Now Available for Public Comment: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for FDAAA 801 and NIH Draft Reporting Policy for NIH-Funded Trials

Safety and Efficacy of OMS302 in Subjects Undergoing Unilateral Cataract Extraction With Lens Replacement (CELR)

This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Omeros Corporation
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01193127
First received: August 23, 2010
Last updated: August 27, 2014
Last verified: August 2014
  Purpose

The purpose of this study is to determine whether the use of OMS302 (the study drug) in individuals undergoing Cataract Extraction with Lens Replacement (CELR) surgery is safe and effective at maintaining an adequately dilated pupil during surgery and reducing post-operative symptoms of discomfort (such as eye pain and irritation).


Condition Intervention Phase
Cataract
Drug: OMS302 Solution
Drug: OMS302 Mydriatic Solution
Drug: OMS302 Anti-inflammatory Solution
Drug: Balanced Salt Solution (BSS) Solution
Phase 2

Study Type: Interventional
Study Design: Allocation: Randomized
Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study
Intervention Model: Factorial Assignment
Masking: Double Blind (Subject, Investigator)
Primary Purpose: Treatment

Resource links provided by NLM:


Further study details as provided by Omeros Corporation:

Primary Outcome Measures:
  • Pupil Diameter (mm) During Surgery [ Time Frame: During surgery (immediately prior to surgical incision to wound closure) ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Pupil diameter from surgical baseline (immediately prior to surgical incision) to the end of the surgical procedure (wound closure) was summarized using descriptive statistics by treatment group and time point. Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to test for differences in the maintenance of mydriasis. The repeated measures model included change from baseline pupil diameter as the response variable and treatment (OMS302, ketorolac tromethamine, and vehicle), time point (as a categorical variable) and the stratification factor lens opacities classification system II (LOCS II) grade as predictor variables. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach with an AR(1) working-correlation structure was used.

  • Ocular Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score (mm) Within 12 Hours Postoperatively [ Time Frame: through 12 hours post-surgery ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    For the primary analysis of this endpoint, only the results on the day of operation at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10-12 hours were utilized. The VAS scores (where 0 = no pain and 100 = worst possible pain) were summarized by treatment group and time point. Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to test for differences in postoperative ocular pain. The repeated measures model included VAS pain score as the response variable and treatment (OMS302, phenylephrine hydrochloride (PE), and vehicle), time point (as a categorical variable) and the stratification factor LOCS II grade as predictor variables. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach with an AR(1) working correlation structure was used.


Secondary Outcome Measures:
  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Two Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Six Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Six hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, One Day Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Two Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, Seven Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, 14 Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Tearing, 30 Days Post-Surgery/ Early Termination [ Time Frame: up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Two Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Six Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Six hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia One Day Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Two Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia Seven Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia 14 Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Photophobia 30 Days Post-Surgery /Early Termination [ Time Frame: Up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge 2 Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge Six Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Six hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge One Day Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge Two Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge Seven Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge 14 Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Eye Discharge 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination [ Time Frame: Up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching Two Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching 6 Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Six hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching One Day Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching Two Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching Seven Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching 14 Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Itching 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination [ Time Frame: Up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Two Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Six Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Six hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation One Day Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Two Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation Seven Days Post-Surgery 7 Days [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation 14 Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Foreign Body Sensation 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination [ Time Frame: Up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Two Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Six Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Six hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness One Day Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Two Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness Seven Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness 14 Days Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Ocular Symptoms Using Numerical Rating System - Haziness 30 Days Post-Surgery/Early Termination [ Time Frame: Up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The ocular symptom outcomes were based on Ocular Pain and Symptoms Numerical Ordinal Scale (Numerical Rating System - NRS) at each time point for each assessment (tearing, photophobia, eye discharge, itching, foreign body sensation, and haziness). Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Baseline [ Time Frame: Baseline ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 1 [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 2 [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 7 [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 14 [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BVCA) - Log Score, Day 30 [ Time Frame: 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Best-Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was summarized by the ETDRS visual acuity log score. For subjects without a score due to inability to read the ETDRS chart, the log score was imputed as 1.6 for the purpose of treatment comparisons. Subjects without a score because the manifest refraction was not completed were excluded from the analysis. Treatment comparisons for BCVA were performed by pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Baseline [ Time Frame: Baseline ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, 2 Hours Post Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    TPostoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 1 [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 2 [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 7 [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 14 [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Postoperative Ocular Inflammation in Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) Grade, Day 30 [ Time Frame: 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Postoperative inflammation as measured using the Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS), summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Baseline [ Time Frame: Baseline ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Two Hours Post-surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 1 [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 2 [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 7 [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 14 [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Subjects With Postoperative Ocular Inflammation SOIS = 0, Day 30 [ Time Frame: 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    Number of subjects with Summed Ocular Inflammation Score (SOIS) = 0, summarized by treatment arm and time point. Ocular inflammation was evaluated by measuring the anterior chamber cell count and flare using a slit lamp biomicroscope. SOIS was calculated by adding the average of subject's anterior chamber cells and flare grades. The minimum SOIS was 0 (indicating absence of inflammation), whereas the maximum SOIS was 8.

    Grading was as follows:

    Anterior Chamber Cells: Grade None = 0/no cells; Grade Mild = +1/1-5 cells; Grade Moderate = +2/6-15 cells; Grade Severe = +3/16-30 cells; Grade Very Severe = +4/>30 cells.

    Anterior Chamber Flare: Grade None = 0/no Tyndall effect; Grade Mild = +1/barely discernable Tyndall effect; Grade Moderate = +2/moderately intense Tyndall beam in anterior chamber; Grade Severe = +3/severely intense Tyndall beam; Grade Very Severe = +4/very severely intense Tyndall beam with a white and milky appearance to the aqueous


  • Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Two Hours Post-Surgery [ Time Frame: Two hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 1 [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 2 [ Time Frame: Two days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 7 [ Time Frame: Seven days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 14 [ Time Frame: 14 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Postoperative Mean Anterior Chamber Cell Count, Day 30 [ Time Frame: 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    The mean anterior chamber cell count was calculated as the average of the two anterior chamber cell counts. If a cell count was indicated as > 30, it was imputed as 45 for the purpose of treatment comparisons which was performed using pairwise Wilcoxon tests.

  • Ocular Pain VAS Score After Day 0 [ Time Frame: 43 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    VAS pain scores (where 0 = no pain and 100 = worst possible pain) after the day of surgery were summarized.

  • Postoperative Use of Ophthalmic Anti-inflammatory Medications [ Time Frame: up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Ophthalmic anti-inflammatory medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications. Subject incidence of ophthalmic anti-inflammatory medication use by post-surgery day was presented. Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Use of Pain Medications at Day 1 [ Time Frame: One day ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Ocular pain medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications. Subject incidence of ocular pain medication use at day 1 and post day 1 were presented. Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.

  • Use of Pain Medications After Day 1 [ Time Frame: up to 30 days ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Ocular pain medications were identified by reviewing concomitant medications. Subject incidence of ocular pain medication use at day 1 and post day 1 were presented. Treatment comparisons were performed using a Cochran-Mantel- Haenszel (CMH) test adjusting for the stratification factor LOCS II grade.


Enrollment: 223
Study Start Date: July 2010
Study Completion Date: February 2011
Primary Completion Date: January 2011 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Arms Assigned Interventions
Experimental: OMS302 Solution
OMS302 Solution
Drug: OMS302 Solution
Experimental: OMS302 Mydriatic Solution
OMS302 Mydriatic Solution
Drug: OMS302 Mydriatic Solution
Experimental: OMS302 Anti-inflammatory Solution
OMS302 Anti-inflammatory Solution
Drug: OMS302 Anti-inflammatory Solution
Placebo Comparator: Balanced Salt Solution (BSS) Solution
Balanced Salt Solution (BSS) Solution
Drug: Balanced Salt Solution (BSS) Solution

  Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study:   18 Years and older
Genders Eligible for Study:   Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   No
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Competent and willing to voluntarily provide informed consent
  • 18 years of age or older
  • In good general health needing to undergo cataract extraction with lens replacement surgery in one eye, under topical anesthesia
  • Other inclusion criteria to be evaluated by the investigator

Exclusion Criteria:

  • No allergies to the medications and/or the active ingredients of any of the study medications
  • No medications with the same activities as the of the active ingredients in OMS302 for defined time intervals prior to and after surgery
  • No other significant eye injuries, eye conditions or general medical conditions likely to interfere with the evaluation of the study medication
  • Other exclusion criteria to be evaluated by the investigator
  Contacts and Locations
Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the Contacts provided below. For general information, see Learn About Clinical Studies.

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01193127

  Show 24 Study Locations
Sponsors and Collaborators
Omeros Corporation
  More Information

No publications provided

Responsible Party: Omeros Corporation
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01193127     History of Changes
Other Study ID Numbers: C09-001
Study First Received: August 23, 2010
Results First Received: July 2, 2014
Last Updated: August 27, 2014
Health Authority: United States: Food and Drug Administration

Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Cataract
Eye Diseases
Lens Diseases
Anti-Inflammatory Agents
Mydriatics
Pharmaceutical Solutions
Autonomic Agents
Peripheral Nervous System Agents
Pharmacologic Actions
Physiological Effects of Drugs
Therapeutic Uses

ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on November 20, 2014