Clinical comparison of silicone hydrogel monthly lenses (CLL541-P001)

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    One-month clinical comparison of silicone hydrogel monthly lenses in high lipid depositors

  • IRAS ID

    228285

  • Contact name

    Kishan Patel

  • Contact email

    kpatel@otg.co.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Alcon Research Ltd. (Alcon Laboratories Inc.)

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 5 months, 23 days

  • Research summary

    Silicone hydrogel contact lenses provide better oxygen transmissibility, but have been associated with increased lipid deposition and in some cases with a reduced wettability. Alcon implemented two innovative technologies for deposit protection and longer-lasting lens surface moisture. AIR OPTIX plus HydraGlyde monthly replacement contact lenses bring together these two technologies.
    This study has been designed to compare the performance of AIR OPTIX plus HydraGlyde and ACUVUE VITA to demonstrate less lipid uptake by AIR OPTIX plus HydraGlyde after 30 days of wear.
    Up to 140 monthly replacement contact lens wearers will be enrolled and screened to identify if they are high lipid depositors. The selection will be based upon the amount of tear lipid that the screening contact lens (PureVision 2) has taken up after 10 hours of wear. Approximately 78 participants will progress to the investigational phase when they will wear the two study contact lenses. Each study contact lens will be worn for a period of 30 (-0/+3) days; the order of us of the contact lenses will be randomized.
    All participants will attend the first two visits of the screening phase and those who progress to the investigational phase will attend an additional four visits. During the investigational phase the participants will also complete remote questionnaires by responding to text messages on a weekly basis.

  • REC name

    London - West London & GTAC Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    17/LO/1027

  • Date of REC Opinion

    30 Jun 2017

  • REC opinion

    Unfavourable Opinion