ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01783847TONTTUpdated May 7, 2019Results posted

Traumatic Optic Neuropathy Treatment Trial (TONTT)

A Phase 1/2 interventional study of Recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO) and Observation in Traumatic Optic Neuropathy, sponsored by Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Completed at 3 sites in Iran. Open to participants aged 5 Years to 90 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-05-07.

Sponsored by Tehran University of Medical Sciences · Phase 1/2, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 1/2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
117
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
5 Years to 90 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The pathophysiology of Traumatic Optic Neuropathy (TON) is thought to be multifactorial, and some researchers have also postulated a primary and secondary mechanism of injury.TON is categorized as direct or indirect.In indirect TON cases, the injury to the axons is thought to be induced by shearing forces that are transmitted to the fibers or to the vascular supply of the nerve. Studies have shown that forces applied to the frontal bone and malar eminences are transferred and concentrated in the area near the optic canal. The tight adherence of the optic nerve's dural sheath to the periosteum within the optic canal is also thought to contribute to this segment of the nerve being extremely susceptible to the deformative stresses of the skull bones. Such injury leads to ischemic injury to the axons of the retinal ganglion cells within the optic canal. At present, no studies validate a particular approach to the management of TON. There are three management lines for these patients that include 1)observation only;2)medical treatment with high or megadoses of methylprednisolone; and 3)surgical intervention. Generally no line precedes the others and additionally, medical or surgical interventions may result in serious side effects or complications. In 2005, the results of the Corticosteroid Randomization after Significant Head Injury (CRASH) trial raised concerns regarding the use of mega dose steroids in traumatic brain injury. This study was the largest randomized study that evaluated steroids in patients with traumatic brain injury and was stopped early due to the significantly increased risk of death in patients that received mega dose steroids at their 6-month follow-up when compared with the placebo group (25.7% vs 22.3%; Relative Risk 1.15 Confidence Interval 1.07 to 1.24; p=0.0001). Although the etiology of the increased risk of death was not determined, the findings of this study should be taken into consideration when managing cases of TON with concurrent traumatic brain injury. Very recently it has been shown the cytokine hormone erythropoietin (EPO) that had been long known and used as a valuable agent to promote hematopoiesis has been protective in experimental models of mechanical trauma, neuroinflammation, cerebral and retinal ischemia, and even in a human stroke trial, and most notably in optic nerve transection. A double blind placebo-controlled multicenter trial on EPO add-on treatment in chronic schizophrenic men was performed. Treatment over 12 weeks with high-dose weekly (40,000 IU intravenously) EPO led to significant improvement of cognitive performance compared to placebo controls. Different studies have been performed on the effect of EPO on neuropathy in different studies. The investigators recently published our results on treating patients with TON with EPO and found it safe and effective. Patients were compared with a historical control group of patients who received no treatment for TON. A better visual recovery was found. The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of EPO on TON in a Multi- center clinical trial using a semi-experimental design.

02

Conditions studied

  • Traumatic Optic Neuropathy

Keywords

  • Erythropoietin
  • Traumatic Optic Neuropathy
  • Visual function
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Tehran University of Medical Sciences is the lead sponsor of 231 studies on the registry; 12 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
5 Years to 90 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Having indirect traumatic optic neuropathy, not more than 3 weeks between trauma and treatment, normal fundoscopy

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Having other injuries that effect on visual function, direct optic neuropathy, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, uncontrolled hypertension, polycythemia, creatinin more than 3 mg/dl, sensitivity to EPO, hyperkalemia, women who use contraceptive pill, pregnant and breast feeding women, history of stroke and cardiovascular diseases, having malignancy
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 1 / Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Care provider)
Enrollment
117 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO)

    Intravenous EPO 10,000 IU for 5-13 years of age and 20,000 IU for \>13 years/ day for 3 days

    Drug: Recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO)

  • Active comparator
    Methylprednisolone

    Just Intravenous Methyl prednisolone 250 mg every 6 hours for 3 days.

    Drug: Methyl prednisolone

  • Other
    Observation

    Observation

    Other: Observation

Interventions

  • DrugRecombinant human erythropoietin (EPO)

    4000 units per vial

    Also known as: EPO (Pooyesh darou Co., Tehran)

  • OtherObservation

    Just observation

  • 250 mg every 6 hours for 3 days.

    Also known as: Depo-Medrol

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of Participants With Change/Improvement Visual Acuity From the Beseline

    Best corrected visual acuity will measure at 1,2,3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks and 1 month and at least 3 months after treatment. Improvement is defined based on 1) mean logMAR\[12\], 2) 0.3 change in logMAR (improvement, deterioration, and no change) \[12,16\] , 3) mean improvement percentage which is calculated as: improvement%= (logMar ( of VA after treatment)-logMar ( of initial VA))/(logMar(20/13)˟-logMar ( of initial VA) 4) percentage of patients at different ordinal categorization of the BCVA as no light perception (NLP), light perception (LP)and hand motion (HM), count fingers (CF), and ≥ 20/200.

    Time frame: Change from baseline at least 3 months after treatment

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of Participants With Relative Afferent Papillary Defect (RAPD) Grade +4

    A positive RAPD means there are differences between the two eyes in the afferent pathway due to retinal or optic nerve disease. Graded from +1 to +4. The higher one is a better grade

    Time frame: Change from baseline at least 3 months after treatment

07

Results

Posted Sep 12, 2018

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneRecombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)MethylprednisoloneObservation
Started851616
Completed691516
Not completed1610

Outcome measures

PrimaryNumber of Participants With Change/Improvement Visual Acuity From the Beseline

Best corrected visual acuity will measure at 1,2,3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks and 1 month and at least 3 months after treatment. Improvement is defined based on 1) mean logMAR\[12\], 2) 0.3 change in logMAR (improvement, deterioration, and no change) \[12,16\] , 3) mean improvement percentage which is calculated as: improvement%= (logMar ( of VA after treatment)-logMar ( of initial VA))/(logMar(20/13)˟-logMar ( of initial VA) 4) percentage of patients at different ordinal categorization of the BCVA as no light perception (NLP), light perception (LP)and hand motion (HM), count fingers (CF), and ≥ 20/200.

Time frame:
Change from baseline at least 3 months after treatment
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Change/Improvement Visual Acuity From the Beseline
ParticipantsRecombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)MethylprednisoloneObservation
Number of Participants With Change/Improvement Visual Acuity From the Beseline2835
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Relative Afferent Papillary Defect (RAPD) Grade +4

A positive RAPD means there are differences between the two eyes in the afferent pathway due to retinal or optic nerve disease. Graded from +1 to +4. The higher one is a better grade

Time frame:
Change from baseline at least 3 months after treatment
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Relative Afferent Papillary Defect (RAPD) Grade +4
ParticipantsRecombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)MethylprednisoloneObservation
Number of Participants With Relative Afferent Papillary Defect (RAPD) Grade +42678

Adverse events

Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Recombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)0/69 (0%)0/69 (0%)0/69 (0%)
Methylprednisolone0/15 (0%)0/15 (0%)0/15 (0%)
Observation0/16 (0%)0/16 (0%)0/16 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)Recombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)MethylprednisoloneObservationTotal
<=18 years206430
Between 18 and 65 years64101286
>=65 years1001
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Recombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)MethylprednisoloneObservationTotal
Mean28.4 ± 13.923.5 ± 9.429.0 ± 13.727.8 ± 13.4
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Recombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)MethylprednisoloneObservationTotal
Female110314
Male741613103
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)Recombinant Human Erythropoietin (EPO)MethylprednisoloneObservationTotal
Iran, Islamic Republic of851616117
08

Study locations

3 sites
  • Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
    Shiraz, Fars, Iran
  • Iran University of Medical Sciences
    Tehran, 1467744814, Iran
  • Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
    Tehran, Iran
09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
Not marked actual or estimatedDates not marked actual or estimated

The record gives a start of Feb 2015, a primary completion of Apr 2016 and a completion of Feb 2017. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.

Results were first posted in Sep 2018, 2 years 5 months after primary completion.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Feb 1, 2013
First posted
Feb 5, 2013
Start
Feb 2015
Primary completionActual
Apr 2016
CompletionActual
Feb 2017
Results first posted
Sep 12, 2018
Last update
May 7, 2019
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 7, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01783847
Collaborators
Iran University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Feb 5, 2013
Start date
Feb 2015
Primary completion
Apr 2016
Completion
Feb 2017
Results posted
Sep 12, 2018
Last update
May 7, 2019

Study contacts

Mohsen B Kashkouli, MD
study chair · Iran University of Medical Sciences

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2016. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion