Cargando…
Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials
INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of the once-daily topical ophthalmic solutions, alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2%, in preventing ocular itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis were evaluated. METHODS: Pooled analysis was conducted of two double-masked, multicenter, active- and pla...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4209090/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25260889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-014-0155-3 |
_version_ | 1782341221822234624 |
---|---|
author | McLaurin, Eugene B. Marsico, Nicholas P. Ackerman, Stacey L. Ciolino, Joseph B. Williams, Julia M. Villanueva, Linda Hollander, David A. |
author_facet | McLaurin, Eugene B. Marsico, Nicholas P. Ackerman, Stacey L. Ciolino, Joseph B. Williams, Julia M. Villanueva, Linda Hollander, David A. |
author_sort | McLaurin, Eugene B. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of the once-daily topical ophthalmic solutions, alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2%, in preventing ocular itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis were evaluated. METHODS: Pooled analysis was conducted of two double-masked, multicenter, active- and placebo-controlled studies using the conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) model of allergic conjunctivitis. Subjects were randomized 1:1:1 to receive alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine 0.2%, or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was subject-evaluated mean ocular itching at 3 min post-CAC and 16 h after treatment instillation. Secondary measures included ocular itching at 5 and 7 min post-CAC. Ocular itch was determined over all time points measured (3, 5, and 7 min) post-CAC and the proportion of subjects with minimal itch (itch score <1) and zero itch (itch score = 0) was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 284 subjects were enrolled in the two studies. At 3 min post-CAC and 16 h after treatment instillation, alcaftadine 0.25% achieved a significantly lower mean itch score compared with olopatadine 0.2% (0.50 vs. 0.87, respectively; P = 0.0006). Alcaftadine demonstrated a significantly lower mean itch score over all time points compared with olopatadine (0.68 vs. 0.92, respectively; P = 0.0390); both alcaftadine- and olopatadine-treated subjects achieved significantly lower overall mean ocular itching scores compared with placebo (2.10; P < 0.0001 for both actives). Minimal itch over all time points was reported by 76.1% of alcaftadine-treated subjects compared with 58.1% of olopatadine-treated subjects (P = 0.0121). Treatment with alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2% was safe and well tolerated; no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Once-daily alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution demonstrated greater efficacy in prevention of ocular itching compared with olopatadine 0.2% at 3 min post-CAC (primary endpoint), and over all time points, 16 h post-treatment instillation. Alcaftadine and olopatadine both provided effective relief compared with placebo and were generally well tolerated. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0155-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4209090 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42090902014-10-28 Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials McLaurin, Eugene B. Marsico, Nicholas P. Ackerman, Stacey L. Ciolino, Joseph B. Williams, Julia M. Villanueva, Linda Hollander, David A. Adv Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of the once-daily topical ophthalmic solutions, alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2%, in preventing ocular itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis were evaluated. METHODS: Pooled analysis was conducted of two double-masked, multicenter, active- and placebo-controlled studies using the conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) model of allergic conjunctivitis. Subjects were randomized 1:1:1 to receive alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine 0.2%, or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was subject-evaluated mean ocular itching at 3 min post-CAC and 16 h after treatment instillation. Secondary measures included ocular itching at 5 and 7 min post-CAC. Ocular itch was determined over all time points measured (3, 5, and 7 min) post-CAC and the proportion of subjects with minimal itch (itch score <1) and zero itch (itch score = 0) was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 284 subjects were enrolled in the two studies. At 3 min post-CAC and 16 h after treatment instillation, alcaftadine 0.25% achieved a significantly lower mean itch score compared with olopatadine 0.2% (0.50 vs. 0.87, respectively; P = 0.0006). Alcaftadine demonstrated a significantly lower mean itch score over all time points compared with olopatadine (0.68 vs. 0.92, respectively; P = 0.0390); both alcaftadine- and olopatadine-treated subjects achieved significantly lower overall mean ocular itching scores compared with placebo (2.10; P < 0.0001 for both actives). Minimal itch over all time points was reported by 76.1% of alcaftadine-treated subjects compared with 58.1% of olopatadine-treated subjects (P = 0.0121). Treatment with alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2% was safe and well tolerated; no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Once-daily alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution demonstrated greater efficacy in prevention of ocular itching compared with olopatadine 0.2% at 3 min post-CAC (primary endpoint), and over all time points, 16 h post-treatment instillation. Alcaftadine and olopatadine both provided effective relief compared with placebo and were generally well tolerated. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0155-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Healthcare 2014-09-27 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4209090/ /pubmed/25260889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-014-0155-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2014 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research McLaurin, Eugene B. Marsico, Nicholas P. Ackerman, Stacey L. Ciolino, Joseph B. Williams, Julia M. Villanueva, Linda Hollander, David A. Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials |
title | Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials |
title_full | Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials |
title_fullStr | Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials |
title_short | Ocular Itch Relief with Alcaftadine 0.25% Versus Olopatadine 0.2% in Allergic Conjunctivitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials |
title_sort | ocular itch relief with alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine 0.2% in allergic conjunctivitis: pooled analysis of two multicenter randomized clinical trials |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4209090/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25260889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-014-0155-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mclaurineugeneb ocularitchreliefwithalcaftadine025versusolopatadine02inallergicconjunctivitispooledanalysisoftwomulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrials AT marsiconicholasp ocularitchreliefwithalcaftadine025versusolopatadine02inallergicconjunctivitispooledanalysisoftwomulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrials AT ackermanstaceyl ocularitchreliefwithalcaftadine025versusolopatadine02inallergicconjunctivitispooledanalysisoftwomulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrials AT ciolinojosephb ocularitchreliefwithalcaftadine025versusolopatadine02inallergicconjunctivitispooledanalysisoftwomulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrials AT williamsjuliam ocularitchreliefwithalcaftadine025versusolopatadine02inallergicconjunctivitispooledanalysisoftwomulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrials AT villanuevalinda ocularitchreliefwithalcaftadine025versusolopatadine02inallergicconjunctivitispooledanalysisoftwomulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrials AT hollanderdavida ocularitchreliefwithalcaftadine025versusolopatadine02inallergicconjunctivitispooledanalysisoftwomulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrials |