Does Dry Eye Disease Severity Impact Efficacy of Varenicline Solution Nasal Spray on Sign and Symptom Treatment Outcomes?

SIGNIFICANCE: There is a clinical necessity for dry eye disease treatments that perform across a broad range of presenting patient severities. Varenicline solution nasal spray (VNS), a unique cholinergic agonist ocular surface-sparing nasal spray therapy, demonstrated significant improvement in both signs and symptoms of dry eye disease in subjects with mild, moderate, and severe symptoms as the clinical studies enrolled a more real-world patient population. PURPOSE: This study evaluated efficacy outcomes for VNS in patients with mild-moderate and severe dry eye disease. METHODS: An analysis of integrated data from two randomized clinical trials, ONSET-1 (NCT03636061) and ONSET-2 (NCT04036292) (vehicle control [VC], n = 294; VNS 0.03 mg, n = 308), was performed. Adults 22 years or older with dry eye disease, Ocular Surface Disease Index score of ≥23, corneal fluorescein staining score of ≥2 in ≥1 regions/≥4 all regions, and Schirmer Test Score (STS) of ≤10 mm (no restrictions on Eye Dryness Score [EDS]) were included in this study. Efficacy was evaluated using analysis of covariance among pre-specified subgroups of mild-moderate and severe baseline disease severity defined by STS (≤5 vs. >5) and EDS (<60 vs. ≥60). Consistency of effect was evaluated by interaction tests. RESULTS: No treatment-subgroup interactions were observed for all end points ( P > .05). The odds of achieving a ≥10-mm improvement in STS for VNS versus VC for patients with baseline STS ≤5 and >5 were 3.4(95% confidence interval, 2.0 to 5.6) and 2.3(1.3 to 4.0) and for EDS of <60 and ≥60 were 3.4(1.9 to 6.1) and 2.5(1.5 to 4.0). Least-squares mean treatment/VC differences in change from baseline in EDS for patients with baseline STS ≤5 or >5 were -7.4(95% confidence interval, -12.5 to -2.4) and -2.8(-8.7 to 3.1); EDS of <60 and ≥60 were -2.9(-8.3 to 2.5) and -8.1(-13.6 to -2.6). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with VC, VNS improved tear production and patient-reported symptoms in patients with dry eye disease, demonstrating consistency of effect regardless of initial presenting severity.

A single vectored thermal pulsation treatment for meibomian gland dysfunction increases mean comfortable contact lens wearing time by approximately 4 hours per day.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of a single vectored thermal pulsation (VTP) treatment in contact lens wearers with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) and dry eye symptoms. METHODS: The prospective, nonsignificant risk, open-label, randomized, multi-center clinical trial included 55 soft contact lens (SCL) wearers with MGD and evaporative dry eye. Subjects were randomized to the single VTP treatment group or an untreated control. The controls received a crossover VTP treatment at 3 months (crossover treatment group). Primary effectiveness measures were meibomian gland secretion (MGS) score and Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness (SPEED) that were evaluated at baseline, at 1 and 3 months post-VTP treatment, and at 1 month post-VTP treatment in the crossover treatment group. Exploratory variables included fluorescein tear break-up time (TBUT), lid wiper epitheliopathy (LWE), lid parallel conjunctival folds (LIPCOF), ocular surface staining, frequency of over-the-counter (OTC) drop use, and hours of comfortable contact lens wear. RESULTS: At 3 months, the treatment group showed significantly greater mean change from baseline in MGS (12.4±9.1 vs 1.4±6.4, p<0.0001), SPEED (-8.4±4.7 vs -0.7±4.4, p<0.0001) and significantly greater improvement in exploratory variables (TBUT, LWE, and frequency of OTC drop use) relative to the controls. Mean comfortable contact lens wearing time increased by 4.0±3.9 hours at 1 month. This was sustained for 3 months with no change in the control group. The crossover treatment group demonstrated similar results to the treatment group at 1 month post-VTP. CONCLUSION: In SCL wearers with MGD, a single VTP treatment significantly improved mean meibomian gland function and significantly reduced dry eye signs and symptoms compared to an untreated control. The treatment increased mean comfortable lens wearing time by 4 hours (approximately doubling the pretreatment findings). This was sustained for up to 3 months post-treatment on average.