0
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 50.19.47.197. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Clinical Trial Retrospective |

Impact of the Cryotherapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity Randomized Clinical Trial FREE

John T. Flynn, MD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliation: Department of Ophthalmology, Harkness Eye Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York.


Section Editor: Simmons Lessell, MD

More Author Information
Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(9):1275-1276. doi:10.1001/archopht.125.9.1275.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

The true impact of the Cryotherapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) randomized trial,1 or CRYO-ROP trial as it came to be known, cannot be measured apart from the development of the international classification of ROP2 (ICROP), which served as the backbone of the trial's organization. The trial served as a necessary and sufficient test of the validity of the classification itself. Both were validated by the exercise.

A brief overview of the background of the ICROP is in order to understand how closely entwined the two were and how both were born in response to the upsurge of ROP following a more liberal policy of oxygen use in the decade of the 1960s3 and the sporadic reports of the beneficial effects of photocoagulation4 and cryotherapy5 (coming from Japan and Israel primarily). The need for a new classification became obvious because studies had shown in previous decades that spontaneous regression of ROP indeed occurred. A better way of describing the eyes that truly needed treatment was required to separate a true response to therapy from the natural history of the disease itself. In answer to the need, some 23 members from 11 countries with an interest in ROP assembled in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, in 1981 to map out a rough sketch of a classification system that they agreed to use for a year without publication. The group then reconvened on the campus of the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, to finalize the document, which was published in 1984.2

The direct results of these efforts were the conception, planning, and implementation of the Cryotherapy for ROP randomized clinical trial of cryotherapy against observation (no treatment). A group of ophthalmologists from the United States intimately involved in the development of knowledge of ROP and its classification, among them Earl Palmer, MD, the study's principal investigator, David Schafer, MD, Graham Quinn, MD, Dale Phelps, MD, myself, and others, put together the manual of procedure. In this effort, we were joined by Robert Hardy, PhD, professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the School of Public Health, University of Texas, Houston, who lent design and biostatistical expertise and served as study coordinating center principal investigator during this and subsequent studies. The study manual of procedure outlined in exquisite detail every step in the selection of eligible infants, examining technique, diagnosis of the disease, threshold for treatment, technique of treatment, and follow-up of the infant's treated eye. Because the disease was most often symmetrical in patients (> 80%), one eye served as the treated eye and the other as its control. The threshold for treatment was greater than 5 clock hours of grade 3 ROP in zone 1 or 2 accompanied by plus disease—defined for the study as dilated and tortuous veins and arteries of the posterior pole vessels. Twenty-three centers were enrolled in the study and their principal investigators were trained in the study protocol, applying ICROP to the disease as they examined premature infants of birth weight less than 1251 g and accurately diagnosing ROP and its severity. After careful peer review, the National Eye Institute fully supported the study and subsequent follow-up of the enrolled infants. The study compared treatment with cryotherapy to the avascular retina for threshold ROP vs observation and no treatment for threshold disease in the opposite eye. Subjects were randomized by eye when the level of ROP was equal in both eyes and by patient when one eye was at the threshold but the other was not. Unfavorable outcome was defined as a total retinal detachment or a retinal fold through the macula destroying central vision. The results, both anatomical and later functional, were positive for cryotherapy. The finding of an unfavorable outcome in the treated eye was reduced by 50% (to approximately 25%) over its nontreated control (unfavorable outcome in approximately 46%). Some 291 premature infants were entered in the trial. At that point, the trial was stopped as it became clear that even if all future infants needed to attain sample size had failed cryotherapy, the study results would not be reversed. The infants enrolled in the study have been carefully followed up for 15 years. And although the visual results have not been as striking as had been hoped, they have nevertheless maintained a statistically significant edge over the results in the untreated eye. Cryotherapy proved to be far less successful in zone 1 disease than in zone 2 disease, where fortunately greater than 75% of the disease occurs. It is important to note that unfavorable outcomes as stage 5 (total retinal detachment) outnumbered stage 4B (a retinal fold extending through the macula) by a ratio of 13 to 1. The treated unfavorable results were far more common proportionately in zone 1 disease than in zone 2 disease.

The results of this study proved for the first time the availability of a treatment that improved the outlook for vision significantly over the natural history of the disease. The results of the study were quickly adopted both in the United States and worldwide as the standard of care, a tribute to the meticulous planning and execution by the investigators involved in carrying it out. Treatment took a further step forward when the indirect diode laser became available and was shown in a number of observational studies to be as effective as cryotherapy and easier in application for the infant and therapist.6 The CRYO-ROP trial proved to be the template for studies to follow.7 It also furnished a cadre of ophthalmologists trained in the design and implementation of randomized trial methods and the application of the methods to other problems in pediatric ophthalmology as they arose. It stands as one of the most successful trials undertaken with support of the National Eye Institute.

ARTICLE INFORMATION

Correspondence: John T. Flynn, MD, Department of Ophthalmology, Harkness Eye Institute, 635 W 165th St, New York, NY 10032 (jtf38@columbia.edu).

Submitted for Publication: November 22, 2006; accepted November 22, 2006.

Financial Disclosure: None reported.

Funding/Support: This work was supported in part by the Communities Foundation of Texas.

Cryotherapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity Cooperative Group, Multicenter trial of cryotherapy for retinopathy of prematurity: three-month outcome. Arch Ophthalmol 1990;108 (2) 195- 204
PubMed Link to Article
Committee for the Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity, An international classification of retinopathy of prematurity. Arch Ophthalmol 1984;102 (8) 1130- 1134
PubMed Link to Article
Reisner  SHAmir  JShohat  MKrikler  RNissenkorn  IBen-Sira  I Retinopathy of prematurity: incidence and treatment. Arch Dis Child 1985;60 (65) 698- 701
PubMed Link to Article
Uemura  YTsukahara  INagata  M  et al.  Diagnostic and therapeutic criteria for retinopathy of prematurity [in Japanese]. Committee's Report Appointed by the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare. Tokyo, Japan: Japanese Ministry of Health & Welfare1974;
Ben-Sira  INissenkorn  IGrunwald  EYassur  Y Treatment of acute retrolental fibroplasia by cryopexy. Br J Ophthalmol 1980;64 (10) 758- 762
PubMed Link to Article
Shalev  BFarr  AKRepka  MX Randomized comparison of diode laser photocoagulation vs cryotherapy for threshold retinopathy of prematurity: seven-year outcome. Am J Ophthalmol 2001;132 (1) 76- 80
PubMed Link to Article
Good  WVHardy  RJDobson  V  et al. Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity Cooperative Group, The incidence and course of retinopathy of prematurity: findings from the early treatment for retinopathy treatment study. Pediatrics 2005;116 (1) 15- 23
PubMed Link to Article

Figures

Tables

References

Cryotherapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity Cooperative Group, Multicenter trial of cryotherapy for retinopathy of prematurity: three-month outcome. Arch Ophthalmol 1990;108 (2) 195- 204
PubMed Link to Article
Committee for the Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity, An international classification of retinopathy of prematurity. Arch Ophthalmol 1984;102 (8) 1130- 1134
PubMed Link to Article
Reisner  SHAmir  JShohat  MKrikler  RNissenkorn  IBen-Sira  I Retinopathy of prematurity: incidence and treatment. Arch Dis Child 1985;60 (65) 698- 701
PubMed Link to Article
Uemura  YTsukahara  INagata  M  et al.  Diagnostic and therapeutic criteria for retinopathy of prematurity [in Japanese]. Committee's Report Appointed by the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare. Tokyo, Japan: Japanese Ministry of Health & Welfare1974;
Ben-Sira  INissenkorn  IGrunwald  EYassur  Y Treatment of acute retrolental fibroplasia by cryopexy. Br J Ophthalmol 1980;64 (10) 758- 762
PubMed Link to Article
Shalev  BFarr  AKRepka  MX Randomized comparison of diode laser photocoagulation vs cryotherapy for threshold retinopathy of prematurity: seven-year outcome. Am J Ophthalmol 2001;132 (1) 76- 80
PubMed Link to Article
Good  WVHardy  RJDobson  V  et al. Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity Cooperative Group, The incidence and course of retinopathy of prematurity: findings from the early treatment for retinopathy treatment study. Pediatrics 2005;116 (1) 15- 23
PubMed Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

526 Views
1 Citations
×

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs