Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2016 Aug 13;388(10045):661-72.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30371-3. Epub 2016 Jun 30.

Safety and durability of effect of contralateral-eye administration of AAV2 gene therapy in patients with childhood-onset blindness caused by RPE65 mutations: a follow-on phase 1 trial

Jean Bennett  1 , Jennifer Wellman  2 , Kathleen A Marshall  3 , Sarah McCague  3 , Manzar Ashtari  4 , Julie DiStefano-Pappas  5 , Okan U Elci  5 , Daniel C Chung  6 , Junwei Sun  7 , J Fraser Wright  2 , Dominique R Cross  3 , Puya Aravand  8 , Laura L Cyckowski  9 , Jeannette L Bennicelli  10 , Federico Mingozzi  11 , Alberto Auricchio  12 , Eric A Pierce  13 , Jason Ruggiero  14 , Bart P Leroy  15 , Francesca Simonelli  16 , Katherine A High  17 , Albert M Maguire  18
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Safety and durability of effect of contralateral-eye administration of AAV2 gene therapy in patients with childhood-onset blindness caused by RPE65 mutations: a follow-on phase 1 trial

Jean Bennett et al. Lancet. .

Abstract

Background: Safety and efficacy have been shown in a phase 1 dose-escalation study involving a unilateral subretinal injection of a recombinant adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector containing the RPE65 gene (AAV2-hRPE65v2) in individuals with inherited retinal dystrophy caused by RPE65 mutations. This finding, along with the bilateral nature of the disease and intended use in treatment, prompted us to determine the safety of administration of AAV2-hRPE65v2 to the contralateral eye in patients enrolled in the phase 1 study.

Methods: In this follow-on phase 1 trial, one dose of AAV2-hRPE65v2 (1.5 × 10(11) vector genomes) in a total volume of 300 μL was subretinally injected into the contralateral, previously uninjected, eyes of 11 children and adults (aged 11-46 years at second administration) with inherited retinal dystrophy caused by RPE65 mutations, 1.71-4.58 years after the initial subretinal injection. We assessed safety, immune response, retinal and visual function, functional vision, and activation of the visual cortex from baseline until 3 year follow-up, with observations ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01208389.

Findings: No adverse events related to the AAV were reported, and those related to the procedure were mostly mild (dellen formation in three patients and cataracts in two). One patient developed bacterial endophthalmitis and was excluded from analyses. We noted improvements in efficacy outcomes in most patients without significant immunogenicity. Compared with baseline, pooled analysis of ten participants showed improvements in mean mobility and full-field light sensitivity in the injected eye by day 30 that persisted to year 3 (mobility p=0.0003, white light full-field sensitivity p<0.0001), but no significant change was seen in the previously injected eyes over the same time period (mobility p=0.7398, white light full-field sensitivity p=0.6709). Changes in visual acuity from baseline to year 3 were not significant in pooled analysis in the second eyes or the previously injected eyes (p>0.49 for all time-points compared with baseline).

Interpretation: To our knowledge, AAV2-hRPE65v2 is the first successful gene therapy administered to the contralateral eye. The results highlight the use of several outcome measures and help to delineate the variables that contribute to maximal benefit from gene augmentation therapy in this disease.

Funding: Center for Cellular and Molecular Therapeutics at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Spark Therapeutics, US National Institutes of Health, Foundation Fighting Blindness, Institute for Translational Medicine and Therapeutics, Research to Prevent Blindness, Center for Advanced Retinal and Ocular Therapeutics, Mackall Foundation Trust, F M Kirby Foundation, and The Research Foundation-Flanders.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests

AMM and JB are co-inventors on a patent for “a method of treating or retarding the development of blindness” (US Patent number 8147823) but waived any potential financial interest in this technology in 2002. KAH, JFW, DCC, and JW are now employed by and have equity in Spark Therapeutics, a company that was formed after the participants had received intervention to the second eye and that is developing this technology. JB also reports having served on a scientific advisory board for Avalanche Technologies and is a founder of Gensight Biologics. JB, DCC, AMM, KAH, JW, KAM, SM, and JS are coauthors of a provisional patent describing the mobility test used in this study. FM and KAH hold a patent on methods for detection and modulation of T-cell responses to gene therapy vectors. JFW is an inventor on patents relative to adeno-associated vector development. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Subretinal areas of second-eye injection and Goldmann visual fields
Scotomas and the natural blind spot are shown in black.
Figure 2
Figure 2. FST with (A) white, (B) blue, and (C) red stimuli, (D) visual acuity measurements, and (E) mobility change score
(A–C) Note that the scales of the y axes are different. The more negative the threshold, the higher the sensitivity. (D) Visual acuity measurements are shown as mean logMAR scores for each visit. (E) The mobility change score reflects the change in the ability of the patients to pass the mobility test under lower illuminance than at baseline. Error bars represent 1 SE. Only significant p values (ie, p<0·05) are shown. See appendix p 6 for detailed statistical analyses. FST=full-field light sensitivity thresholds.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Full-field light sensitivity threshold results immediately before and after administration of AAV2-hRPE65v2 to the second, contralateral eye in patients given low-dose treatment in their first eye
Figure 4
Figure 4
Full-field light sensitivity threshold results immediately before and after administration of AAV2-hRPE65v2 to the second, contralateral eye in patients given medium-dose treatment in their first eye
Figure 5
Figure 5
Full-field light sensitivity threshold results immediately before and after administration of AAV2-hRPE65v2 to the second, contralateral eye in patients given high-dose treatment in their first eye
Figure 6
Figure 6. Change in mobility score
Participants are listed according to their original dose assignment when the first eye was injected: (A) low dose, (B) medium dose, and (C) high dose. A positive change score reflects the ability to navigate more accurately and quickly at dimmer light levels than at baseline. See appendix p 6 for detailed statistical analyses. *Mobility testing for NP01, CH11, and CH12 was not standardised until their follow-on visits in year 1. All other participants began the follow-on study after mobility testing standardisation.
Figure 7
Figure 7. fMRI results at baseline of the follow-on study and at 1 year after administration to the second eye
Participants are listed according to their original dose assignment when the first eye was injected: (A) low dose, (B) medium dose, and (C) high dose. Significant areas of cortical activations are shown as orange clusters overlaid onto the medial and lateral representations of the inflated cortex. Results are presented for the left eye for all but one participant (CH09), who received administration to his right eye in the follow-on study. For follow-up fMRI results, a stringent statistical threshold of false discovery rate <5%, corrected p<0·004, and continuous cluster area ≥100 mm2 was used for all patients (except NP01)., For baseline fMRI results, a relaxed threshold of uncorrected p<0·05 and continuous cluster area ≥50 was used for all patients (except NP15 and NP02) to reveal cortical activations.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Morimura H, Fishman GA, Grover S, Fulton A, Berson E, Dryja T. Mutations in the RPE65 gene in patients with autosomal recessive retinitis pigmentosa or Leber congenital amaurosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1998;95:3088–93. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Thompson DA, Gyurus P, Fleischer LL, et al. Genetics and phenotypes of RPE65 mutations in inherited retinal degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:4293–99. - PubMed
    1. Redmond TM, Yu S, Lee E, et al. Rpe65 is necessary for production of 11-cis-vitamin A in the retinal visual cycle. Nat Genet. 1998;20:344–51. - PubMed
    1. Redmond T, Poliakov E, Yu S, Tsai J, Lu Z, Gentleman S. Mutation of key residues of RPE65 abolishes its enzymatic role as isomerohydrolase in the visual cycle. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:13658–63. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Acland GM, Aguirre GD, Ray J, et al. Gene therapy restores vision in a canine model of childhood blindness. Nat Genet. 2001;28:92–95. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Associated data