Phase IV Multicenter, Prospective, Open-Label Clinical Trial of Cenegermin (rhNGF) for Stage 1 Neurotrophic Keratopathy (DEFENDO).

INTRODUCTION: Cenegermin is approved for treatment of neurotrophic keratopathy (NK) and has been studied in patients with stage 2 or 3 NK. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of cenegermin in adults with stage 1 NK. METHODS: This was a phase IV, multicenter, prospective, open-label, uncontrolled trial. Adults with stage 1 NK (Mackie criteria) and decreased corneal sensitivity (≤ 4 cm) received 1 drop of cenegermin 20 mcg/ml in the affected eye(s) 6 times/day for 8 weeks with a 24-week follow-up. RESULTS: Of 37 patients, corneal epithelial healing was observed in 84.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 68.1-94.9%; P < 0.001) at week 8; 95.2% (95% CI 76.2-99.9%; P < 0.001) of those patients remained healed at the end of the 24-week follow-up (week 32). At week 8, 91.2% (95% CI 76.3-98.1%; P < 0.001) of patients experienced improved corneal sensitivity; this improvement was observed in 82.1% (95% CI 63.1-93.9%; P < 0.001) of patients at week 32. Mean best-corrected distance visual acuity change from baseline at week 8 was - 0.10 logMAR (standard deviation [SD], 0.15; 95% CI - 0.16 to - 0.05; P < 0.001) and at week 32 was - 0.05 logMAR (SD, 0.16; 95% CI - 0.11 to 0.01; P = 0.122). At weeks 8 and 32, 15.2% (95% CI 5.1-31.9%; P < 0.001) and 10.7% (95% CI 2.3-28.2%; P < 0.001) of patients, respectively, had a 15-letter gain from baseline. At least one adverse event (AE) was reported by 73.0% and 45.7% of patients during the treatment and follow-up periods, respectively. The most common treatment-related, treatment-emergent AEs were eye pain (37.8%), blurred vision (10.8%), and eyelid pain (8.1%); these were mostly mild or moderate and were only reported during the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the potential use of cenegermin for treating patients with stage 1 NK, and future confirmatory studies would be beneficial to elaborate on these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DEFENDO; NCT04485546.

Efficacy and Safety of CSF-1 (0.4% Pilocarpine Hydrochloride) in Presbyopia: Pooled Results of the NEAR Phase 3 Randomized, Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CSF-1 (0.4% pilocarpine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution) for use in individuals with presbyopia. METHODS: Two Phase 3 multicenter, randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group clinical trials were conducted in 35 private ophthalmology clinics in the United States from October 2020 to February 2022. Key inclusion criteria were the following: (1) age 45-64 years, (2) distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) at 40 cm ≥0.40 and ≤0.90 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR, approximately 20/50-20/160 Snellen) in at least 1 eye, (3) manifest refraction (MR) between -4.50 and +2.00 diopter (D) sphere in each eye with ≤2.00D difference between eyes, (4) <2.00D of cylinder MR in each eye, (5) ≤0.04 logMAR (20/20-2 or better) corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) at 4 m in each eye. Key exclusion criteria were the following: (1) >0.14 logMAR (7 letters) improvement in post-vehicle treatment in monocular DCNVA in either eye at visit 1, (2) introcular pressure (IOP) <9 or >22 mm Hg, (3) average dark-adapted pupillometry <3.5 mm in either eye, (4) prior refractive surgery or intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Participants applied CSF-1 or vehicle twice per day for 2 weeks. Efficacy and safety assessments were performed at several times on days 1, 8, and 15. Response was defined as ≥3-line gain in DCNVA without loss of ≥1-line in CDVA in the study eye under mesopic room lighting conditions. The primary efficacy endpoint was measured 1 hour post-dose 1 on day 8. Key secondary endpoints were 2 hours post-dose 1, and 1 and 2 hours post-dose 2, also on day 8. Safety endpoints were ocular and non-ocular treatment-related adverse events (TRAE), conjunctival redness, drop comfort, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, intraocular pressure, indirect fundoscopy, and CDVA at 4 m. FINDINGS: Six hundred thirteen participants were randomized to CSF-1 (n = 309) or vehicle (n = 304). Participants were predominantly White (80.8%) and female (62.0%), with mean age (standard deviation) of 54.7 (4.8). CSF-1 met the primary and key secondary endpoints. At the primary endpoint, 40.1% of the CSF-1 group achieved response versus 19.1% of the vehicle group (P < 0.0001). The percentage of responders was significantly greater in CSF-1 compared with vehicle at all tested times. Changes from baseline in all safety endpoints were comparable between groups. Most adverse events (AEs) were mild and transient. Neither serious nor severe AEs were reported with CSF-1. IMPLICATIONS: CSF-1, a low-dose pilocarpine ophthalmic solution, demonstrated superiority to vehicle in improving near vision in individuals with presbyopia without compromising distance vision. CSF-1 demonstrated a favorable safety profile. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04599933 (NEAR-1), NCT04599972 (NEAR-2).

Why Are Corneal Specialists Resistant to Treating Patients Who Have Severe Ocular Surface Disease With Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency?

PURPOSE: To highlight the paucity of surgeons performing ocular surface stem cell transplantation with systemic immunosuppression (OSSTx with SI) for limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) patients, suboptimal treatments for LSCD, and obstacles to adoption. METHODS: A review of the Eye Bank Association of America annual reports and the authors' case volume for OSSTx with SI was performed. Examination of the published literature on corneal surgeries, especially for LSCD, was completed. These findings were combined with our clinical observations to develop this editorial. RESULTS: Despite techniques and protocols for OSSTx with SI published more than 30 years ago for the treatment of severe bilateral LSCD, only a small number of corneal specialists have adopted these techniques. There is a paucity of attention to this population of patients, with minimal publications to advance this area of our field. We are too often referred patients with LSCD and severe ocular surface disease that have had suboptimal treatments such as penetrating keratoplasties or primary keratoprostheses. Hesitancy for adopting OSSTx with SI is likely due to a lack of exposure to these procedures during training and fear of systemic immunosuppression. Corneal surgeons are likely unaware of the safety of systemic immunosuppression with appropriate monitoring especially when comanaging these patients with an organ transplant specialist. CONCLUSION: There is a large unmet need for the treatment of corneal blindness secondary to conjunctival and LSCD. For the vast majority of patients, OSSTx should be the first surgical choice to treat these eyes. We hope major ophthalmology centers will meet this need by building programs, and groups of corneal surgeons should collaborate to create regional centers to make this treatment more accessible to help this population.

Clinical diagnosis and management of Demodex blepharitis: the Demodex Expert Panel on Treatment and Eyelid Health (DEPTH).

BACKGROUND: Twelve ocular surface disease experts convened to achieve consensus about Demodex blepharitis (DB) using a modified Delphi panel process. METHODS: Online surveys were administered using scaled, open-ended, true/false, and multiple-choice questions. Consensus for questions using a 1 to 9 Likert scale was predefined as median scores of 7-9 and 1-3. For other question types, consensus was achieved when 8 of 12 panellists agreed. Questions were randomized, and results of each survey informed the following survey. RESULTS: Twelve practitioners comprised the Demodex Expert Panel on Treatment and Eyelid Health (DEPTH). Following 3 surveys, experts agreed that DB is chronic (n = 11) and recurrent (n = 12) and is often misdiagnosed. Consensus was achieved regarding inflammation driving symptoms (median = 7; range 7-9), collarettes as the most common sign (n = 10) and pathognomonic for DB (median = 9; range 8-9), and itching as the most common symptom (n = 12). Panellists agreed that DB may be diagnosed based on collarettes, mites, and/or patient symptoms (n = 10) and felt that patients unresponsive to typical therapies should be evaluated for DB (n = 12). Consensus about the most effective currently available OTC treatment was not reached. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi methodology proved effective in establishing consensus about DB, including signs, symptoms, and diagnosis. Consensus was not reached about the best treatment or how to grade severity. With increased awareness, eyecare practitioners can offer DB patients better clinical outcomes. A follow-up Delphi panel is planned to obtain further consensus surrounding DB treatment.

Delphi Panel Consensus Regarding Current Clinical Practice Management Options for Demodex blepharitis.

Purpose: To obtain consensus on Demodex blepharitis (DB) treatment using a modified Delphi panel process. Methods: Literature search identified gaps in knowledge surrounding treatment of DB. Twelve ocular surface disease experts comprised the Demodex Expert Panel on Treatment and Eyelid Health (DEPTH). They completed a live roundtable discussion in addition to 3 surveys consisting of scaled, open-ended, true/false, and multiple-choice questions pertaining to the treatment of DB. Consensus for scaled questions using a 1 to 9 Likert scale was predefined as median scores of 7-9 and 1-3. For other question types, consensus was achieved when 8 of 12 panelists agreed. Results: The experts agreed that an effective therapeutic agent for treatment of DB would likely decrease the necessity of mechanical intervention, such as lid scrubs or blepharoexfoliation (Median = 8.5; Range 2-9). When treating DB, panelists believed that collarettes serve as a surrogate for mites, and that eliminating or reducing collarettes should be the main clinical goal of treatment (Median = 8; Range 7-9). The panelists would treat patients with at least 10 collarettes, regardless of other signs or symptoms and agreed that DB can be cured, but there is always the possibility for a reinfestation (n = 12). There was also consensus that collarettes, and therefore mites, are the primary treatment target and the way by which clinicians can monitor patient response to therapy (Median = 8; Range 7-9). Conclusion: Expert panelists achieved consensus on key facets of DB treatment. Specifically, there was consensus that collarettes are pathognomonic for DB, that DB patients with >10 collarettes should be treated even in the absence of symptoms, and that treatment efficacy can be tracked by collarette resolution. By increasing awareness about DB, understanding the goals of and monitoring treatment efficacy, patients will receive better care and, ultimately, better clinical outcomes.

Allogeneic Ocular Surface Stem Cell Transplantation Outcomes With Decreased or No Systemic Immunosuppression in the Elderly.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to report outcomes after allogeneic ocular surface stem cell transplantation (OSST) for limbal stem cell deficiency in the setting of decreased or no systemic immunosuppression (SI) in the elderly. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of all eyes that underwent OSST for limbal stem cell deficiency between 2005 and 2020 at CVP Physicians. Inclusion criteria included patients who were (1) at least 70 years at the time of (2) allogeneic OSST. Postoperative SI regimens were assessed. Outcome measures included improvement in visual acuity, ocular surface stability, and adverse effects. RESULTS: There were 14 eyes of 14 patients that met the inclusion criteria with mean follow-up of 3.0 (range 0.4-7.0) years. SI was run at a lower level for 6 patients, and 8 patients did not receive any SI. Nine eyes underwent keratolimbal allograft, 1 had a living-related conjunctival limbal allograft, and 4 had combined OSST. Most eyes (85.7%) attained improvement in visual acuity during their follow-up. At the last follow-up, 57.1% maintained a stable ocular surface. Six eyes developed acute rejection or late failure. Minimal adverse events were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients administered less or no SI exhibit overall favorable outcomes after allogeneic OSST. Although not significantly different, surface stability and duration of improved vision was greater with low SI. No SI may be an option that still achieves improved vision in a high proportion for at least part of their follow-up. Decreasing SI after OSST in this population can improve quality of life while minimizing adverse effects.

Comparison of Persistent Epithelial Defect Treatment With Sutureless Cryopreserved and Dehydrated Amniotic Membrane.

PURPOSE: To compare cryopreserved sutureless amniotic membrane (C-SAM) and dehydrated SAM (D-SAM) outpatient treatment outcomes for persistent epithelial defects (PEDs), analyze risk factors for treatment failure, and identify adverse events. DESIGN: Retrospective, interventional comparative clinical study. METHODS: This study was a multicenter retrospective interventional cohort from 2 tertiary corneal referral practices from 2016 to 2020. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) PEDs treated (2) outpatient with (3) either C-SAM or D-SAM. PEDs were defined as epithelial defects present for ≥7 days after failing prior conservative therapy. The primary outcome measure was the resolution or improvement of a PED. The secondary outcomes included analysis of treatment failures and identification of adverse events. A total of 220 PEDs from 204 eyes (197 patients) treated with either C-SAM or D-SAM met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 100 PEDs (45.5%) resolved after single amniotic membrane administration, 46.5% (59 of 127) in the C-SAM group and 44.1% (41 of 93) in the D-SAM group (P = .727). Forty-nine PEDs neither improved nor resolved without a significant difference between the C-SAM (21.3%) and D-SAM groups (23.7%, P = .673). There was no statistically significant difference for PED resolution, PED improvement, PEDs that did not resolve/improve, or those requiring surgery between the 2 groups for initial SAM. CONCLUSIONS: C-SAM and D-SAM were both effective for treating PEDs with comparable outcomes for resolution, improvement, and need for additional surgical intervention. Specific differences in adverse events may help dictate clinical use. Inflammatory disease was a risk factor for nonresolution of all PEDs.

Presence of Panel-reactive Antibodies after Penetrating Keratoplasty.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between penetrating keratoplasty (PK) and postoperative PRA level and number of unacceptable antigens. METHODS: A cross-sectionalstudy was performed on patients with history of PK. Patients with prior solid organ transplantation, pregnancy, or blood transfusion were excluded. These findings were combined with a retrospective review. Patients were grouped by single or multiple PKs. The primary outcome was postoperative PRA level. RESULTS: Incidence of postoperative PRA elevation and mean peak PRA was higher in the multiple PK group (p = .08 and p = .010, respectively). Mean number of unacceptable antigens was elevated in the multiple PK group (p = .024). There was a moderately positive correlation between number of PK grafts and PRA level (r = 0.629, p = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: PRA level may be influenced by PKs, with higher PRA associated with increased prior PKs. Further studies are necessary to determine the potential prognostic value.Abbreviations: PK: penetrating keratoplasty; PRA: panel reactive antibodies; OSST: ocular surface stem cell transplantation; LSCD: limbal stem cell deficiency.

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.

A Comparison of TearCare and Lipiflow Systems in Reducing Dry Eye Disease Symptoms Associated with Meibomian Gland Disease.

Purpose: To compare TearCare and Lipiflow systems in the ability to reduce the symptoms of dry eye disease (DED) associated with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD). Methods: In this multicenter, masked, randomized-controlled trial, 235 subjects received a single TearCare treatment (n = 115) or a single LipiFlow treatment (n = 120) and were followed for 1-month post-treatment. DED symptoms were assessed using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), Symptom Assessment in Dry Eye (SANDE), and Eye Dryness (ED) questionnaires at baseline and at 1 month. Post-hoc subgroup analysis was conducted on subjects with less severe and more severe gland obstruction determined by baseline meibomian gland secretion score (MGSS). Results: TearCare system significantly improved total OSDI, SANDE, and ED scores from baseline (p < 0.0001) at 1-month follow-up. Subjects with more severe disease (MGSS <7) achieved statistically greater reduction with TearCare compared to LipiFlow in total OSDI score (30.4 ± 2.53 and 21.9 ± 2.37, respectively, p ANCOVA = 0.0160), OSDI Section B score for quality of vision (5.1 ± 0.48 and 3.6 ± 0.45, respectively, p ANCOVA= 0.0206), and SANDE frequency score (51.9 ± 3.70 and 41.5 ± 3.45, respectively, p ANCOVA = 0.0455). Conclusion: TearCare provides significant DED symptom relief at 1 month after a single treatment. Outcomes were consistent in OSDI, SANDE, and ED assessments. In subjects with more severe gland dysfunction, TearCare performed significantly better than LipiFlow in improving quality of vision and overall DED symptom frequency determined by OSDI and SANDE. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT03857919.

Use of Cenegermin in the Presence of Bandage Contact Lenses.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to characterize the outcomes of eyes with neurotrophic keratitis (NK) treated with a course of cenegermin-bkbj in the presence of a bandage contact lens (BCL). METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all eyes with a clinical diagnosis of NK treated with cenegermin-bkbj was performed between 2018 and 2020. Inclusion criteria included cenegermin-bkbj treatment with a BCL in place. Demographics, etiology, visual acuity, pretreatment and posttreatment corneal sensation, and treatment outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: There were 18 eyes of 16 patients (69% female) with NK treated with cenegermin-bkbj while having a BCL in place. After cenegermin-bkbj treatment, presence of corneal sensation significantly increased from 7% of eyes to 79% of eyes (P < 0.0001). There was also a significant increase in the number of quadrants with corneal sensation (mean of 0.1 quadrants increased to 1.6 quadrants, P =0.0005). Six of 10 eyes (67%; P = 0.004) with a persistent epithelial defect (PED) experienced complete resolution at the conclusion of treatment, while 3 additional eyes experienced a decrease in the defect size. Despite all 18 eyes necessitating a chronic BCL before cenegermin-bkbj treatment, 4 were able to maintain their epithelium without a BCL after treatment for at least some period. CONCLUSIONS: Cenegermin-bkbj treatment for NK with a BCL in place demonstrated improvement in corneal sensation, epithelial defect size, and fluorescein staining. In eyes demonstrating previous ocular surface decompensation with discontinuation of a BCL, maintenance of BCL use during treatment with cenegermin-bkbj may be considered.

Acute Corneal Epithelial Rejection of LR-CLAL After SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report a case of acute corneal epithelial rejection of living-related conjunctival limbal allograft (LR-CLAL) after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination. OBSERVATIONS: A 27-year-old woman developed acute epithelial rejection of LR-CLAL 2 weeks after receiving the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. She received the LR-CLAL transplant 4 years and 7 months previously and had a stable clinical course with no history of rejection. She had an ABO blood group and human leukocyte antigen compatible donor, no systemic comorbidities, and no rejection risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The novel SARS-CoV-2 vaccine upregulates the immune system to produce an adaptive immune response. The SARS-CoV-2 vaccine may potentially be associated with increased risk of rejection in those with ocular surface transplants.

Anterior Scleral and Limbal Inflammatory Necrosis After Adjuvant Miltefosine for Recalcitrant Acanthamoeba Keratitis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report a retrospective case series of anterior scleral and limbal inflammatory necrosis after adjuvant miltefosine for recalcitrant Acanthamoeba keratitis (AK). METHODS: A case series and literature review. RESULT: Four eyes of 3 patients with recalcitrant AK developed anterior scleral and limbal inflammatory necrosis with significant scleral-limbal thinning after treatment with miltefosine. The average age was 38 years, and the average duration of infection before miltefosine treatment was 239 days. All cases required urgent surgical intervention to either prevent or mitigate corneal-limbal perforation. CONCLUSIONS: Miltefosine has been observed to result in the resolution of AK when used as an adjunctive therapy. It may also lead to a consecutive inflammatory necrosis of the anterior sclera and limbus. This inflammatory response may be significant enough to cause rapid scleral-limbal thinning with subsequent perforation.

TearCare for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction in Adult Patients With Dry Eye Disease: A Masked Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a single TearCare procedure compared with a single LipiFlow procedure in treatment of the dry eye disease associated with meibomian gland dysfunction. METHODS: In a multicenter, masked, randomized controlled trial, 135 subjects received a single TearCare (TC) treatment (n = 67) or a single LipiFlow (LF) treatment (n = 68) at baseline and were followed up for 1 month posttreatment. Tear film breakup time, meibomian gland function, and corneal and conjunctival staining scores were assessed as dry eye signs at baseline, 2 weeks, and 1 month; dry eye symptoms were assessed using the Ocular Surface Disease Index, Symptom Assessment in Dry Eye, and eye dryness questionnaires at baseline and 1 month. RESULTS: At 1 month posttreatment, both groups demonstrated significant improvements (P < 0.0001) in mean tear film breakup time and meibomian gland secretion score to 3.0 ± 4.4 and 11.2 ± 11.1 in the TC group and 2.6 ± 3.3 and 11.0 ± 10.4 in the LF group, respectively. The mean eye dryness, Symptom Assessment in Dry Eye, and Ocular Surface Disease Index scores were significantly reduced (P < 0.0001) by 35.4 ± 34.1, 38.2 ± 31.0, and 27.9 ± 20.5 in the TC group and 34.9 ± 26.9, 38.0 ± 25.9, and 23.4 ± 17.7 in the LF group, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences for any result between the groups. However, the TC group demonstrated numerically greater improvements consistently in all signs and symptoms. Device-related ocular adverse events were reported in 3 patients in the TC group (superficial punctate keratitis, chalazion, and blepharitis) and 4 patients in the LF group (blepharitis, 2 cases of foreign body sensation, and severe eye dryness). CONCLUSIONS: A single TearCare treatment significantly alleviates the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction and is equivalent in its safety and effectiveness profile to LipiFlow treatment as shown in this 1-month follow-up study.

Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Dermatological Perspective on Pathogenesis and Treatment Outlook.

Meibomian glands are modified oil-producing glands that produce meibum and can become dysfunctional and negatively affect the lipid layer in the tear film, resulting in ocular surface diseases such as evaporative dry eye. Abnormal keratin production and aggregation at the meibomian gland orifice has been implicated in the pathogenesis of meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD). Current treatments largely ignore the role of keratin proteins. This review paper synthesizes various publications on hyperkeratinization and its role in MGD pathogenesis and proposes a novel treatment strategy for MGD that involves the use of keratolytic agents commonly used in dermatological treatments.

Efficacy of Lifitegrast Ophthalmic Solution, 5.0%, in Patients With Moderate to Severe Dry Eye Disease: A Post Hoc Analysis of 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

IMPORTANCE: An investigation of the treatment effect of lifitegrast ophthalmic solution, 5.0%, in different subgroups by severity of dry eye disease (DED) seems warranted. OBJECTIVE: To explore the heterogeneity across different subgroups of DED and identify which participants were most likely to achieve clinically meaningful benefit with lifitegrast treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This post hoc responder analysis was performed using the data from the phase 3 OPUS-2 and OPUS-3 studies, which were 12-week, prospective, double-masked, multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel-arm clinical trials that previously demonstrated the efficacy of lifitegrast in DED. Pooled data were stratified into 4 subgroups based on severity of inferior corneal staining score (ICSS; ≤1.5 vs >1.5) and eye dryness score (EDS; <60 or ≥60) at baseline. Data were collected from December 7, 2012, to October 5, 2015, and post hoc analysis was performed from April 14, 2020, to July 30, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Lifitegrast or placebo twice daily for 84 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion of participants with (1) a clinically meaningful improvement in signs (ICSS or total corneal staining score [TCSS]) and symptoms (EDS or global visual analog scale [VAS]) and (2) a composite response for a given sign and symptom end point pair at day 84 were measured. Clinically meaningful improvement was defined as at least 30% improvement in symptoms (EDS or global VAS) and either at least a 1-point improvement in ICSS or at least a 3-point improvement in TCSS. For the composite responder analysis, the end point pairs were defined as at least a 30% reduction in EDS and at least a 1-point improvement in ICSS; at least a 30% reduction in EDS and at least a 3-point improvement in TCSS; at least a 30% improvement in global VAS and at least a 1-point improvement in ICSS; and at least a 30% improvement in global VAS and at least a 3-point improvement in TCSS. RESULTS: In total, 1429 participants (716 in the placebo group and 713 in the lifitegrast group) were analyzed (1087 women [76.1%]; mean [SD] age, 58.7 [14.3] years). For the overall pooled population, responder and composite responder rates favored lifitegrast vs placebo (odds ratio range, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.05-1.59] to 2.10 [95% CI, 1.68-2.61]; P ≤ .02). In the composite analysis, the subgroup with ICSS of greater than 1.5 and EDS of at least 60 at baseline (ie, moderate to severe DED) demonstrated a 1.70- to 2.11-fold higher odds of achieving clinically meaningful improvement with lifitegrast across all sign and symptom end point pairs (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These post hoc findings suggest that lifitegrast ophthalmic solution, 5.0%, treatment may be associated with a response in participants with moderate to severe signs and symptoms of DED. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02284516.

The corneal endothelium: clinical review of endothelial cell health and function.

The endothelial cell is a critical structure within the cornea and is responsible for maintaining corneal clarity through its pump function. Endothelial cells are lost over time naturally but can be injured medically, surgically, or as a part of various dystrophies. Monitoring of endothelial cells can be performed clinically or more formally with specular microscopy. In cases of significant compromise, endothelial cells can be transplanted by various endothelial keratoplasty techniques. The future pipeline is bright for possible endothelial cell regeneration and rehabilitation. This article reviews these topics in depth to provide a comprehensive look at the structure and function of the endothelial cell, etiologies of endothelial cell damage, detailed review of iatrogenic causes of endothelial cell loss, and management strategies.