Naive Population10.597.5% Confidence Interval 9.2 to 11.9ETDRS Letters
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8WITT Population44.297.5% Confidence Interval 37.1 to 51.4Percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
B: Faricimab 6 mg PTIITT Population43.797.5% Confidence Interval 36.8 to 50.7Percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8WITT Population46.897.5% Confidence Interval 39.8 to 53.8Percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With a ≥2-Step Diabetic Retinopathy Severity (DRS) Improvement From Baseline on the ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) at Week 52, ITT and Treatment-Naive Populations
A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8WTreatment-Naive Population46.997.5% Confidence Interval 38.7 to 55.1Percentage of participants

Participant flow15

How many started, completed or left each group, period by period.

PeriodMilestoneGroupParticipantsUnits counted
Overall StudySTARTEDA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W317
Overall StudySTARTEDB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI319
Overall StudySTARTEDC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W315
Overall StudyReceived at Least One Dose of Study DrugA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W317
Overall StudyReceived at Least One Dose of Study DrugB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI319
Overall StudyReceived at Least One Dose of Study DrugC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W314
Overall StudyCompleted up to Week 56A: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W298
Overall StudyCompleted up to Week 56B: Faricimab 6 mg PTI312
Overall StudyCompleted up to Week 56C: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W299
Overall StudyCOMPLETEDA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W275

Adverse events678

Each adverse event the trial posted, group by group: the participants affected out of those at risk.

TypeEventOrgan systemGroupAffectedAt riskEvents
otherCataractEye disordersA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W5231777
otherCataractEye disordersB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI5831988
otherCataractEye disordersC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W3331448
otherConjunctival haemorrhageEye disordersA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W3631744
otherConjunctival haemorrhageEye disordersB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI2431929
otherConjunctival haemorrhageEye disordersC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W2531434
otherDiabetic retinal oedemaEye disordersA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W2931731
otherDiabetic retinal oedemaEye disordersB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI2531930
otherDiabetic retinal oedemaEye disordersC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W2331427
otherVitreous detachmentEye disordersA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W1931726

Adverse event totals9

The totals the trial posted for each group.

TotalGroupAffectedAt risk
Total, all-cause mortalityA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W12317
Total, all-cause mortalityB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI9319
Total, all-cause mortalityC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W10314
Total, other adverse eventsA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W195317
Total, other adverse eventsB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI169319
Total, other adverse eventsC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W178314
Total, serious adverse eventsA: Faricimab 6 mg Q8W97317
Total, serious adverse eventsB: Faricimab 6 mg PTI82319
Total, serious adverse eventsC: Aflibercept 2 mg Q8W100314

Papers13

The papers the trial lists on ClinicalTrials.gov.

PMIDListed asSource
35085503DERIVEDPubMed
36246184DERIVEDPubMed
36897413DERIVEDPubMed
37585454DERIVEDPubMed
38158159RESULTPubMed
38758639DERIVEDPubMed
38852921DERIVEDPubMed
39580145DERIVEDPubMed
40496217DERIVEDPubMed
40668667DERIVEDPubMed

1 to 10 of 13

See all 13 papers

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.

ClinicalTrials.gov
2026-11-12
ClinicalTrials.gov
Results, from AACT
2026-03-23
AACT
NIH grant links
2026-11-13
NIH RePORTER

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/NCT03622593

GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT03622593/registered?page=2