Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial registered on ANZCTR
Registration number
ACTRN12625000100493
Ethics application status
Approved
Date submitted
16/01/2025
Date registered
30/01/2025
Date last updated
30/01/2025
Date data sharing statement initially provided
30/01/2025
Type of registration
Prospectively registered
Titles & IDs
Public title
Investigating the impact of external factors on diurnal changes to corneal immune cells
Query!
Scientific title
Investigating the impact of light filtering lenses on diurnal changes to corneal immune cells in healthy adults aged 18 to 45 years
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
313440
0
IVCM_Diurnal25
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
U1111-1314-4025
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Healthy
335825
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Eye
332397
332397
0
0
Query!
Normal eye development and function
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
The eye exposed to the intervention will be randomly allocated. Each intervention will be worn once only, as described for each intervention (below).
• Nexcare Opticlude Orthoptic Eyepatch
The Nexcare Opticlude Eyepatch will be worn overnight over one eye until the next morning visit (08:00-10:00).
On a separate testing day, about one week later, the Nexcare Opticlude Eyepatch will be worn overnight over one eye until the next late afternoon visit (16:00-18:00).
• NOIR Frame style #46 Laser Safety Eyewear for 180-532nm, Filter colour: orange, Visible Light Transmission: 48%, CE rating/EN207 180-315, D LB7 + IR LB4, >315-532 DIRM LB6 (Blue + UV filter)
On a separate week, the NOIR safety glasses with Blue + UV filter over one eye (control eye exposed to natural light) will be worn from awakening until a visit in the late afternoon (16:00-18:00).
• NOIR Frame style #46 Laser Safety Eyewear for 190-398nm and 10,600nm, Filter colour: clear, Visible Light Transmission: 93%, CE rating 190-315 D LB7 + IR LB4, >315-398 DIRM LB5, 9000-11000 DI LB3 (UV only filter)
On a separate week, the NOIR safety glasses with UV- only filter will be worn over one eye (with the control eye exposed to natural light) from awakening in the morning, until late in the late afternoon (16:00-18:00).
A reminder notification to use the intervention, as indicated, will be sent out to participants the day prior to the study visit. Adherence to the intervention will be assessed by participant self-report at the study visit.
Query!
Intervention code [1]
330013
0
Treatment: Devices
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
The control will be the same participants but the contralateral eye that is exposed to natural light and environmental conditions (i.e. not exposed to the intervention).
Baseline levels will also be measured prior to the administration of any interventions.
Query!
Control group
Active
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
340149
0
Physiological diurnal change in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [1]
340149
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [1]
340149
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Primary outcome [2]
339956
0
Physiological diurnal change in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [2]
339956
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [2]
339956
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Primary outcome [3]
340169
0
Physiological diurnal change in the dynamic characteristics of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [3]
340169
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [3]
340169
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
443137
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [1]
443137
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [1]
443137
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
443136
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [2]
443136
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [2]
443136
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
443130
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and intervention A eyepatch AM in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [3]
443130
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [3]
443130
0
Baseline AM vs intervention A eyepatch AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
443164
0
Difference between control eye and eyepatch intervention eye in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial T cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [4]
443164
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [4]
443164
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
443109
0
Physiological diurnal change in the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [5]
443109
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [5]
443109
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
443132
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and the eyepatch intervention AM in the dynamic characteristics of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [6]
443132
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [6]
443132
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
443106
0
Physiological diurnal change in the morphology of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [7]
443106
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [7]
443106
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
443138
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial T cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [8]
443138
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [8]
443138
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
443141
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the density of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [9]
443141
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [9]
443141
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
443116
0
Physiological diurnal change in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial dendritic cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [10]
443116
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [10]
443116
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
443112
0
Physiological diurnal change in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial T cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [11]
443112
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [11]
443112
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
443111
0
Physiological diurnal change in the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [12]
443111
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [12]
443111
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
443143
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [13]
443143
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [13]
443143
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
443131
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and the eyepatch intervention AM in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [14]
443131
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [14]
443131
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
443148
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the dynamic characteristics of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [15]
443148
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [15]
443148
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
443129
0
Physiological diurnal change in the density of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [16]
443129
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [16]
443129
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
443156
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the density of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [17]
443156
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [17]
443156
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
443140
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the density of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [18]
443140
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [18]
443140
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
443139
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial dendritic cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [19]
443139
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [19]
443139
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
443128
0
Physiological diurnal change in the density of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [20]
443128
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [20]
443128
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
443161
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [21]
443161
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [21]
443161
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
443163
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [22]
443163
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [22]
443163
0
Control eye AM vs intervention A eyepatch eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
443149
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the morphology of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [23]
443149
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [23]
443149
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
443142
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the density of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [24]
443142
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [24]
443142
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
443127
0
Physiological diurnal change in the density of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [25]
443127
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [25]
443127
0
Baseline AM vs Baseline PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
443133
0
Difference between Baseline AM (morning) and eyepatch intervention AM in the morphology of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [26]
443133
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [26]
443133
0
Baseline AM vs eyepatch intervention AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
443150
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [27]
443150
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [27]
443150
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [28]
443153
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial dendritic cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [28]
443153
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [28]
443153
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [29]
443158
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [29]
443158
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [29]
443158
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [30]
443152
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial T cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [30]
443152
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [30]
443152
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [31]
443151
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [31]
443151
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [31]
443151
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [32]
443147
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [32]
443147
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [32]
443147
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [33]
443166
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [33]
443166
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [33]
443166
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [34]
443154
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the density of corneal epithelial dendritic cells
Query!
Assessment method [34]
443154
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [34]
443154
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [35]
443159
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the dynamic characteristics of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [35]
443159
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [35]
443159
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [36]
443155
0
Difference between Baseline PM, eyepatch intervention PM, blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM, and UV-only blocking lens intervention PM in the density of corneal epithelial T cells
Query!
Assessment method [36]
443155
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [36]
443155
0
Baseline PM vs eyepatch intervention PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention PM
Query!
Secondary outcome [37]
443160
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells
Query!
Assessment method [37]
443160
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [37]
443160
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [38]
443157
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells at the corneal whorl and periphery at AM and PM
Query!
Assessment method [38]
443157
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [38]
443157
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Secondary outcome [39]
443165
0
Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial dendritic cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve
Query!
Assessment method [39]
443165
0
Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software
Query!
Timepoint [39]
443165
0
Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
• Male or female aged 18 to 45 years, with full legal capacity to volunteer;
• Provide written informed consent to participate;
• In good general health;
• Have the ability to understand and follow study instructions, with the intention of completing all required study visits;
• Have not worn contact lenses consistently (i.e., less than once per week) over the three months prior to baseline;
• Habitual unaided monocular distance vision (uncorrected distance visual acuity) of at least 6/15 or binocular 6/12, and unaided binocular near vision of N12 or better at 40cm;
• Have typical sleeping patterns, defined as obtaining at least six hours of sleep per night, with sleep onset time between 21:00 PM and 2:00 AM, and waking up between 05:00 AM and 09:00 AM;
• Have at least 3 T cells in either the corneal whorl or periphery within the field of view on IVCM at baseline.
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
45
Years
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
Yes
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
• Any known active ocular disease and/or infection (including dry eye disease).
• Presence of any of the following conditions: active ocular inflammation, active ocular allergy, a corneal disorder or abnormality that could affect corneal sensitivity or normal spreading of the tear film (except superficial punctate keratitis), severe blepharitis or obvious inflammation of the eyelid margin, which in the judgment investigator may interfere with the interpretation of the study results.
• An injury to either eye in the 12 weeks prior to enrolment.
• Ocular surgery within the past six months at baseline, or has ocular surgery planned over the course of participation in the study.
• Prior history of laser refractive eye surgery.
• A known allergy to, or previous reaction to, any eye drops required for the study.
• The presence of significant corneal scarring or a physical factor that impairs the ability to perform corneal imaging.
• Clinically significant dry eye disease, as specified in the Tear Film and Ocular Surface Society Dry Eye Workshop II (TFOS DEWS II) definition, defined by dry eye symptoms (i.e., an Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) score greater than or equal to 13, out of 100 (Schiffman et al. 2000)) AND one or more of the following clinical signs (Wolffsohn et al. 2017):
o Tear osmolarity of greater than or equal to 308 mOsm/L in either eye or interocular differences greater than 8mOsm/L;
o Tear break up time (TBUT) < 10 sec in either eye;
o Ocular surface staining: > 5 corneal spots, > 9 conjunctival spots, or lid margin (greater than or equal to 2 mm length and greater than or equal to 25% width)
• Current use of any topical medications other than artificial lubricant eye drops (e.g., anti-glaucoma medications, corticosteroids);
• Have a history of a systemic infection known to affect corneal immune status (e.g., positive for COVID-19 or upper respiratory infection within 4 weeks of baseline), by self-report;
• Have received a vaccination within 2 weeks of baseline, by self-report;
• Any condition that would contraindicate the drawing of blood, or a significant history of vasovagal syncope during blood draws;
• Any blood-borne illnesses such as hepatitis and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) that may affect the eyes
• Females who are pregnant or breastfeeding at the time of study enrolment or who plan to become pregnant during the study (as reported by the participant);
• Unable or unwilling to wear the study interventions (eye patch, blue + UV light-filtering glasses, and UV only light-filtering glasses) or an actigraphy watch and MiEye light meter ‘pin’, as assessed during the Baseline visit;
• Unable or unwilling to keep a sleep diary;
• Requires a habitual spectacle or contact lens correction for daily activity;
• Unable to sit/lie supine comfortably during the examination procedures.
• Participation in an interventional clinical trial within the previous 30 days, or currently enrolled in an interventional clinical trial;
• Current shift-work and/or recent cross-time zone travel in the last month, or such anticipated travel during the study period;
• A condition or situation that, in the opinion of the study investigator, will limit the potential participant’s ability to comply with the study protocol, might adversely affect their safety or substantially confound the study outcomes.
References:
1. Schiffman, R.M., et al., Reliability and validity of the Ocular Surface Disease Index. Arch Ophthalmol, 2000. 118(5): p. 615-21.
2. Wolffsohn, J.S., et al., TFOS DEWS II Diagnostic Methodology report. Ocul Surf, 2017. 15(3): p. 539-574.
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Sealed opaque envelops
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Simple randomisation using a randomisation table created by computer software (i.e. computerised sequence generation). The randomisation will be stratified so that each participant has equal chance of receiving the intervention in a cross-over study.
Query!
Masking / blinding
Blinded (masking used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
The people analysing the results/data
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Crossover
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Not Applicable
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
This will be, to our knowledge, the first study to evaluate the diurnal variations in corneal immune cells in response to localised environmental factors. As a novel exploratory study, it is not possible to accurately calculate a required sample size using conventional statistical methods (which requires a reliable estimate of effect size and variability).
The nominated sample size of 18 completed participants is anticipated to provide sufficient power to detect significant inter-group differences.
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Not yet recruiting
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
31/01/2025
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
30/09/2025
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
30/11/2025
Query!
Actual
Query!
Sample size
Target
24
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
VIC
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Funding source category [1]
317879
0
University
Query!
Name [1]
317879
0
The University of Melbourne
Query!
Address [1]
317879
0
Query!
Country [1]
317879
0
Australia
Query!
Primary sponsor type
University
Query!
Name
The University of Melbourne
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Australia
Query!
Secondary sponsor category [1]
320216
0
None
Query!
Name [1]
320216
0
Query!
Address [1]
320216
0
Query!
Country [1]
320216
0
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Approved
Query!
Ethics committee name [1]
316564
0
University of Melbourne Central Human Research Ethics Committee
Query!
Ethics committee address [1]
316564
0
https://research.unimelb.edu.au/work-with-us/ethics-and-integrity/our-ethics-committees
Query!
Ethics committee country [1]
316564
0
Australia
Query!
Date submitted for ethics approval [1]
316564
0
15/11/2024
Query!
Approval date [1]
316564
0
10/01/2025
Query!
Ethics approval number [1]
316564
0
29193
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
This study is investigating whether ‘time of day’ factors and sleep patterns affect immune cells (cells that protect the eye) in the cornea (transparent front part of the eye). This study will also examine whether different light filtering lenses (that block different wavelengths of light) influence the behaviour of corneal immune cells. The study will aim to enrol 24 participants, with a target of 18 completed participants, aged 18 to 45 years, who have healthy eyes and do not regularly wear contact lenses or spectacles for daily activities. Participants will attend for 8 study visits in total, comprising 3 visits in the morning (08:00 AM-10:00 AM) and 5 visits in the late afternoon (16:00 PM-18:00 PM). Over the course of the study, participants will be asked to wear various forms of eye wear, consisting of an eyepatch and safety glasses with a filtered lens over one eye, overnight and/or throughout the day, as directed by the study team, as well as have some tear and blood samples collected.
Query!
Trial website
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Query!
Public notes
Additional outcomes: Secondary outcome 41: Difference between control eye and eyepatch intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 41: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 41: Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM Secondary outcome 42: Difference between control eye and eyepatch intervention eye in the density of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 42: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 42: Control eye AM vs eyepatch intervention eye AM Secondary outcome 43: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 43: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 43: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 44: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 44: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 44: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 45: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the dynamic characteristics of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 45: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 45: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 46: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 46: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 46: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 47: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 47: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 47: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 48: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 48: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 48: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 49: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 49: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 49: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 50: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial T cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve Assessment method 50: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 50: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 51: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye for the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial dendritic cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve Assessment method 51: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 51: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 52: Difference between the control eye and eyepatch intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 52: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 52: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 53: Difference between control eye and eyepatch intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 53: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using Fiji image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 53: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 54: Difference between control eye and eyepatch intervention eye in the density of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 54: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using Fiji image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 54: Control eye PM vs eyepatch intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 55: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 55: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 55: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 56: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 56: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 56: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 57: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 57: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 57: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 58: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the morphology of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 58: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 58: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 59: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 59: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 59: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 60: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 60: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 60: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 61: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial T cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve Assessment method 61: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 61: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 62: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial dendritic cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve Assessment method 62: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 62: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 63: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 63: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 63: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 64: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 64: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 64: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 65: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the density of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 65: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 65: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 66: Difference between control eye and blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 66: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 66: Control eye PM vs blue+UV blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 67: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 67: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 67: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 68: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 68: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 68: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 69: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 69: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 69: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 70: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the morphology of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 70: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 70: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 71: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the morphology of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 71: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 71: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 72: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the morphology of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 72: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 72: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 73: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial T cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve Assessment method 73: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 73: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 74: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the neuroimmune interactions of corneal epithelial dendritic cells before and after apparent contact of a corneal nerve Assessment method 74: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 74: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 75: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial dendritic cells Assessment method 75: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 75: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 76: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the density of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 76: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 76: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 77: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the density of corneal stromal immune cells Assessment method 77: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 77: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Secondary outcome 78: Difference between control eye and UV only blocking lens intervention eye in the dynamic characteristics of corneal epithelial T cells Assessment method 78: Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Secondary Timepoint 78: Control eye PM vs UV only blocking lens intervention eye PM Exploratory outcome 1: Physiological diurnal change in circulating (blood) immune cell profiles Assessment method 1: Blood collection and analysis Exploratory Timepoint 1: Baseline AM vs Baseline PM Exploratory outcome 2: Physiological diurnal change in tear film inflammatory cytokine profiles Assessment method 2: Tear collection and enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) analysis Exploratory Timepoint 2: Baseline AM vs Baseline PM Exploratory outcome 3: Median morning, daytime and evening light exposure of the 7-day period following assessments for Baseline AM and PM visits Assessment method 3: Analysis from data collected from MiEye light meter pins Exploratory Timepoint 3: Baseline AM and 7 days later Exploratory outcome 4: Correlation between light exposure regularity patterns and baseline corneal immune cell dynamics Assessment method 4: Analysis from data collected from MiEye light meter pins and Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Exploratory Timepoint 4: Baseline AM and PM (for immune cell dynamics) and weekly average (light exposure) Exploratory outcome 5: Correlation between sleep regularity patterns and baseline corneal immune cell dynamics Assessment method : Analysis from data collected from GENEactiv watches and Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Exploratory Timepoint 5: Baseline AM and PM (for immune cell dynamics) and weekly average sleep patterns Exploratory outcome 6: Correlation between sleep regularity patterns and baseline circulating immune cell profiles Assessment method 6: Analysis from data collected from GENEactiv watches and Functional in vivo confocal microscopy using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph III (HRT-III) with Rostock Corneal Module, and quantified using image analysis software Exploratory Timepoint 6: Baseline AM and PM (for immune cell dynamics) and blood analysis AM = morning, PM = late afternoon/evening Study results will be updated upon study completion.
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
138258
0
Prof Laura Downie
Query!
Address
138258
0
Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, 200 Berkeley St, Carlton, VIC, 3053
Query!
Country
138258
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
138258
0
+6139035 3043
Query!
Fax
138258
0
Query!
Email
138258
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
138259
0
Laura Downie
Query!
Address
138259
0
Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, 200 Berkeley St, Carlton, VIC, 3053
Query!
Country
138259
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
138259
0
+6139035 3043
Query!
Fax
138259
0
Query!
Email
138259
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Name
138260
0
Laura Downie
Query!
Address
138260
0
Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, 200 Berkeley St, Carlton, VIC, 3053
Query!
Country
138260
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
138260
0
+6139035 3043
Query!
Fax
138260
0
Query!
Email
138260
0
[email protected]
Query!
Data sharing statement
Will the study consider sharing individual participant data?
No
No IPD sharing reason/comment:
Data sharing is not currently part of our ethics approval.
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Results publications and other study-related documents
Documents added manually
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Documents added automatically
No additional documents have been identified.
Download to PDF