0.2% Betamethasone Sodium Phosphate: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Masked Study to Compare Its Ocular Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy to Vehicle in Cataract Surgery Subjects.

Purpose: To compare the preservative-free corticosteroid 0.2% betamethasone sodium phosphate BID (SURF-201) to vehicle BID in patients undergoing routine cataract surgery. Methods: Phase 2, multicenter, randomized (1:1 ratio), double-masked, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group study in patients scheduled for uncomplicated cataract surgery without the aid of a femtosecond laser. Subjects instilled topical medications for 16 days beginning the day before cataract surgery (Day -1), 1 dose administered at least 1 hour prior to cataract surgery (on Day 0) and 1 dose on the evening after cataract surgery, and then 2 doses administered each day through Day 15; patients were re-evaluated on Days 22 and 32 to ensure no rebound inflammation. Primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of subjects with anterior chamber cell (ACC) grade 0 between the two groups at Day 15. Secondary outcomes included pain scores and overall safety. Results: There was a statistically significant difference (P=0.004) in the proportion of subjects in the SURF-201 treatment group with an ACC grade of 0 at Day 15 (n=22/39 [56.4%]) compared to subjects in the vehicle treatment group (n=9/43 [20.9%]). There was no statistically significant difference (P=0.528) in the proportion of subjects in the SURF-201 treatment group who had a visual analog scale pain score of 0 at Day 15 (n=35/38 [89.7%]) compared to subjects in the vehicle group (n=33/40 [82.5%]). A slightly higher incidence of adverse events occurred in subjects in the SURF-201 treatment group (n=27/40 [67.5%]) compared to the vehicle treatment group (n=23/43 [53.5%]). Conclusion: SURF-201 is an effective topical, preservative-free corticosteroid when dosed BID for the treatment of postoperative inflammation and prevention of pain in a post-cataract population.

Phase 2, Randomized, Open-Label Parallel-Group Study of Two Dosing Regimens of Netarsudil for the Treatment of Corneal Edema Due to Fuchs Corneal Dystrophy.

Background: This phase 2 study evaluated the therapeutic potential of netarsudil to reduce corneal edema and to improve vision in patients with Fuchs corneal dystrophy (FCD). Methods: Patients (N = 40) with baseline central corneal thickness (CCT) of ≥600 µm and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 70-20 letters (20/40-20/400 Snellen equivalent) were randomized 1:1 to receive netarsudil once a day (QD) or twice a day (BID) for 8 weeks. Primary endpoint was mean CCT change from baseline at week 4. Results: Netarsudil QD and BID significantly reduced CCT at week 4 [mean change (standard error of mean), 28.4 (7.99) µm, P = 0.0021; and 20.1 (8.75) µm, P = 0.0335, respectively]. Five (12.5%) patients achieved complete resolution of corneal edema at week 4. BCVA improved by 3.2 (2.76) letters with QD and 1.5 (2.84) letters with BID, and 10 (25%) patients [5 with QD (P = 0.0078) and 5 with BID (P = 0.0096)] gained ≥10 letters at week 4. Improvements in CCT and vision were observed at week 2 and persisted at week 8, without significant differences between the 2 doses at any time point. Netarsudil QD significantly improved visual acuity and glare factor scores on the Visual Function and Corneal Health Status (V-FUCHS) questionnaire at weeks 4 and 8 (mean change, -0.4 to -0.3; P ≤ 0.0200). Netarsudil was well tolerated. Reticular edema developed in one (2.5%) patient with BID, which resolved with treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: Netarsudil QD led to significant reductions in corneal edema as well as improvements in vision and patient-reported symptoms of glare and visual impairment in patients with FCD. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04498169.

Corneal cross-linking versus conventional management for keratoconus: a lifetime economic model.

AIMS: To assess the cost-effectiveness of corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) versus no CXL for keratoconus in the United States (US). METHODS: A discrete-event microsimulation was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of corneal cross-linking (CXL, Photrexa + KXL combination product) versus no CXL for patients with keratoconus. The lifetime model was conducted from a US payor perspective. The source for CXL efficacy and safety data was a 12-month randomized, open-label, sham-controlled, multi-center, pivotal trial comparing CXL versus no CXL. Other inputs were sourced from the literature. The primary outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Costs (2019 USD) and effects were discounted 3% annually. The impacts of underlying uncertainty were evaluated by scenario, univariate, and probabilistic analyses. RESULTS: Starting at a mean baseline age of 31 years and considering a mixed population consisting of 80% slow-progressors and 20% fast-progressors, the CXL group was 25.9% less likely to undergo penetrating keratoplasty (PK) and spent 27.9 fewer years in advanced disease stages. CXL was dominant with lower total direct medical costs (-$8,677; $30,994 versus $39,671) and more QALYs (1.88; 21.80 versus 19.93) compared to no CXL. Considering the impact of reduced productivity loss in an exploratory scenario, CXL was associated with a lifetime cost-savings of $43,759 per patient. CXL was cost-effective within 2 years and cost-saving within 4.5 years. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include those that are common to similar pharmacoeconomic models that rely on disparate sources for inputs and extrapolation on short-term outcomes to a long-term analytical horizon. CONCLUSIONS: Keratoconus is a progressive and life-altering disease with substantial clinical, economic, and humanistic consequences. The economic value of cross-linking is maximized when applied earlier in the disease process and/or younger age, and extends to improved work productivity, out-of-pocket costs, and quality of life.

Evaluation of the IOP-Lowering Effect of a Multi-Pressure Dial at Different Negative Pressure Settings.

Purpose: To evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of a multi-pressure dial (MPD) at targeted negative pressure settings. Methods: Prospective, intrasubject controlled study of 65 healthy subjects randomized to receive no negative pressure for 60 minutes or negative pressure application at designated levels of 25%, 50%, and 75% of baseline IOP for 20 minutes each. The main outcome measure was mean IOP with application of negative pressure. Results: In the study eye group, from a baseline IOP of 15.8 ± 3.6 mm Hg, the mean IOP was 13.5 ± 3.4, 11.5 ± 3.1, and 10.2 ± 2.7 mm Hg with negative pressure settings of 25%, 50% and 75%, respectively. In the control eye group, from a baseline IOP of 15.5 ± 3.0 mm Hg, the mean IOP values at the same time points, without negative pressure, were 15.6 ± 3.0, 15.5 ± 2.5 and 15.3 ± 2.4 mm Hg. The difference between the mean IOPs of the two groups was significantly different at all negative pressure settings (P < 0.001) in comparison with baseline. There was one minor adverse event, a corneal abrasion, that was unrelated to device wear. Conclusions: Negative pressure application to the periocular space with a multi-pressure dial can produce titratable IOP reduction while the device is worn with active negative pressure. To our knowledge, this technology represents the first nonpharmacologic, nonlaser, nonsurgical method for IOP reduction. Translational Relevance: This represents the first study demonstrating the IOP-lowering ability of the multi-pressure dial, a device that uses a novel IOP-lowering strategy by delivering negative pressure to the periocular region.

Baseline Visual Acuity at Wet AMD Diagnosis Predicts Long-Term Vision Outcomes: An Analysis of the IRIS Registry.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Clinical trials in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) demonstrate that high visual acuity (VA) can be maintained, and low VA can be improved with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment. Few real-world data investigating the relationship between baseline VA and long-term outcomes exist. This study compares VA at diagnosis and after treatment using data from a large patient registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of IRIS Registry patients diagnosed with nAMD in one or both eyes between January 2013 and June 2017. Patients received at least two anti-VEGF injections in the study eye(s) less than 45 days apart during the study period. Primary outcomes were the percentage of eyes with 20/40 VA or better at diagnosis and association of VA at diagnosis with longer-term visual outcomes. RESULTS: The study included 162,902 eyes. Among all included eyes, 34.3% presented with 20/40 VA or better at diagnosis. Patients with 20/40 vision or better at baseline maintained a mean VA of 20/40 or better for 2 years after treatment initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline VA at nAMD diagnosis predicts long-term VA outcomes. Early diagnosis before VA is adversely affected is a key factor in preserving vision in patients with nAMD. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2020;51:633-639.].

Overnight Safety Evaluation of a Multi-Pressure Dial in Eyes with Glaucoma: Prospective, Open-Label, Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the safety and tolerability of the multi-pressure dial (MPD) worn overnight for seven consecutive days. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label, randomized, single-site study. SUBJECTS: Twenty eyes of 10 subjects with open-angle glaucoma were fitted with an MPD and randomized to negative pressure application of -10 mmHg in one eye (study eye) worn overnight for 7 consecutive days. METHODS: Safety measures included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP) changes from baseline during and after negative pressure application, slit lamp and dilated fundus exam findings, and rate of adverse events. Subjective assessments were completed daily by the subjects during the 7-day study period and immediately following the study period. RESULTS: Prior to the 7-day testing period, application of 10 mmHg negative pressure reduced mean IOP from 18.2 ± 3.8 mmHg to 14.0 ± 2.1 mmHg (p<0.01), a 22% reduction. After 7 days of consecutive nightly wear, repeat IOP measurements with the application of negative pressure showed a decrease in mean IOP from 16.9 ± 4.3 mmHg to 13.5 ± 3.7 mmHg. The observed IOP reduction was in addition to the subjects' current treatment regimen. There were no statistically significant changes in IOP, BCVA from baseline following the 7-day period of nightly wear with the application of negative pressure. The patient-reported outcomes were favorable. CONCLUSION: The MPD can safely and comfortably be worn overnight. The decrease in IOP of >20% in addition to current therapy is both clinically and statistically significant. The MPD shows promise as a potential new treatment option for nocturnal IOP control.

Effect of Graft Attachment Status and Intraocular Pressure on Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Outcomes in the Cornea Preservation Time Study.

PURPOSE: To examine the association of donor, recipient, and operative factors on graft dislocation after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in the Cornea Preservation Time Study (CPTS) as well as the effects of graft dislocation and elevated IOP on graft success and endothelial cell density (ECD) 3 years postoperatively. DESIGN: Cohort study within a multi-center, double-masked, randomized clinical trial. METHODS: 1090 individuals (1330 study eyes), median age 70 years, undergoing DSAEK for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (94% of eyes) or pseudophakic or aphakic corneal edema (6% of eyes). Recipient eyes receiving donor corneal tissue randomized by preservation time (PT) of 0-7 days (N = 675) or 8-14 days (N = 655) were monitored for early or late graft failure through 3 years. Donor, recipient, operative, and postoperative parameters were recorded including graft dislocation (GD), partial detachment, and pre- and post-operative IOP. Pre- and postoperative central donor ECD were determined by a central image analysis reading center. Proportional hazards, mixed effects, and logistic regression models estimated risk ratios and (99% confidence intervals). RESULTS: Three independent predictive factors for GD were identified: a history of donor diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.29 [1.30, 4.02]), increased pre-lamellar dissection central corneal thickness (OR: 1.13 [1.01, 1.27] per 25µ increase), and operative complications (OR: 2.97 [1.24, 7.11]). Among 104 (8%) eyes with GD, 30 (28.9%) developed primary donor or early failure and 5 (4.8%) developed late failure vs. 15 (1.2%; P < .001) and 29 (2.4%; P = .04), respectively, of 1226 eyes without GD. 24 (2%) of 1330 study eyes had early acutely elevated postoperative IOP that was associated with a higher risk of graft failure through 3 years (hazard ratio: 3.42 [1.01, 11.53]), but not with a lower mean 3-year ECD (mean difference 61 (-479, 601) cells/mm2, P = .77). History of elevated postoperative IOP beyond 1 month was not significantly associated with 3-year graft success or ECD. CONCLUSIONS: Donor diabetes, increased donor corneal thickness, and intraoperative complications were associated with an increased risk of GD. Early acutely elevated postoperative IOP and GD significantly increased the risk for graft failure following DSAEK.

Dropless Cataract Surgery: An Overview.

Risk reduction and the attainment of good outcomes in contemporary cataract surgery depend in part on patient compliance with a postoperative regimen of topical eye drops. Topical drops are expensive and challenging to instill properly for patients. The consequences of noncompliance or poor compliance can be significant for the patient (in the case of a complication) and for society (in the case of development of antibiotic resistance). For all of these reasons, new approaches that reduce the need for topical therapy are beginning to emerge, including intracameral injection, sustained or slow-release drug delivery mechanisms, and the recently introduced "Dropless cataract surgery," which involves intravitreal injection of single-use, compounded combination of antibiotics and corticosteroids. This paper is a review of the rationale for reducing topical therapy in cataract surgery prophylaxis, and what is known to date about the efficacy and safety of the dropless approach.

A randomized double-masked study to compare the ocular safety, tolerability, and efficacy of bromfenac 0.075% compared with vehicle in cataract surgery subjects.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of a low-dose version of bromfenac 0.075% in DuraSite® (bromfenac 0.075%) compared with DuraSite® vehicle (vehicle) alone for the treatment of postoperative inflammation and ocular pain after cataract surgery. METHODS: A multicenter, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial of 240 subjects randomized in a 2:1 ratio to bromfenac 0.075% or vehicle was conducted. Subjects were dosed BID beginning 1 day before the cataract surgery, the day of surgery, and 14 days after surgery. A slit lamp biomicroscopy examination was performed to evaluate the signs of inflammation, including anterior chamber cells (ACC) and anterior chamber flare (ACF). The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of subjects with an ACC grade of 0 at Day 15. Secondary efficacy endpoints included the proportion of subjects who achieved a pain score of 0 at each postsurgical visual analog scale (VAS) assessment and the proportion of subjects with an ACF grade of 0 at Day 15. RESULTS: At Day 15, proportionally more subjects in the bromfenac 0.075% group than in the vehicle group had an ACC grade of 0 (57.1% vs 18.8%, respectively; P<0.001). At each of the postsurgical time points (Days 1, 8, 15, and 29), proportionally more bromfenac 0.075%-treated subjects (76.8%, 90.5%, 92.9%, and 85.1%, respectively) had no pain (a VAS score of 0) compared with the vehicle-treated subjects (48.2%, 38.8%, 42.4%, and 47.1%, respectively), and at each time point, these differences in proportions were statistically significant (P<0.001). More subjects in the bromfenac 0.075% group had complete ACF resolution (151/167; 90.4%) compared to those in the vehicle group (54/85; 63.5%). There were no new safety signals reported. CONCLUSION: Bromfenac 0.075% in DuraSite is safe, well tolerated, and effective at reducing inflammation and preventing pain associated with cataract surgery.

Modern laser in situ keratomileusis outcomes.

UNLABELLED: Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) articles published between 2008 and 2015 that contain clinical outcomes data were reviewed and graded for quality, impression, and potential bias. All 97 relevant articles (representing 67 893 eyes) provided a positive or neutral impression of LASIK. Industry bias was not evident. The aggregate loss of 2 or more lines of corrected distance visual acuity was 0.61% (359/58 653). The overall percentage of eyes with uncorrected distance visual acuity better than 20/40 was 99.5% (59 503/59 825). The spherical equivalent refraction was within ±1.0 diopter (D) of the target refraction in 98.6% (59 476/60 329) of eyes, with 90.9% (59 954/65 974) within ±0.5 D. In studies reporting patient satisfaction, 1.2% (129/9726) of patients were dissatisfied with LASIK. Aggregate outcomes appear better than those reported in summaries of the safety and effectiveness of earlier laser refractive surgery systems approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Modern results support the safety, efficacy, and patient satisfaction of the procedure. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Proprietary or commercial disclosures are listed after the references.

A randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, comparative study to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of 1% azithromycin-0.1% dexamethasone combination compared to 1% azithromycin alone, 0.1% dexamethasone alone, and vehicle in the treatment of subjects with blepharitis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of a 1% azithromycin-0.1% dexamethasone combination in DuraSite ("combination") compared to 0.1% dexamethasone in DuraSite, 1% azithromycin in DuraSite, and vehicle in the treatment of subjects with blepharitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a Phase III, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, four-arm study in which 907 subjects with blepharitis were randomized to combination (n=305), 0.1% dexamethasone (n=298), 1% azithromycin (n=155), or vehicle (n=149). Ten study visits were scheduled: screening visit, days 1 and 4 (dosing phase) and 15, and months 1-6 (follow-up phase). On day 1, subjects applied one drop of the study drug to the eyelid of the inflamed eye(s) twice daily, and continued with twice-daily dosing for 14 days. After completing 14 days of dosing, subjects were followed for 6 months for efficacy and safety. RESULTS: A total of 57 subjects (6.3%) had complete clinical resolution at day 15: 25 (8.2%), 17 (5.7%), 8 (5.2%), and 7 (4.7%) subjects in the combination-, 0.1% dexamethasone-, 1% azithromycin-, and vehicle-treatment groups, respectively. The combination was superior to 1% azithromycin and vehicle alone, but not to 0.1% dexamethasone alone. Mean composite (total) clinical sign and symptom scores improved in all four treatment groups during the post-treatment evaluation phase for the intent-to-treat population, but outcomes were superior when a drop containing 0.1% dexamethasone was utilized. Clinical response was noted as early as day 4, and persisted as long as 6 months. Most adverse events were considered mild in severity and not related to the study drug. CONCLUSION: A higher percentage of subjects in the combination group achieved complete clinical resolution of the signs and symptoms of blepharitis at day 15 than with 1% azithromycin and vehicle, but outcomes were similar to treatment with 0.1% dexamethasone alone. The combination was well tolerated.

Intracameral phenylephrine and ketorolac injection (OMS302) for maintenance of intraoperative pupil diameter and reduction of postoperative pain in intraocular lens replacement with phacoemulsification.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of OMS302 on intraoperative pupil diameter and early postoperative ocular pain when administered during intraocular lens replacement surgery. METHODS: Four hundred and six patients (406 study eyes; 202 in the OMS302 group and 204 in the placebo group) were entered into this randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter Phase III study, which was conducted at 15 centers in the USA and the Netherlands. The patients received OMS302 (60.75 mM phenylephrine HCl and 11.25 mM ketorolac tromethamine) or placebo in irrigation solution during intraocular lens replacement. No other changes in procedure were required. Coprimary endpoints were change in pupil diameter over time from surgical baseline to end of procedure and patient-reported ocular pain during the first 12 hours postoperatively. Secondary endpoints included additional measures of pupil diameter and postoperative pain. RESULTS: OMS302 was superior to placebo in maintaining intraoperative mydriasis, preventing miosis, and reducing postoperative pain. The weighted mean (standard error) difference (OMS302 - placebo) in change in the area under the curve from baseline for pupil diameter was 0.590 ([0.049]; 95% confidence interval 0.494 to 0.686; P<0.0001). For ocular pain scores, the weighted mean (standard error) difference was -4.580 ([1.192]; 95% confidence interval -6.917 to 2.244; P=0.0002). All secondary efficacy results favored OMS302. Specifically, analyses supporting prevention of miosis (patients with ≥6 mm pupil diameter at completion of cortical clean-up and those with <6 mm diameter at any time during surgery) were significant for OMS302 (95.9% versus 77.0% and 9.2% versus 38.0%, respectively; P<0.0001 for each endpoint). OMS302 was well tolerated and not associated with any unexpected adverse events. CONCLUSION: OMS302 maintained mydriasis, prevented miosis, and reduced early postoperative pain when administered in irrigation solution during intraocular lens replacement, with a safety profile similar to that of placebo. OMS302 is preservative-free and bisulfite-free, and its administration does not require any modification to the surgical procedure.

A Phase III clinical study to evaluate the efficacy of combined azithromycin and dexamethasone in the treatment of blepharoconjunctivitis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and antimicrobial efficacy and safety of ISV-502 (1.0% azithromycin and 0.1% dexamethasone) compared to 1.0% azithromycin or 0.1% dexamethasone in the treatment of subjects with blepharoconjunctivitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with verified blepharoconjunctivitis were randomized to receive ISV-502 (Group 1; n=140), 1.0% azithromycin alone (Group 2; n=141), or 0.1% dexamethasone alone (Group 3; n=136). Bacterial cultures were obtained from the conjunctiva and eyelid. Treatment was instilled in both eyes twice daily at 12-hour intervals for 14 days. The primary endpoint was complete resolution of clinical signs and symptoms at Day 15. The secondary endpoint was complete bacterial eradication at Day 15 among subjects with positive bacterial cultures at baseline. RESULTS: Significantly more Group 1 subjects met the primary endpoint (27.1%) than those in Group 2 (15.6%; P=0.028), but not compared to Group 3 (23.5%; P=0.581). Significantly more Group 1 patients (60%) had complete bacterial eradication at Day 15 compared with Group 3 (40.2%; P=0.007), but there was no difference compared with Group 2 (66.3%; P=0.306). Adverse events were reported in about 25% of the subjects, with an equal distribution among treatment arms; the most common adverse event was irritation at the instillation site. Visual acuity and intraocular pressure differences were not statistically significant, but did show age and sex differences between groups. CONCLUSION: ISV-502 is effective in the treatment of blepharoconjunctivitis as evaluated by clinical cure and bacterial eradication scores. ISV-502 was superior to 1.0% azithromycin in clinical cure and superior to 0.1% dexamethasone in bacterial eradication.

Corneal inlays for presbyopia correction.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This study provides an overview of the three types of corneal inlays now in use for the correction of presbyopia and reviews recently published evidence of the inlays' safety and efficacy. RECENT FINDINGS: Results for corneal reshaping and refractive inlays are promising, but very limited. Small-aperture inlays are already in widespread use and have been shown to improve uncorrected near and intermediate vision without a significant loss in distance acuity or an unacceptable increase in visual symptoms. Complications have been minimal, but the inlays may be removed if necessary. They do not prevent visualization or imaging of the retina and may be retained during subsequent cataract surgery. SUMMARY: The presbyopic demographic is large and growing, with a high level of interest in spectacle independence. There is currently no other effective solutions for presbyopes who desire good uncorrected vision at all distances without the risks of intraocular surgery or the visual compromises of monovision. Additional research is needed, but the future for corneal inlay technology is bright.