Cargando…

Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% compared to cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% and diquafosol sodium 3%. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, evaluator-masked, active control, parallel, phase IV study. A total of 227 patients were randomly allocated t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Chang Hyun, Kim, Mee Kum, Kim, Eun Chul, Kim, Jae Yong, Kim, Tae-Im, Kim, Hong Kyun, Song, Jong Suk, Yoon, Kyung-Chul, Lee, Do Hyung, Lee, Hyung Keun, Chung, Tae-Young, Choi, Chul Young, Kim, Hyun Seung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Ophthalmological Society 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6685820/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31389210
http://dx.doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2018.0116
_version_ 1783442455009427456
author Park, Chang Hyun
Kim, Mee Kum
Kim, Eun Chul
Kim, Jae Yong
Kim, Tae-Im
Kim, Hong Kyun
Song, Jong Suk
Yoon, Kyung-Chul
Lee, Do Hyung
Lee, Hyung Keun
Chung, Tae-Young
Choi, Chul Young
Kim, Hyun Seung
author_facet Park, Chang Hyun
Kim, Mee Kum
Kim, Eun Chul
Kim, Jae Yong
Kim, Tae-Im
Kim, Hong Kyun
Song, Jong Suk
Yoon, Kyung-Chul
Lee, Do Hyung
Lee, Hyung Keun
Chung, Tae-Young
Choi, Chul Young
Kim, Hyun Seung
author_sort Park, Chang Hyun
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% compared to cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% and diquafosol sodium 3%. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, evaluator-masked, active control, parallel, phase IV study. A total of 227 patients were randomly allocated to instill cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% (CN) twice daily, cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% (CE) twice daily, or diquafosol sodium 3% (DQ) six times daily. Non-inferiority of CN was analyzed by primary endpoint (cornea and conjunctival staining scores at week 12). The secondary endpoints were scores of corneal staining, conjunctival staining, tear break-up time, Schirmer test, and Ocular Surface Disease Index at weeks 4 and 12. RESULTS: Primary endpoints showed statistically significant improvements in all groups. Primary endpoints were −6.60 for the CN group, −5.28 for the CE group, and −6.63 for the DQ group (National Eye Institute scale from 0 to 33), verifying the non-inferiority of CN compared to CE (95% confidence interval, −0.15 to 2.80, Δ>−2.88). In intergroup comparison between CN and CE groups, the CN group had significantly more decreased conjunctival staining score at week 12. Intergroup comparison between CN and DQ groups showed consistent statistically significant improvements in TBUT and Schirmer test in the CN group. In the DQ group, TBUT showed late statistically significant improvement at week 12 and Schirmer test showed relatively short-term statistically significant improvement at week 4. CONCLUSIONS: Cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% was equivalently efficient compared to cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% and diquafosol sodium 3%. In addition, CN showed significant improvements in several parameters for treatment of dry eyes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6685820
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher The Korean Ophthalmological Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66858202019-08-11 Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye Park, Chang Hyun Kim, Mee Kum Kim, Eun Chul Kim, Jae Yong Kim, Tae-Im Kim, Hong Kyun Song, Jong Suk Yoon, Kyung-Chul Lee, Do Hyung Lee, Hyung Keun Chung, Tae-Young Choi, Chul Young Kim, Hyun Seung Korean J Ophthalmol Original Article PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% compared to cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% and diquafosol sodium 3%. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, evaluator-masked, active control, parallel, phase IV study. A total of 227 patients were randomly allocated to instill cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% (CN) twice daily, cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% (CE) twice daily, or diquafosol sodium 3% (DQ) six times daily. Non-inferiority of CN was analyzed by primary endpoint (cornea and conjunctival staining scores at week 12). The secondary endpoints were scores of corneal staining, conjunctival staining, tear break-up time, Schirmer test, and Ocular Surface Disease Index at weeks 4 and 12. RESULTS: Primary endpoints showed statistically significant improvements in all groups. Primary endpoints were −6.60 for the CN group, −5.28 for the CE group, and −6.63 for the DQ group (National Eye Institute scale from 0 to 33), verifying the non-inferiority of CN compared to CE (95% confidence interval, −0.15 to 2.80, Δ>−2.88). In intergroup comparison between CN and CE groups, the CN group had significantly more decreased conjunctival staining score at week 12. Intergroup comparison between CN and DQ groups showed consistent statistically significant improvements in TBUT and Schirmer test in the CN group. In the DQ group, TBUT showed late statistically significant improvement at week 12 and Schirmer test showed relatively short-term statistically significant improvement at week 4. CONCLUSIONS: Cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% was equivalently efficient compared to cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% and diquafosol sodium 3%. In addition, CN showed significant improvements in several parameters for treatment of dry eyes. The Korean Ophthalmological Society 2019-08 2019-08-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6685820/ /pubmed/31389210 http://dx.doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2018.0116 Text en © 2019 The Korean Ophthalmological Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Park, Chang Hyun
Kim, Mee Kum
Kim, Eun Chul
Kim, Jae Yong
Kim, Tae-Im
Kim, Hong Kyun
Song, Jong Suk
Yoon, Kyung-Chul
Lee, Do Hyung
Lee, Hyung Keun
Chung, Tae-Young
Choi, Chul Young
Kim, Hyun Seung
Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye
title Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye
title_full Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye
title_fullStr Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye
title_short Efficacy of Topical Cyclosporine Nanoemulsion 0.05% Compared with Topical Cyclosporine Emulsion 0.05% and Diquafosol 3% in Dry Eye
title_sort efficacy of topical cyclosporine nanoemulsion 0.05% compared with topical cyclosporine emulsion 0.05% and diquafosol 3% in dry eye
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6685820/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31389210
http://dx.doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2018.0116
work_keys_str_mv AT parkchanghyun efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT kimmeekum efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT kimeunchul efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT kimjaeyong efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT kimtaeim efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT kimhongkyun efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT songjongsuk efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT yoonkyungchul efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT leedohyung efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT leehyungkeun efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT chungtaeyoung efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT choichulyoung efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye
AT kimhyunseung efficacyoftopicalcyclosporinenanoemulsion005comparedwithtopicalcyclosporineemulsion005anddiquafosol3indryeye