Five variable that rule your life - Home mortgage and biostatistical power

Ocular Pharmacology

Treatment of ocular diseases presents unique challenges and opportunities for the clinician and for the clinical pharmacologist. Ophthalmic pharmaceuticals, typically given as liquids, require consideration of solubility, physiological pH, and osmolarity, as well as sterility and stability, which in turn requires optimal pharmaceutics. Ocular tissue levels are challenging to obtain in humans, and the clinical pharmacokinetics is typically blood levels, which are primarily related to safety, rather than efficacy. The eye is a closed compartment with multiple physiological barriers with esterases and transporters, but relatively little cytochrome oxidases. Delivery routes include topical, intravitreal, and systemic. Patient dosing involves not only adherence issues common to all chronic diseases, but also performance requirements on eye drop instillation. Therapeutically, ocular diseases and their pharmacological treatments include both those analogous to systemic diseases (e.g., inflammation, infection, and neuronal degeneration) and those unique to the eye (e.g., cataract and myopia).

A phase 2a, double-masked, randomized, vehicle-controlled trial of VVN001 in subjects with dry eye disease

PURPOSE

Evaluate the initial ocular safety and tolerability and efficacy of VVN001 Ophthalmic Solution (VVN001), a small-molecule antagonist of lymphocyte function-associated antigen-1 (LFA-1), in subjects with dry eye disease (DED).

METHODS

This was a multi-center, double-masked, randomized, dose-response, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group study conducted in 170 subjects with DED. Subjects were randomized to receive VVN001 (1% or 5%) or its vehicle, twice-daily in both eyes for 84 days. The primary outcome measure was inferior region corneal fluorescein staining (iCFS, 0-4 scale) at Day 84. Visual Analogue Scale eye dryness (VAS, 0-100 scale) was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

The primary and first secondary outcomes were not met. At Day 84 treatment effects in favor of VVN001 5% relative to its vehicle for iCFS were 0.29 units (p = 0.054), and for VAS were 3.18 units (p = 0.533). In other secondary outcomes, treatment effects in favor of VVN001 5% relative to its vehicle were seen in total CFS (1.61 units, 0-20 scale, p = 0.004) and Schirmer score (1.77 and 2.32 mm, p = 0.049 and p = 0.17 at Days 14 and 28 respectively). Adverse events of incidence 5% or greater in either active treatment group were instillation site pain (3/57, 5.3%), dysgeusia (3/56, 5.4%) and urinary tract infection (3/57, 5.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no major safety issues of note. Appropriately powered studies will be required with a priori selection of the efficacy endpoints to evaluate VVN001's therapeutic potential.