No abstract

No abstract

To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of waterfree cyclosporine formulation (CyclASol) at 2 concentrations (0.1% and 0.05% of cyclosporine [CsA]) to vehicle when applied twice daily for 16 weeks in patients with dry eye disease (DED). An open-label Restasis (Allergan, Irvine, CA) arm was included to allow a direct comparison with an approved therapy.Design: An exploratory phase II, multicenter, randomized, vehicle-controlled clinical trial, double-masked between CyclASol and vehicle with an open-label comparator.Participants: Two hundred and seven eligible patients with a history of dry eye disease were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 1 of 4 treatment arms (CyclASol 0.05%, n ¼ 51; CyclASol 0.1%, n ¼ 51; vehicle, n ¼ 52, and Restasis, n ¼ 53).Methods: After a 2-week run-in period with twice-daily dosing of Systane Balance (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX), patients were randomized to the respective treatment arm and dosed twice daily for 16 weeks.Main Outcome Measures: The study was set up to explore efficacy on a number of sign and symptom end points including total and subregion corneal fluorescein staining, conjunctival staining, visual analog scale (VAS) for dry eye symptoms VAS severity, and Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire.Results: CyclASol showed a consistent reduction in corneal and conjunctival staining compared with both vehicle and Restasis over the 16-week treatment period, with an early onset of effect (at day 14). A mixed-effects modelebased approach demonstrated that the CyclASol drug effect was statistically significant over vehicle (total corneal staining P < 0.1, central corneal staining P < 0.001, conjunctival staining P < 0.01). This model-based analysis suggests a significant CyclASol effect for OSDI as symptom parameter (P < 0.01). The numbers of ocular adverse events were low in all treatment groups.Conclusions: CyclASol showed efficacy, safety, and tolerability at 2 concentrations in moderate-to-severe DED. In a direct head-to-head against open-label Restasis, CyclASol was found to have an earlier onset of action, as early as after 2 weeks of treatment, in relieving the signs of DED, as measured by corneal and conjunctival staining. The central region of the cornea, an important area for visual function in dry eye sufferers, was shown to have the most benefit from treatment. Excellent safety, tolerability, and comfort profile supports this new CsA formulation as having a positive benefit-to-risk ratio.

PurposeTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of ophthalmic MIM-D3, a tyrosine kinase TrkA receptor agonist, in patients with dry eye.DesignA prospective, two-center, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled Phase 2 study.MethodsA total of 150 dry eye patients were randomized 1:1:1 to study medication (1% MIM-D3, 5% MIM-D3, or placebo) and dosed twice daily (BID) for 28 days. Key eligibility criteria included exacerbation in corneal staining and ocular discomfort in the Controlled Adverse Environment (CAESM) on two visits, separated by 1 week of BID dosing with artificial tears. Safety and efficacy were evaluated at baseline, throughout treatment, and for 2 weeks post-treatment. The pre-specified primary outcome measures were fluorescein corneal staining post-CAE at day 28 and diary worst symptom scores over 28 days. Secondary outcomes included the pre-, post-, and the change from pre- to post-CAE fluorescein and lissamine green staining in both corneal and conjunctival regions, as well as individual diary symptoms.ResultsThe prespecified primary endpoints were not met. Compared with placebo, fluorescein corneal staining at day 28 was significantly improved (P < 0.05) in the 1% MIM-D3 group for the assessment of change from pre-CAE to post-CAE. In addition, following CAE exposure, patients in the 1% MIM-D3 group showed significant improvements versus placebo (P < 0.05) in inferior fluorescein and lissamine green staining after 14 and 28 days. Compared with placebo, patients in the 5% MIM-D3 group reported significantly lower daily diary scores for ocular dryness (P < 0.05). In a subgroup defined by higher symptom scores during the run-in period, significant treatment effects (P < 0.05) were observed for diary symptoms for both MIM-D3 doses. Ocular adverse events were mild and not considered to be treatment-related.ConclusionTreatment with topical ophthalmic MIM-D3 demonstrated protection against the effects of a CAE challenge on dry eye signs, reduced patient-reported diary symptoms, with a favorable safety profile.

No abstract