Phase 3, Randomized, 20-Month Study of Bimatoprost Implant in Open-Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension (ARTEMIS 1).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of 10- and 15-µg bimatoprost implant in subjects with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) after initial and repeated administrations. DESIGN: Randomized, 20-month, multicenter, subject- and efficacy evaluator-masked, parallel-group, phase 3 clinical study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with OAG or OHT in each eye, open iridocorneal angle inferiorly in the study eye, and study eye baseline IOP (hour 0; 8 am) of 22-32 mmHg after washout. METHODS: Study eyes received bimatoprost implant 10 µg (n = 198) or 15 µg (n = 198) on day 1 with readministration at weeks 16 and 32, or twice-daily topical timolol maleate 0.5% (n = 198). Intraocular pressure was measured at hours 0 and 2 at each visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary end points were IOP and change from baseline IOP through week 12. Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and corneal endothelial cell density (CECD). RESULTS: Both dose strengths of bimatoprost implant were noninferior to timolol in IOP lowering after each administration. Mean diurnal IOP was 24.0, 24.2, and 23.9 mmHg at baseline and from 16.5-17.2, 16.5-17.0, and 17.1-17.5 mmHg through week 12 in the 10-µg implant, 15-µg implant, and timolol groups, respectively. The incidence of corneal and inflammatory TEAEs of interest (e.g., corneal endothelial cell loss, iritis) was higher with bimatoprost implant than timolol and highest with the 15-µg dose strength. Incidence of corneal TEAEs increased after repeated treatment; with 3 administrations at fixed 16-week intervals, incidence of ≥20% CECD loss was 10.2% (10-µg implant) and 21.8% (15-µg implant). Mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was stable; 3 implant-treated subjects with corneal TEAEs had >2-line BCVA loss at their last visit. CONCLUSIONS: Both dose strengths of bimatoprost implant met the primary end point of noninferiority to timolol through week 12. One year after 3 administrations, IOP was controlled in most subjects without additional treatment. The risk-benefit assessment favored the 10-µg implant over the 15-µg implant. Ongoing studies are evaluating other administration regimens to reduce the potential for CECD loss. The bimatoprost implant has potential to improve adherence and reduce treatment burden in glaucoma.

Bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% dosed once daily for cataract surgery: results of 2 randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and ocular safety of bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% (Prolensa) dosed once daily for the treatment of ocular inflammation and pain in subjects who underwent cataract surgery with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. DESIGN: Two phase 3, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred forty subjects (440 study eyes: 222 in the bromfenac group and 218 in the placebo group). METHODS: Two phase 3, prospective, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trials were conducted at 39 ophthalmology clinics in the United States. Subjects 18 years of age or older were randomized to receive either bromfenac 0.07% or placebo dosed once daily beginning 1 day before cataract surgery, on the day of surgery, and continuing for 14 days after surgery (for a total of 16 days). Subjects were evaluated on days 1, 3, 8, 15, and 22 after surgery. The primary efficacy end point was cleared ocular inflammation, as measured by the summed ocular inflammation score of zero (anterior chamber cell count = 0 and absence of flare) by day 15. Secondary end points included cleared ocular inflammation at day 15 and the number of subjects who were pain free at day 1. The data from the 2 clinical trials were integrated for analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Summed ocular inflammation score and ocular pain. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of subjects treated with bromfenac 0.07% achieved complete clearance of ocular inflammation by day 15 and at day 15 compared with placebo (P < 0.0001). A statistically significantly higher proportion of subjects in the bromfenac 0.07% group were pain free at all study visits compared with those in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). Fewer subjects in the bromfenac group (3.2%) discontinued investigational product early because of a lack of efficacy than in the placebo group (23.9%; P < 0.0001). The incidence of adverse events was significantly lower in the bromfenac 0.07% group compared with the placebo group (P = 0.0041). CONCLUSIONS: Bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% dosed once daily was clinically safe and effective compared with placebo for the treatment of ocular inflammation and pain in subjects who had undergone cataract surgery and may be a beneficial addition to the current standard of care, which commonly includes ophthalmic antibiotics and corticosteroids.

Rotational Stability of the Clareon Monofocal Aspheric Hydrophobic Acrylic Intraocular Lens 6 Months After Implantation.

PURPOSE: To determine the rotational stability of the Clareon® aspheric, monofocal, intraocular lens (IOL) up to 6 months after implantation. METHODS: This prospective, single-arm clinical study evaluated rotational stability of the Clareon IOL in a subset of subjects (n=141, 6 sites) that participated in an investigational device exemption trial for the Clareon IOL. The Clareon model (SY60CL) used in this subset was a non-toric IOL with toric axis markings to measure IOL rotation. All subjects (adults aged ≥22 years who required cataract extraction by phacoemulsification) received the Clareon IOL unilaterally. The position of the toric markings was captured using dilated retro-illumination slit-lamp photography and ocular anatomical landmarks. Post-operative rotational stability was assessed by an independent reading center. IOL rotation was defined as the difference between IOL axis of orientation on the day of surgery (≤1 hour after surgery) and each post-operative visit. Post-operative IOL-based rotational stability was evaluated at day 0 (day of surgery), day 1, week 1, month 1, and month 6 post-operatively. RESULTS: Compared with day 0, mean absolute IOL rotation was 1.85° on day 1 (n=127) and 2.27° at month 6 (n=124). Absolute IOL rotation ≤5° was observed in 95.3% of subjects on day 1 and 92.7% of subjects at month 6, compared with day 0. Between consecutive months 1 and 6 visits, mean absolute rotation was <1°; 100% of subjects had <10° rotation and 98.4% had ≤5°. The range of rotation on day 1 was 0° to 40.0° because of a subject with ocular trauma; when the trauma-outlier was removed, the mean absolute IOL rotation was 1.6° on day 1 (n=126) and 2.0° at month 6 (n=123). CONCLUSION: These results support the high rotational stability of the Clareon monofocal IOL and serve as reference of the rotational stability of Clareon toric IOLs.

A Randomized, Controlled Comparison of NCX 470 (0.021%, 0.042%, and 0.065%) and Latanoprost 0.005% in Patients With Open-angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension: The Dolomites Study.

PRCIS: NCX 470 0.042% and 0.065% were statistically superior in intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering to latanoprost 0.005%, and NCX 470 0.021% was noninferior. All NCX 470 concentrations were safe and well tolerated. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare varying concentrations of NCX 470 (a nitric oxide-donating bimatoprost) to latanoprost in a dose-response safety and efficacy trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with bilateral open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized to NCX 470 0.021% (n=111), 0.042% (n=108), 0.065% (n=107), or latanoprost 0.005% (n=107) once daily in the evening. IOP was measured at 8:00 am, 10:00 am, and 4:00 pm at weeks 1, 2, and 4. The primary efficacy endpoint was the reduction from baseline in mean diurnal IOP at week 4. Secondary efficacy endpoints included reductions from baseline in mean diurnal IOP at weeks 1 and 2, and reductions from baseline in time-matched IOP at 8:00 am, 10:00 am, and 4:00 pm at weeks 1, 2, and 4. Adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS: All concentrations of NCX 470 resulted in significant reductions of mean diurnal IOP. The 0.042% and 0.065% concentrations were statistically superior to latanoprost 0.005%, and 0.021% was noninferior to latanoprost for change from baseline in mean diurnal IOP at week 4. The 0.065% concentration was also superior to latanoprost by up to 1.4 mm Hg for reduction from baseline at 8:00 am, 10:00 am, and 4:00 pm at week 4. NCX 470 was safe and well tolerated; conjunctival hyperemia was the most frequently reported adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: NCX 470 demonstrated dose-dependent reductions in IOP. The 0.042% and 0.065% concentrations demonstrated significantly greater reductions from baseline in mean diurnal IOP than latanoprost 0.005% at week 4, suggesting that higher concentrations may show even greater efficacy.

Effectiveness and Safety of the Clareon Monofocal Intraocular Lens: Outcomes from a 12-Month Single-Arm Clinical Study in a Large Sample.

PURPOSE: This study assessed effectiveness and safety of the novel Clareon intraocular lens (IOL; model SY60CL; Alcon Vision LLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, single-arm, unmasked clinical trial at 16 investigative clinical sites in the United States. Included were adults ≥22 years who required cataract extraction by phacoemulsification. Following phacoemulsification, 350 subjects received SY60CL IOL unilaterally; 342 completed the study. Monocular best corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) were evaluated. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the percentage of subjects with CDVA ≤0.3 logMAR at month 12. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events (AEs). Visual acuity and safety outcomes were compared with historical safety and performance endpoint (SPE) rates. RESULTS: At 12 months post-implantation, 99.7% of subjects receiving the SY60CL IOL achieved monocular CDVA ≤0.3 logMAR (primary effectiveness endpoint; 1-sided 95% upper confidence limit >SPE rate); 99.7% and 86.8% of subjects achieved monocular CDVA of ≤0.34 (20/40 Snellen or better) and ≤0.04 logMAR (20/20 Snellen or better), respectively. At 12 months, >95% of subjects achieved mean monocular UDVA ≤0.3 logMAR; 97.1% and 57.6% of subjects achieved monocular CDVA of ≤0.34 and ≤0.04 logMAR, respectively. Mean monocular CDVA and UDVA were -0.05 and 0.04 logMAR, respectively. AEs were within SPE limits. The most common nonserious ocular AE was posterior capsule opacification (5.4%). Serious AEs were <1%, and no serious ocular AEs were assessed as related to the device. There were no observations for IOL glistenings at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Results of this study supported effectiveness and safety of the SY60CL IOL. Visual acuity outcomes with the SY60CL IOL exceeded the SPE rates for monocular CDVA and AEs were within the limit of historic SPE rates. (Model number SY60WF is the Clareon lens approved by the FDA.).

Mydriasis with micro-array print touch-free tropicamide-phenylephrine fixed combination MIST: pooled randomized Phase III trials.

Design: Prospective, double-masked, controlled, cross-over superiority studies. Materials & methods: Eligible volunteers in two pooled Phase III trials received microdosed mydriatics. MIST-1 study subjects received fixed-combination TR-PH, phenylephrine 2.5% (PH) or tropicamide 1% (TR). MIST-2 study subjects received TR-PH or placebo. Mean change from baseline in pupil diameter was measured by digital pupillometry at 35 min postadministration. Results: Pooled efficacy analysis included 131 subjects. Compared with TR-PH, treatment group difference in 35-min change in mean pupil dilation from baseline was 0.58 mm (p < 0.0001) with TR, 3.87 mm (p < 0.0001) with PH and 4.65 mm (p < 0.0001) with placebo. Adverse events reported were infrequent, transient and mostly mild. Conclusion: TR-PH demonstrated superior pupil dilation compared with each component and placebo. TR-PH was safe & well-tolerated.

Once-Daily Netarsudil/Latanoprost Fixed-Dose Combination for Elevated Intraocular Pressure in the Randomized Phase 3 MERCURY-2 Study.

PURPOSE: To compare the ocular hypotensive efficacy and safety of a once-daily (pm) fixed-dose combination (FDC) product containing netarsudil 0.02% and latanoprost 0.005% with monotherapy with netarsudil or latanoprost. Netarsudil is a Rho kinase inhibitor that lowers intraocular pressure (IOP) primarily by increasing trabecular (conventional) outflow. Latanoprost is the most frequently prescribed of the prostaglandin analogs, which lower IOP primarily by increasing uveoscleral outflow. DESIGN: Three-month, double-masked, randomized (1:1:1), phase 3, superiority study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients had unmedicated IOP > 20 to <36 mmHg at 8:00 am and met other standard criteria for open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. METHODS: Randomization to once-daily (pm) netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, netarsudil, or latanoprost for 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean IOP at 8:00 am, 10:00 am, and 4:00 pm at week 2, week 6, and month 3 (intent-to-treat). Statistical superiority was concluded if the P value for the comparison of netarsudil/latanoprost FDC with each component was <0.05 and the difference in mean IOP (netarsudil/latanoprost FDC minus comparator) was <0 for all time points at all visits. Safety was recorded throughout the treatment period. RESULTS: A total of 750 patients were enrolled, with 90.2%, 89.4%, and 94.4% completing 3 months of treatment with netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, netarsudil, and latanoprost, respectively. Least-squares mean treated IOP ranged from 15.3 to 16.5 mmHg for netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, 17.4 to 19.8 mmHg for netarsudil, and 17.1 to 18.1 mmHg for latanoprost. Netarsudil/latanoprost FDC met the criteria for superiority to each active component at all 9 time points (all P < 0.0001), lowering IOP by an additional 2.2 to 3.3 mmHg versus netarsudil and an additional 1.5 to 2.4 mmHg versus latanoprost. At month 3, the proportion of patients achieving mean diurnal IOP ≤ 15 mmHg was 42.1% for netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, 15.8% for netarsudil, and 18.3% for latanoprost. No treatment-related serious adverse event (AE) was observed. Treatment-related systemic AEs were minimal. The most frequent ocular AE was conjunctival hyperemia (netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, 54.5%; netarsudil, 42.7%; latanoprost, 22.3%), which was generally mild. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily netarsudil/latanoprost FDC demonstrated IOP reductions that were statistically and clinically superior to its individual components at all 9 time points over 3 months, with tolerable ocular safety. This FDC offers a reduced treatment burden that may improve adherence and clinical outcomes.

Duration of IOP reduction with travoprost BAK-free solution.

PURPOSE: To compare the duration of action of travoprost ophthalmic solution 0.004% (Travatan Z) formulated without benzalkonium chloride (BAK) to travoprost ophthalmic solution 0.004% formulated with BAK (Travatan). METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-masked study. Patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized to receive 2 weeks of once-daily therapy with travoprost BAK-free or travoprost with BAK. Patients received the last dose of medication on day 13 and then intraocular pressure (IOP) was assessed every 12 hours for 60 hours. Statistical analysis included change in IOP from baseline for each group and comparison of mean IOP between groups. RESULTS: Of the 109 patients enrolled, 106 patients completed the study. Untreated mean baseline IOP at 8 AM was 26.9 mm Hg in the travoprost BAK-free group and 27.1 mm Hg in the travoprost with BAK group. At 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 hours after the last dose, mean IOP in the travoprost BAK-free group was 18.7, 17.2, 19.5, 18.7, and 20.8 mm Hg, respectively; whereas mean IOP in the travoprost with BAK group was 18.5, 16.8, 19.7, 18.0, and 20.8 mm Hg, respectively. Mean IOP at all time points after the last dose of medication was >6 mm Hg lower than the 8 AM baseline in both groups. Between-group differences were within +/-0.6 mm Hg at all postdose time points. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 treatment groups at baseline or at any postdose time point. Drug-related side effects were uncommon, mild in intensity, and comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost without BAK has similar IOP-lowering efficacy and safety compared with travoprost preserved with BAK. Both formulations of travoprost have a prolonged duration of action, with statistically and clinically significant reductions from baseline persisting up to 60 hours after the last dose.

An ex vivo human aqueous humor-concentration comparison of two commercial bromfenac formulations.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the concentration of bromfenac in the aqueous humor utilizing high-performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry between two commercial nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, using aqueous humor concentrations to characterize pharmacokinetic proportional differences between 0.075% bromfenac ophthalmic solution in DuraSite (BromSite®) and 0.09% bromfenac ophthalmic solution (Bromday®). METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-masked, two-arm, parallel-group, comparative, Phase II clinical trial, subjects were assigned to receive bromfenac in DuraSite or bromfenac ophthalmic solution in a 1:1 ratio. One drop of the masked test article was instilled into the study eye once a day for 2 days prior to and 3 hours prior (last instillation) to the subject's cataract surgery. Aqueous humor samples were collected upon initial cataract incision for analysis of bromfenac levels. The primary end point was aqueous humor concentration of bromfenac at Day 3, at the initiation of cataract surgery. Aqueous humor samples were collected and analyzed for bromfenac levels. RESULTS: A total of 60 subjects completed the study, 30 in each group. The mean bromfenac aqueous humor concentration in subjects who received bromfenac in DuraSite was more than twice (49.33±41.87 ng/mL, P=0.004) that of subjects who received bromfenac ophthalmic solution (23.65±16.31 ng/mL) after three doses. CONCLUSION: Mean bromfenac aqueous humor concentration in subjects receiving the DuraSite-containing bromfenac in DuraSite (0.075%) was significantly higher compared to subjects receiving bromfenac ophthalmic solution (0.09%) after 3 days of dosing.

Evaluating the patient experience after implantation of a 0.4 mg sustained release dexamethasone intracanalicular insert (Dextenza™): results of a qualitative survey.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the patient experience of sustained release dexamethasone intracanalicular insert (Dextenza™) following cataract surgery as part of a Phase III clinical trial program. METHODS: This cross-sectional, qualitative evaluation involved individual interviews lasting approximately 45 minutes. Patients from four US investigational study sites who had previously received an insert were enrolled. There were no predesignated end points; this was a qualitative survey seeking a deeper understanding of patient experience. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were interviewed. Most patients (92%) reported the highest level of satisfaction grade with regard to overall product satisfaction. All patients described the insert as comfortable. Most patients (96%) described their overall experience with the insert as very convenient or extremely convenient. Twenty-two of 23 (96%) participants rated their experience with the insert as "very" or "extremely convenient", compared to previous topical therapy, and 88% of patients stated that if they were to undergo cataract surgery again, they would request the insert. When asked if they would recommend the insert to family members or friends, 92% stated they would. The survey found that 84% of participants would be willing to pay more for the insert than for eye drop therapy. CONCLUSION: The dexamethasone insert was found by patients to be highly favorable with regard to overall satisfaction, convenience, and comfort. The insert was well received and largely preferred over topical therapy alternatives following surgery. More extensive evaluation of the patient experience is warranted, and future studies should help inform design of the next generation of sustained release drug delivery systems.

Brimonidine and timolol fixed-combination therapy versus monotherapy: a 3-month randomized trial in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the safety and intraocular pressure (IOP)- lowering efficacy of a fixed combination of brimonidine 0.2% and timolol 0.5% (fixed brimonidine/ timolol) versus each drug used as monotherapy. METHODS: Patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized to receive fixed brimonidine/timolol BID (n = 385), brimonidine 0.2% TID (n = 382), or timolol 0.5% BID (n = 392) in a multicenter, double-masked study. The primary outcome measure was decrease from baseline IOP. RESULTS: Over all follow-up measurements, the mean decrease from baseline IOP ranged from 4.9 to 7.6 mmHg with brimonidine/timolol, from 3.1 to 5.5 mmHg with brimonidine, and from 4.3 to 6.2 mmHg with timolol. Mean IOP reductions from baseline were significantly larger with fixed brimonidine/timolol than with timolol at all follow-up measurements (P < or = 0.026); the difference was greater than 1.5 mmHg at 10 AM (peak effect for each treatment). Mean IOP reductions from baseline were significantly larger with fixed brimonidine/ timolol than with brimonidine at 8 AM, 10 AM, and 3 PM (P < 0.001); the difference was greater than 1.5 mmHg. The rate of discontinuations owing to adverse events was 3.6% in the fixed timolol/brimonidine group. CONCLUSIONS: The fixed combination of brimonidine and timolol was well-tolerated and provided significantly better IOP control compared with either brimonidine or timolol used alone.

24-Hour IOP control with once-daily bimatoprost, timolol gel-forming solution, or latanoprost: a 1-month, randomized, comparative clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily (QD) bimatoprost, latanoprost, and timolol gel-forming solution in providing 24-hour intraocular pressure (IOP) control. DESIGN: This was a randomized, multicenter, investigator-masked, prospective, parallel-group, clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. INTERVENTION: After washout of any previous ocular hypotensive medications, patients were randomly assigned to treatment with bimatoprost 0.03% ophthalmic solution QD (n=38) or latanoprost 0.005% ophthalmic solution QD (n=38) between 7 and 9 pm, or timolol maleate 0.5% gel-forming ophthalmic solution QD (n=39) between 7 and 9 am for 1 month. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure, circadian IOP, was measured at eight time points over the course of 24 hours beginning at 8 am on day 28 and with the last measurement at 8 am on day 29. IOP was also measured at 8 am and 10 am at baseline and at 8 am on day 14. Safety measures included adverse events, biomicroscopy, visual acuity, heart rate, and blood pressure. RESULTS: At 10 am (peak drug effect) on day 28, the mean IOP reduction from baseline was significantly greater with bimatoprost (9.3 mm Hg, 40.3%) than with timolol gel (7.1 mm Hg, 31.1%; P=.024, Wilcoxon rank sum test) or latanoprost (7.4 mm Hg, 33.3%). In the overall analysis of IOP measured over the course of 24 hours, mean IOP was significantly lower with bimatoprost or latanoprost than with timolol gel (P<.001; analysis of repeated measures). The analysis of repeated measures also showed a significant difference between bimatoprost and latanoprost (P=.003). In the area-under-the-curve analysis, bimatoprost and latanoprost were superior to timolol gel (P< or =.018) but comparable to each other (P> or =.223). All treatment regimens were well tolerated, with few discontinuations due to adverse events. There were no significant effects on systemic safety parameters. CONCLUSION: Once-daily bimatoprost or latanoprost provided significantly better 24-hour IOP control than timolol gel in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Some measurements suggested a trend for greater efficacy of bimatoprost over latanoprost. All three treatments were 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.

Once-daily nepafenac ophthalmic suspension 0.3% to prevent and treat ocular inflammation and pain after cataract surgery: phase 3 study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate once-daily nepafenac 0.3% to prevent and treat ocular pain and inflammation after cataract surgery. SETTING: Sixty-five centers in the United States and Europe. DESIGN: Randomized double-masked vehicle- and active-controlled phase 3 study. METHODS: Patients received nepafenac 0.3% once daily, nepafenac 0.1% 3 times daily, or their respective vehicles from day -1 to day 14 after cataract extraction. An additional drop of study drug was administered 30 to 120 minutes preoperatively. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with a cure for inflammation (score of 0 for both aqueous cells and flare) at day 14. RESULTS: Of randomized patients, 817 received nepafenac 0.3%, 819 received nepafenac 0.1%, and 200 and 206 received the respective vehicles. Significantly more nepafenac 0.3% patients had no inflammation (68.4% versus 34.0%) and were pain free (91.0% versus 49.7%) at day 14 than vehicle patients (both P<.0001). Nepafenac 0.3% was noninferior to nepafenac 0.1% for inflammation (95% confidence interval [CI], -5.73% to 3.17%) and pain-free rates (95% CI, -3.08% to 2.70%). At all postoperative visits, fewer treatment failures (P≤.0012) and more clinical successes (P ≤ .0264) were observed with nepafenac 0.3% versus vehicle. Nepafenac 0.3% was well tolerated and had a safety profile comparable to that of nepafenac 0.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily nepafenac 0.3% was noninferior to nepafenac 0.1% 3 times daily for prevention and treatment of ocular inflammation and pain following cataract surgery. The safety of nepafenac 0.3% was comparable to that of nepafenac 0.1%, with the added convenience of once-daily dosing. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Drs. Modi, Lehmann, Walters, Fong, Christie, Roel, Nethery, and Reiser have been paid consultants to Alcon Research, Ltd. Ms. Sager is an employee of Alcon Research, Ltd. Drs. Tsorbatzoglou, Philipson, and Traverso have no financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Bimatoprost 0.03% preservative-free ophthalmic solution versus bimatoprost 0.03% ophthalmic solution (Lumigan) for glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a 12-week, randomised, double-masked trial.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To evaluate efficacy and safety of bimatoprost 0.03% preservative-free (PF) ophthalmic solution versus bimatoprost 0.03% (Lumigan) ophthalmic solution for glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS: In this double-masked, parallel-group study, patients were randomised to bimatoprost PF or bimatoprost for 12 weeks. The primary analysis for non-inferiority was change from baseline in worse eye intraocular pressure (IOP) in the per-protocol population at week 12. For equivalence, it was average eye IOP in the intent-to-treat population at each time point at weeks 2, 6 and 12. RESULTS: 597 patients were randomised (bimatoprost PF, n=302 and bimatoprost, n=295). The 95% CI upper limit for worse eye IOP change from baseline was <1.5 mm Hg at each week 12 time point, meeting prespecified non-inferiority criteria. The 95% CI upper limit for the treatment difference for average IOP was 0.69 mm Hg and the lower limit was -0.50 mm Hg at all follow-up time points (hours 0, 2 and 8 at weeks 2, 6 and 12), meeting equivalence criteria. Both treatments showed decreases in mean average eye IOP at all follow-up time points (p<0.001), were safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Bimatoprost PF is non-inferior and equivalent to bimatoprost in its ability to reduce IOP-lowering with a safety profile similar to bimatoprost.

The effect of stromal hydration on surgical outcomes for cataract patients who received a hydrogel ocular bandage.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of stromal hydration on surgical outcomes for patients who received the new hydrogel ocular bandage (ReSure™ Adherent Ocular Bandage, Ocular Therapeutix, Inc, Bedford, MA, USA) following routine cataract surgery. METHODS: This post-hoc, single-masked study was conducted with 310 patients who were scheduled to undergo unilateral clear corneal cataract surgery with phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation. Incisions were closed with stromal hydration (270 patients) or without stromal hydration (40 patients) based on physician standard of care. All patients received the hydrogel bandage at the conclusion of the procedure. Ocular assessments of stromal edema, flare, corneal staining, anterior chamber cells, best-corrected visual acuity, and intraocular pressure were made 24 hours after surgery. RESULTS: Significantly more patients experienced stromal edema in the group with stromal hydration (26.3% versus 10.0%, respectively; P = 0.028). A higher percentage of patients experienced corneal staining when stromal hydration was performed (20.4% versus 2.5%; P = 0.004). The mean BCVA (best-corrected visual acuity) also was significantly different between the groups (logMAR of 0.164 with stromal hydration versus 0.095 without hydration; P = 0.007). No significant differences were observed between the study groups in terms of flare, anterior chamber cells, or intraocular pressure. CONCLUSION: Cataract surgery without stromal hydration provided better surgical outcomes than the traditional hydration procedure when used in conjunction with a new hydrogel bandage.

Nepafenac dosing frequency for ocular pain and inflammation associated with cataract surgery.

PURPOSE: Nepafenac ophthalmic suspension 0.1% was dosed topically once (QD), twice (BID), or three-times (TID) daily to assess the resolution of ocular pain and anterior-segment inflammation following cataract surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, double-masked, randomized, placebo-controlled study of 212 adults. Patients received nepafenac 0.1% or placebo, 1 drop QD, BID, or TID beginning 1 day before cataract surgery, continuing on the day of surgery, and for 14 days thereafter. One (1) additional drop was administered 30-120 min prior to surgery. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent of treatment failures (>or=16 aqueous cells, aqueous flare = severe, or ocular pain score = moderately severe or severe) through postoperative day 14. RESULTS: On days 7 and 14, the QD, BID, and TID all nepafenac posologies significantly reduced the percent of treatment failures, compared to placebo ( p