Can we really distinguish 'responders' from 'non-responders' to myopia control interventions?

PURPOSE: It is common to hear talk of 'responders' and 'non-responders' with respect to myopia control interventions. We consider the reality of distinguishing these sub-groups using data from the first year of the Low-concentration Atropine for Myopia Progression (LAMP) study. METHODS: The first year of the LAMP study was a robustly designed, placebo-controlled trial of three different low concentrations of atropine using a large sample size (N > 100 randomised to each group). The authors subsequently published mean axial elongation and myopia progression rates by age group. We used these data to calculate efficacy in terms of both absolute reduction in myopic progression and absolute reduction in axial elongation for each of the different atropine concentrations at each age group. We then compared these efficacy data to the overall progression for each of the two progression metrics. RESULTS: Plotting efficacy as a function of overall myopia progression and axial elongation for each of the different atropine concentrations demonstrates the invariant nature of efficacy, in terms of clinically meaningful reduction in progression, despite a substantial range of underlying overall progression. That is, faster progressors-the so-called non-responders-achieved similar reduction in axial elongation and myopia progression as the slower progressors-the so-called responders-within the various atropine treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The use of the terms, responders and non-responders, during myopia progression interventions is not supported by evidence. Those designated as such may simply be slower or faster progressors, who, on average achieve the same benefit from treatment.

Corneal epithelial bullae after short-term wear of small diameter scleral lenses.

Complications of scleral lens wear are not well documented or understood. While multiple studies focus on oxygen transmission during scleral lens wear and associated corneal swelling, little is known about the effects of varying scleral lens fitting relationships, especially when there is corneal interaction. Scleral lenses, by convention, are designed to completely clear the corneal surface and rest on the conjunctival and scleral tissue. However, some designs maximize oxygen transmission by reducing the lens diameter, thickness, and recommended corneal clearance.While the modifications increase oxygen transmission in any scleral lens design, they also distribute the lens mass closer to the limbus and make visualization of corneal clearance, especially narrow in the limbal region, more difficult. The sequelae from mechanical interaction between scleral lenses and the ocular surface, in particular the cornea, remain uncertain. This case series will describe corneal epithelial bullae, molding, and epithelial erosions as unintended scleral lens complications. These corneal changes corresponded to areas of contact lens-corneal bearing confirmed utilizing a combined scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (SLO) and anterior segment OCT. This case series will discuss epithelial bullae detection, their etiology, and suggestions for application of this information into scleral lens fitting protocols.

Contact lens associated microbial keratitis: practical considerations for the optometrist.

Microbial keratitis (MK) is a corneal condition that encompasses several different pathogens and etiologies. While contact lens associated MK is most often associated with bacterial infections, other pathogens (fungi, Acanthamoeba species, etc) may be responsible. This review summarizes the risk factors, microbiology, diagnostic characteristics, and treatment options for all forms of contact lens-related MK.