Superdiluted atropine at 0.01% reduces progression in children and adolescents. A 5 year study of safety and effectiveness

Effects of atropine eyedrops at ten different concentrations for myopia control in children: A systematic review on meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To estimate the effect of atropine eyedrops at different concentrations for myopia control in children.

METHODS

We conducted a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCT). Primary outcomes include changes in spherical equivalent error (SER) and changes in axial length (AL), mean difference (MD) together with 95% credible interval (CrI) were used to evaluate the efficacy.

RESULTS

28 RCTs (6608 children) were included in this review. Comparing ten atropine eyedrops (0.0025%, 0.005%, 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.025%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.25%, 0.5% and 1% concentrations) with the placebo, the MDs and 95%CrIs of changes in SER are -0.006 (-0.269, 0.256) D, 0.216 (-0.078, 0.508) D, 0.146 (0.094, 0.199) D, 0.167 (0.039, 0.297) D, 0.201 (0.064, 0.341) D, 0.344 (0.251, 0.440) D, 0.255 (0.114, 0.396) D, 0.296 (0.140, 0.452) D, 0.331 (0.215, 0.447) D, and 0.286 (0.195, 0.337) D, respectively. The MDs and 95%CrIs of changes in AL are -0.048 (-0.182, 0.085) mm, -0.078 (-0.222, 0.066) mm, -0.095 (-0.130, -0.060) mm, -0.096 (-0.183, -0.009) mm, -0.083 (-0.164, -0.004) mm, -0.114 (-0.176, -0.056) mm, -0.134 (-0.198, -0.032) mm, -0.174 (-0.315, -0.061) mm, -0.184 (-0.291, -0.073) mm, and -0.171 (-0.203, -0.097) mm, respectively.Whether evaluated by SER or AL, 1% concentration ranks first in efficacy, but the risk of photophobia is 17 times higher than 0.01% concentration.

CONCLUSIONS

0.01% or higher concentration atropine eyedrops are effective for myopia control, while 0.0025% and 0.005% concentrations may not. As the concentration increases, the effect tends to increase, 1% concentration may have the strongest effect.

0.01% Atropine Eye Drops in Children With Myopia and Intermittent Exotropia: The AMIXT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Exotropia and myopia are commonly coexistent. However, evidence is limited regarding atropine interventions for myopia control in children with myopia and intermittent exotropia (IXT).

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 0.01% atropine eye drops on myopia progression, exotropia conditions, and binocular vision in individuals with myopia and IXT.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This placebo-controlled, double-masked, randomized clinical trial was conducted from December 2020 to September 2023. Children aged 6 to 12 years with basic-type IXT and myopia of -0.50 to -6.00 diopters (D) after cycloplegic refraction in both eyes were enrolled.

Intervention

Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to 0.01% atropine or placebo eye drops administered in both eyes once at night for 12 months.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was change in cycloplegic spherical equivalent from baseline at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included change in axial length (AL), accommodative amplitude (AA), exotropia conditions, and binocular vision at 1 year.

Results

Among 323 screened participants, 300 children (mean [SD] age, 9.1 [1.6] years; 152 male [50.7%]) were included in this study. A total of 200 children (66.7%) were in the atropine group, and 100 (33.3%) were in the placebo group. At 1 year, the 0.01% atropine group had slower spherical equivalent progression (-0.51 D vs -0.75 D; difference = 0.24 D; 95% CI, 0.11-0.37 D; P < .001) and AL elongation (0.31 mm vs 0.42 mm; difference = -0.11 mm; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.06 mm; P < .001) than the placebo group. The mean AA change was -3.06 D vs 0.12 D (difference = -3.18 D; 95% CI, -3.92 to -2.44 D; P < .001) in the atropine and placebo groups, respectively. The 0.01% atropine group had a decrease in near magnitude of exodeviation whereas the placebo group had an increase (-1.25 prism diopters [PD] vs 0.74 PD; difference = -1.99 PD; 95% CI, -3.79 to -0.19 PD; P = .03). In the atropine vs placebo group, respectively, the incidence of study drug-related photophobia was 6.0% (12 of 200 participants) vs 8.0% (8 of 100 participants; difference = -2.0%; 95% CI, -9.4% to 3.7%; P = .51) and for blurred near vision was 6.0% (12 of 200 participants) vs 7.0% (7 of 100 participants) (difference = -1.0%; 95% CI, -8.2% to 4.5%; P = .74).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this randomized clinical trial support use of 0.01% atropine eye drops, although compromising AA to some extent, for slowing myopia progression without interfering with exotropia conditions or binocular vision in children with myopia and IXT.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR2000039827.

Five-year results of atropine 0.01% efficacy in the myopia control in a European population

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 0.01% atropine eye-drops in controlling myopia progression over 5 years.

METHODS

Experimental, analytical, prospective, randomised and longitudinal study, in 361 right eyes from 361 children randomised into the control group (177 eyes without treatment) and treatment group (184 eyes with 0.01% atropine eye-drops). Children assigned to the treatment group used 0.01% atropine once a day every night and the control group's children did not use any treatment or placebo. All the subjects completed an eye examination every 6 months for the 5 years of follow-up. The examination included subjective and objective refraction with cycloplegia, axial length (AL), keratometry and anterior chamber depth (ACD) to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment. It also included the anterior and posterior pole examination to evaluate the safety of the treatment.

RESULTS

The SE increased -0.63±0.42D in children after 5 years of treatment with 0.01% atropine, while in the control group the increase was -0.92±0.56D. AL increased 0.26±0.28 mm in the treatment group compared with 0.49±0.34 mm in the control group. Atropine 0.01% showed an efficacy of 31.5% and 46.9% in the control of the SE and AL increase, respectively. ACD and keratometry did not have significant changes between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Atropine 0.01% is effective in slowing myopia progression in a European population. There were no side effects after 5 years of 0.01% atropine.

Atropine: Updates on myopia pharmacotherapy

The prevalence of myopia has rapidly increased over the last 30 years, with the World Health Organization estimating a worldwide incidence of 23%, projected to increase to 50% by 2050. The myopia epidemic has prompted a reincarnation in efforts to overcome this challenge. The exploration of atropine use in myopia was a result due to a lack of treatment in effect. This study aimed at reviewing the role of atropine in the management of myopia worldwide based on currently available findings. A literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar for studies published up to April 2022 inclusive. Articles with high or medium clinical relevance were selected for this review. Multiple studies have demonstrated the relevance and efficacy rates of different concentrations of atropine, despite still insufficiently explained the exact site and mechanism of action of atropine in slowing myopia progression. Currently available findings highlight that topical atropine opened a new page in pharmacotherapy of myopia and have shown a high therapeutic effect on myopia progression in Asian and European child population, irrespective of ethnicity. There is potential for myopia control with fewer side effects using lower concentrations but still exists a room for improvement, underscoring the requirement of modified atropine topical preparations with increased bioavailability, potentially with nanoparticle formulations, to enable the effective management of myopia.

Incidence of Adverse Events Induced by Atropine in Myopic Children: A Meta-Analysis

A large number of studies have evaluated the efficacy of low-dose atropine in preventing or slowing myopic progression. However, it is challenging to evaluate the ocular safety from these studies. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of adverse events induced by atropine in children with myopia. We performed a systematic literature search in several databases for studies published until November 2022. The incidence of adverse events induced by atropine was pooled by a common-effect (fixed-effect) or random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to drug doses, types of adverse events, and ethnicity. A total of 31 articles were ultimately included in the study. The overall incidence of adverse events for atropine was 5.9%, and the incidence of severe adverse events was 0.0%. The most commonly reported adverse events were photophobia (9.1%) and blurred near vision (2.9%). Other adverse events including eye irritation/discomfort, allergic reactions, headache, stye/chalazion, glare, and dizziness occurred in less than 1% of the patients. The incidence of atropine-induced adverse events varied depending on the drug doses. A lower dose of atropine was associated with a lower incidence of adverse events. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events for low-dose atropine between Asian and White children. Our study suggests photophobia and blurred near vision are the most frequently reported adverse events induced by atropine. Low-dose atropine is safer than moderate- and high-dose atropine. Our study could provide a safe reference for ophthalmologists to prescribe atropine for myopic children.

Low-dose AtropIne for Myopia Control in Children (AIM): protocol for a randomised, controlled, double-blind, multicentre, clinical trial with two parallel arms

INTRODUCTION

Myopia is a major cause of degenerative eye disease and increases the risk of secondary visual impairment. Mitigating its progression therefore has great potential of clinically relevant benefit as shown by using highly diluted atropine eye drops in children of Asian origin. However, limited evidence is available regarding the efficacy and safety of low-dose atropine therapy in non-Asian populations. Hence, the Low-dose AtropIne for Myopia Control in Children (AIM) study will test the efficacy and safety of 0.02% atropine vs placebo in a German population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

AIM is a national, multicentre, prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial with two parallel arms. The primary objective is to assess the efficacy of atropine 0.02% eyedrops for myopia control in children of Caucasian origin. The primary outcome is the change in cycloplegic refraction after 1 year of treatment (D/year). Secondary and tertiary outcome measures comprise the change in axial length (mm/year) in children treated with 0.02% atropine compared with placebo, the myopic progression of participants treated with 0.01% compared with 0.02% atropine (D/year and mm/year), and the safety profile of both 0.02% and 0.01% atropine. Furthermore, the myopic progression 1 year after cessation of therapy with 0.02% atropine will be evaluated. Inclusion criteria are an age of 8-12 years and myopia of -1 D to -6 D with an estimated annual myopia progression of ≥0.5 D. After randomisation, patients will receive either atropine 0.02% (arm A) or placebo eye drops (arm B) in the first year of treatment. In the second year, they will continue to receive atropine 0.02% (arm A) or switch to atropine 0.01% (arm B). In the third year, they will switch to placebo (arm A) or continue with atropine 0.01% (arm B). To achieve a statistical power of 80%, the calculated sample size is 300. The trial has started in October 2021 with a planned recruitment period of 18 months.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

AIM has been approved by the Central Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Freiburg (21-1106), local ethics committees of each participating centre and the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (61-3910-4044659). It complies with the Declaration of Helsinki, local laws and ICH-GCP. Results and underlying data from this trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03865160.

Symptoms and ocular findings associated with administration of 0.01% atropine in young adults

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This paper provides eye care practitioners with important information about the potential side effects of 0.01% atropine.

BACKGROUND

Eye care practitioners routinely administer 0.01% atropine eye drops nightly to slow the progression of myopia, but nobody has assessed accommodative lag or facility, near phoria, intraocular pressure or comfort of drop administration.

METHODS

All 21- to 30-year-old adults with no history of accommodative issues or therapy were eligible. During the baseline visit, participants underwent testing related to potential side effects. Participants then administered one drop of 0.01% atropine nightly to both eyes, and all tests were repeated 1 week later.

RESULTS

The average ± standard deviation age of the 31 participants was 23.9 ± 1.6 years, 71% were female, and 81% were Caucasian. The only significant changes were an increase in photopic pupil size from 4.9 ± 0.8 at baseline to 5.1 ± 0.6 mm after 1 week (paired sample t-test, p = 0.002) and an increase of the average intraocular pressure of the two eyes from 15.6 ± 2.7 to 16.7 ± 3.1 mmHg (paired-sample t-test, p = 0.003), but neither of these changes was clinically meaningful. There were no other statistically significant differences before and after 1-week administration of 0.01% atropine for any of the vision, accommodation, reading speed or subjective side effects. When asked how likely they would be to take the atropine drops to delay the onset of myopia on a scale from 1 (definitely not) to 10 (definitely would), participants replied with an average of 8.2 ± 2.0 after taking atropine eye drops for 1 week (paired-sample t-test, p = 0.81).

CONCLUSION

Nightly administration of 0.01% atropine did not result in any clinically meaningful symptoms, so patients would be very likely to take the drops to delay the onset of myopia.

Interventions for myopia control in children: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Myopia is a common refractive error, where elongation of the eyeball causes distant objects to appear blurred. The increasing prevalence of myopia is a growing global public health problem, in terms of rates of uncorrected refractive error and significantly, an increased risk of visual impairment due to myopia-related ocular morbidity. Since myopia is usually detected in children before 10 years of age and can progress rapidly, interventions to slow its progression need to be delivered in childhood.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children using network meta-analysis (NMA). To generate a relative ranking of myopia control interventions according to their efficacy. To produce a brief economic commentary, summarising the economic evaluations assessing myopia control interventions in children. To maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE; Embase; and three trials registers. The search date was 26 February 2022.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children aged 18 years or younger. Critical outcomes were progression of myopia (defined as the difference in the change in spherical equivalent refraction (SER, dioptres (D)) and axial length (mm) in the intervention and control groups at one year or longer) and difference in the change in SER and axial length following cessation of treatment ('rebound').  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methods. We assessed bias using RoB 2 for parallel RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the outcomes: change in SER and axial length at one and two years. Most comparisons were with inactive controls.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 64 studies that randomised 11,617 children, aged 4 to 18 years. Studies were mostly conducted in China or other Asian countries (39 studies, 60.9%) and North America (13 studies, 20.3%). Fifty-seven studies (89%) compared myopia control interventions (multifocal spectacles, peripheral plus spectacles (PPSL), undercorrected single vision spectacles (SVLs), multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCL), orthokeratology, rigid gas-permeable contact lenses (RGP); or pharmacological interventions (including high- (HDA), moderate- (MDA) and low-dose (LDA) atropine, pirenzipine or 7-methylxanthine) against an inactive control. Study duration was 12 to 36 months. The overall certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Since the networks in the NMA were poorly connected, most estimates versus control were as, or more, imprecise than the corresponding direct estimates. Consequently, we mostly report estimates based on direct (pairwise) comparisons below. At one year, in 38 studies (6525 participants analysed), the median change in SER for controls was -0.65 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (mean difference (MD) 0.90 D, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 1.18), MDA (MD 0.65 D, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.03), LDA (MD 0.38 D, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.66), pirenzipine (MD 0.32 D, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.49), MFSCL (MD 0.26 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.35), PPSLs (MD 0.51 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.82), and multifocal spectacles (MD 0.14 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.21). By contrast, there was little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.07 D, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.24) or undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.15 D, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.00) reduce progression.  At two years, in 26 studies (4949 participants), the median change in SER for controls was -1.02 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (MD 1.26 D, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.36), MDA (MD 0.45 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.83), LDA (MD 0.24 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.31), pirenzipine (MD 0.41 D, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.69), MFSCL (MD 0.30 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.41), and multifocal spectacles  (MD 0.19 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.30). PPSLs (MD 0.34 D, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.76) may also reduce progression, but the results were inconsistent. For RGP, one study found a benefit and another found no difference with control. We found no difference in SER change for undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09). At one year, in 36 studies (6263 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.31 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.30), MDA (MD -0.28 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.17), LDA (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.05), orthokeratology (MD -0.19 mm, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.15), MFSCL (MD -0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.09), pirenzipine (MD -0.10 mm, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.02), PPSLs (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.24 to -0.03), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.06 mm, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.04). We found little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.03) or undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.05 mm, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.11) reduce axial length. At two years, in 21 studies (4169 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.56 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.47mm, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.34), MDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.20), orthokeratology (MD -0.28 mm, (95% CI -0.38 to -0.19), LDA (MD -0.16 mm, 95% CI -0.20 to  -0.12), MFSCL (MD -0.15 mm, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.12), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.03). PPSL may reduce progression (MD -0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.05) but results were inconsistent. We found little or no evidence that undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.01 mm, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.03) or RGP (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.12) reduce axial length. There was inconclusive evidence on whether treatment cessation increases myopia progression. Adverse events and treatment adherence were not consistently reported, and only one study reported quality of life. No studies reported environmental interventions reporting progression in children with myopia, and no economic evaluations assessed interventions for myopia control in children.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies mostly compared pharmacological and optical treatments to slow the progression of myopia with an inactive comparator. Effects at one year provided evidence that these interventions may slow refractive change and reduce axial elongation, although results were often heterogeneous. A smaller body of evidence is available at two or three years, and uncertainty remains about the sustained effect of these interventions. Longer-term and better-quality studies comparing myopia control interventions used alone or in combination are needed, and improved methods for monitoring and reporting adverse effects.

Effect of Atropine 0.01% Eye Drops on the Difference in Refraction and Axial Length between Right and Left Eyes

INTRODUCTION

This study sought to determine whether the application of 0.01% atropine eye drops could impact the disparity in refraction and axial length (AL) between the right and left eyes in Chinese children.

METHODS

The study was designed as a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial. A total of 220 children aged 6-12 years were recruited from the Beijing Tongren Hospital in Beijing, China. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio and were prescribed 0.01% atropine or placebo eye drops to be administered once a night to both eyes for the duration of 1 year. The cycloplegic refraction and AL were recorded including baseline, 6 months, and again at the 12 months.

RESULTS

After 1-year follow-up period, 76 (69%) and 83 (75%) subjects of the initial 220 participants were identified as the 0.01% atropine and placebo groups, respectively. The inter-ocular difference in spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and AL demonstrated stable values in the 0.01% atropine treatment group (SER: p = 0.590; AL: p = 0.322) analyzed after 1 year, but found a significant increase (SER: p < 0.001; AL: p = 0.001) in the placebo group. Furthermore, over 1 year, eyes with greater myopia in the atropine group exhibited slower myopia progression (0.45 ± 0.44 D) than the lesser myopic eye (0.56 ± 0.44 D) (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that 0.01% atropine could maintain the inter-ocular SER and AL difference. And 0.01% atropine appeared to be more effective in delaying the progression of myopia in eyes with more myopia than in the less myopic eyes.

Photorefraction Screening Plus Atropine Treatment for Myopia is Cost-Effective: A Proof-of-Concept Markov Analysis

Purpose

The prevalence of myopia is increasing globally, putting individuals at risk of myopia-associated visual impairment. Low-dose atropine eye drops have been found to safely reduce the risk of progression from myopia to higher levels of myopia and pathological states. In New Zealand, school children have an eye check at age 11. In this study, we aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of introducing photorefractive screening for myopia at age 11 in the New Zealand context, with atropine 0.01% eye drops treatment for those screening positive.

Patients and Methods

A Markov cohort simulation was used to model the impact of screening plus atropine compared to usual care across a lifetime horizon and societal perspective with a 3% discount rate. Cost-effectiveness was determined by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with utility measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Multivariate sensitivity analyses were carried out to investigate factors influencing cost-effectiveness.

Results

The ICER for screening plus atropine was NZ$1590 (95% CI 1390, 1791) per QALY gained, with 7 cases of lifetime blindness prevented per 100,000 children screened.

Conclusion

Screening for myopia with photorefraction at age 11 and atropine 0.01% eye drop treatment of children screening positive is likely to be cost-effective. These results suggest that a real-world trial and cost-effectiveness analysis would be worth considering in New Zealand.

The Role of Atropine in Preventing Myopia Progression: An Update

Several approaches have been investigated for preventing myopia progression in children and teenagers. Among them, topical atropine has shown promising results and it is being adopted in clinical practice more and more frequently. However, the optimal formulation and treatment algorithm are still to be determined. We discuss the pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, clinical, and tolerability profile revealed first by the multicenter, randomized ATOM 1 and 2 trials and, more recently, by the LAMP Study. Results from these trials confirmed the efficacy of low-concentration atropine with a concentration-dependent response. Although atropine at 0.025% and 0.05% concentrations has shown the most encouraging results in large-scale studies, these formulations are not yet commonplace in worldwide clinical practice. Moreover, their rebound effect and the possibility of reaching a stabilization effect have not been fully investigated with real-life studies. Thus, further larger-scale studies should better characterize the clinical efficacy of atropine over longer follow-up periods, in order to define the optimal dosage and treatment regimen.

Efficacy and Safety of 8 Atropine Concentrations for Myopia Control in Children: A Network Meta-Analysis

TOPIC

Comparative efficacy and safety of different concentrations of atropine for myopia control.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Atropine is known to be an effective intervention to delay myopia progression. Nonetheless, no well-supported evidence exists yet to rank the clinical outcomes of various concentrations of atropine.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov on April 14, 2021. We selected studies involving atropine treatment of at least 1 year's duration for myopia control in children. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and compared 8 atropine concentrations (1% to 0.01%). We ranked the atropine concentrations for the corresponding outcomes by P score (estimate of probability of being best treatment). Our primary outcomes were mean annual changes in refraction (diopters/year) and axial length (AXL; millimeters/year). We extracted data on the proportion of eyes showing myopia progression and safety outcomes (photopic and mesopic pupil diameter, accommodation amplitude, and distance and near best-corrected visual acuity [BCVA]).

RESULTS

Thirty pairwise comparisons from 16 RCTs (3272 participants) were obtained. Our NMA ranked the 1%, 0.5%, and 0.05% atropine concentrations as the 3 most beneficial for myopia control, as assessed for both primary outcomes: 1% atropine (mean differences compared with control: refraction, 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.58-1.04]; AXL, -0.35 [-0.46 to -0.25]); 0.5% atropine (mean differences compared with control: refraction, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.40-1.00]; AXL, -0.23 [-0.38 to -0.07]); 0.05% atropine (mean differences compared with control: refraction, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.17-1.07]; AXL, -0.25 [-0.44 to -0.06]). In terms of myopia control as assessed by relative risk (RR) for overall myopia progression, 0.05% was ranked as the most beneficial concentration (RR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.27-0.57]). The risk for adverse effects tended to rise as the atropine concentration was increased, although this tendency was not evident for distance BCVA. No valid network was formed for near BCVA.

DISCUSSION

The ranking probability for efficacy was not proportional to dose (i.e., 0.05% atropine was comparable with that of high-dose atropine [1% and 0.5%]), although those for pupil size and accommodation amplitude were dose related.

Predicting factors for progression of the myopia in the MiSight assessment study Spain (MASS)

PURPOSE

To investigate which baseline factors are predictive for success in controlling myopia progression in a group of children wearing MiSight Contact Lens (CLs).

METHODS

Myopic patients (n=41) fitted with MiSight CLs and followed up two years were included in this study. Bivariate analysis, a logistic regression analysis (LG) and a decision tree (DT) approach were used to screen for the factors influencing the success of the treatment. To assess the response, axial length (AL) changes were considered as main variable. Patients were classified based on a specific range of change of axial length at the end of each year of treatment as "responders" (R) (AL change <0.11mm/per year) and "non-responders" (NR) (AL change ≥0.11mm/per year).

RESULTS

Of a total of forty-one Caucasian patients treated with MiSight CLs, 21 and 16 were considered responders in the first and the second year of follow-up, respectively. LG analysis showed that the only factor associated with smaller axial length growth was more time spent outdoors (p=0.0079) in the first year of treatment. The decision tree analysis showed that in the responding group spending more than 3 and 4h outdoors per week was associated with the best response in the first year and in the second year of treatment respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The LR and the DT approach of this pilot study identifies time spent outdoors as a main factor in controlling axial eye growth in children treated with MiSight CLs.

Efficacy and Adverse Effects of Atropine for Myopia Control in Children: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Objectives

To explore the rebound effects and safety of atropine on accommodation amplitude in slowing myopia progression.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis to testify proper dosage of atropine in children with myopia. We searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library up to March 30, 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of atropine for controlling myopia progression in children. We performed the inverse variance random-effects model to pool the data using mean difference (MD) for continuous variables. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I² test. Additionally, we conducted subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses.

Results

Seventeen RCTs involving 2955 participants were included. Myopia progression was significantly less in the atropine group than that of the control group, with MD = 0.38 D per year (95% confidence interval, 0.20 to 0.56). Less axial elongation was shown with MD = −0.19 mm per year (95% CI, −0.25 to −0.12). There was a statistically difference among various doses (p=0.00001). In addition, 1.0% atropine showed the rebound effect with MD = −0.54 D per year (95% CI, −0.81 to −0.26) and was more effective in the latter six months than in the former one. Less accommodation amplitude was shown in 0.01% atropine.

Conclusion

The efficacy of atropine is dose dependent, and 0.01% atropine may be the optimal dose in slowing myopia progression in children with no accommodation dysfunction. A rebound effect is more prominent in high-dose atropine in the former cessation after discontinuation.

A multicenter Spanish study of atropine 0.01% in childhood myopia progression

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atropine 0.01% eye drops for myopia control in a multicentric pediatric Spanish cohort. An interventional, prospective, multicenter study was designed. Children aged between 6 and 14 years, with myopia between - 2.00 D to - 6.00 D, astigmatism < 1.50 D and documented previous annual progression greater than - 0.5 D (cycloplegic spherical equivalent, SE) were included. Once nightly atropine 0.01% eye drops in each eye were prescribed to all participants for 12 months. Age, gender, ethnicity and iris color were registered. All patients underwent the same follow-up protocol in every center: baseline visit, telephone consultation 2 weeks later and office controls at 4, 8 and 12 months. At each visit, best-corrected visual acuity, and cycloplegic autorefraction were assessed. Axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth and pupil diameter were measured on an IOL Master (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc, Dublin, CA). Adverse effects were registered in a specific questionnaire. Mean changes in cycloplegic SE and AL in the 12 months follow-up were analyzed. SE progression during treatment was compared with the SE progression in the year before enrollment for each patient. Correlation between SE and AL, and annual progression distribution were evaluated. Progression risk factors were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression analyses. Of the 105 recruited children, 92 completed the treatment. Mean SE and AL changes were - 0.44 ± 0.41 D and 0.27 ± 0.20 mm respectively. Mean SE progression was lower than the year before treatment (- 0.44 ± 0.41 D versus - 1.01 ± 0.38 D; p < 0.0001). An inverse correlation between SE progression and AL progression (r: - 0.42; p < 0.0001) was found. Fifty-seven patients (62%) had a SE progression less than - 0.50 D. No risk factors associated with progression could be identified in multivariate analyses. Mean pupil diameter increment at 12-months visit was 0.74 ± 1.76 mm. The adverse effects were mild and infrequent, and decreased over the time. Atropine 0.01% is effective and safe for myopia progression control in a multicentric Spanish children cohort. We believe this efficacy might be extensible to the myopic pediatric population from Western countries with similar social and demographic features. More studies about myopia progression risk factors among atropine treated patients are needed.

Prevention of Choroidal Thinning by 0.01% Atropine Administered 24 h Before Exposure to Hyperopic Blur in Young Myopes

Purpose: To evaluate the persistence of atropine's effect upon choroidal thickness and ocular biometrics and its interaction with hyperopic blur in a population of young adult myopes. Methods: Twenty young (aged 18-35 years) myopic participants with spherical equivalent refractive error of -0.75 to -6.00 D (mean ± SD -2.85 ± 1.64 D) had subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) measurements derived from scans collected from the right eye only with a SD-OCT instrument (Copernicus SOCT-HR) before, as well as 60 min following the introduction of 3 testing conditions: (1) placebo/hyperopic (-3 D) blur, (2) placebo/hyperopic blur one day after administration of 0.01% atropine, and (3) placebo/no blur. Each combination of blur and pharmacological agent was tested on a separate day at approximately the same time of day between 9 am and 2 pm. Results: Repeated measures ANOVA revealed that hyperopic blur and placebo were associated with a decrease in choroidal thickness (mean change: -10.7 ± 2.7 μm, P < 0.001 after 60 min), whereas administration of 0.01% atropine one day before the introduction of hyperopic blur prevented the thinning of the choroid (mean change of +1.1 ± 3.7 μm after 60 min) compared to baseline (both, P > 0.05). There was also no significant difference between the baseline choroidal thickness measurements for any of the conditions tested. Conclusion: Low dose atropine can inhibit signals associated with hyperopic defocus that cause thinning of the choroid for at least 24 h after initial instillation.

Stepwise low concentration atropine for myopic control: a 10-year cohort study

The aim of this study was to analyze changes in refraction and evaluate the variables in school children who received atropine as myopic control for 10 years. Low-concentration atropine (0.05%) was prescribed initially, and the dose was increased in a stepwise manner if rapid myopic progression (≥ 0.5D per half year) was noted during the regular follow-up visit. 23 children with a mean age of 6.96 ± 1.07 years were included. The initial spherical equivalent was − 1.25 ± 0.84 D. The overall mean myopic progression was − 0.30 ± 0.27 D/year. Younger initial age, female, higher initial spherical equivalent and the need of higher concentration of atropine were found to be risk factors for myopic progression in multivariate mixed-effect analysis (p = 0.013, 0.017, 0.024 and 0.014). Children who kept using a lower concentration of atropine (≤ 0.1%) tended to have slower myopic progression throughout the 10-year course than those who shifted to higher concentrations (> 0.1%) (p ≤ 0.001). Stepwise low concentration of atropine might be effective for long-term myopic control in school students. Those who had poor response to lower concentration of atropine may have the risk of faster progression, even with high concentration of atropine. Additional or alternative treatment might be considered.

Influence of Lenslet Configuration on Short-Term Visual Performance in Myopia Control Spectacle Lenses

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate short-term visual performance and optical quality of three different lenslet configurations on myopia control spectacle lenses.

Materials and Methods: This study utilized a cross-over design. Distance visual acuity (VA) was measured in 50 myopic children; contrast sensitivity (CS) was measured in 36 myopic children. For each test, four spectacle lenses were evaluated in a random order: single-vision lens (SVL), lens with concentric rings of highly aspherical lenslets (HAL), lens with concentric rings of slightly aspherical lenslets (SAL), and lens with honeycomb configuration of spherical lenslets (HC). The modulation transfer function (MTF) and MTF area (MTFa) were used to determine optical quality. All tests were performed monocularly on the right eye with full correction.

Results: HAL and SAL had larger MTFa than HC. VA in lenses with lenslets was significantly reduced compared to SVL (all p < 0.01). The reduction in VA was worse with HC than with SAL (p = 0.02) and HAL (p = 0.03); no effect of lenslet asphericity was found (p > 0.05). VA changes induced by lenslets showed no correlation with spherical equivalent refraction (all p > 0.05) and were weakly positively associated with age for SAL (r = 0.36, p = 0.01) and HC (r = 0.31, p = 0.03), but not for HAL (p = 0.30). The area under the log contrast sensitivity function (AULCSF) decreased with HAL and HC (all p < 0.001) in all illumination levels, and AULCSF with HAL was higher than that with HC in a photopic condition (1.17 ± 0.10 vs. 1.10 ± 0.13, p = 0.0004). The presence of lenslets did not affect CS at 3 cycles per degree (cpd) (p = 0.80). At 6 to 18 cpd, CS was significantly reduced by HAL and HC (all p < 0.05), but not SAL (p > 0.05) compared to SVL. At high spatial frequencies (>12 cpd) both SAL and HAL reduced CS significantly less than HC (all p < 0.01).

Conclusion: Short-term visual performance was minimally impaired by looking through the lenslet structure of myopia control spectacle lenses. Concentric rings with aspherical lenslets had a significantly lower impact on both VA and CS than honeycomb configuration with spherical lenslets.

Update and guidance on management of myopia. European Society of Ophthalmology in cooperation with International Myopia Institute

The prevalence of myopia is increasing extensively worldwide. The number of people with myopia in 2020 is predicted to be 2.6 billion globally, which is expected to rise up to 4.9 billion by 2050, unless preventive actions and interventions are taken. The number of individuals with high myopia is also increasing substantially and pathological myopia is predicted to become the most common cause of irreversible vision impairment and blindness worldwide and also in Europe. These prevalence estimates indicate the importance of reducing the burden of myopia by means of myopia control interventions to prevent myopia onset and to slow down myopia progression. Due to the urgency of the situation, the European Society of Ophthalmology decided to publish this update of the current information and guidance on management of myopia. The pathogenesis and genetics of myopia are also summarized and epidemiology, risk factors, preventive and treatment options are discussed in details.

The Effect of Long-Term Low-Dose Atropine on Refractive Progression in Myopic Australian School Children

Myopia will affect half the global population by 2050 and is a leading cause of vision impairment. High-dose atropine slows myopia progression but with undesirable side-effects. Low-dose atropine is an alternative. We report the effects of 0.01% or 0.005% atropine eye drops on myopia progression in 13 Australian children aged between 2 and 18 years and observed for 2 years without and up to 5 years (mean 2.8 years) with treatment. Prior to treatment, myopia progression was either ‘slow’ (more positive than −0.5 D/year; mean −0.19 D/year) or ‘fast’ (more negative than −0.5 D/year; mean −1.01 D/year). Atropine reduced myopic progression rates (slow: −0.07 D/year, fast: −0.25 D/year, combined: before: −0.74, during: −0.18 D/year, p = 0.03). Rebound occurred in 3/4 eyes that ceased atropine. Atropine halved axial growth in the ‘Slow’ group relative to an age-matched model of untreated myopes (0.098 vs. 0.196 mm/year, p < 0.001) but was double that in emmetropes (0.051 mm/year, p < 0.01). Atropine did not slow axial growth in ‘fast’ progressors compared to the age-matched untreated myope model (0.265 vs. 0.245 mm/year, p = 0.754, Power = 0.8). Adverse effects (69% of patients) included dilated pupils (6/13) more common in children with blue eyes (5/7, p = 0.04). Low-dose atropine could not remove initial myopia offsets suggesting treatment should commence in at-risk children as young as possible.

Side effects of topical atropine 0.05% compared to 0.01% for myopia control in German school children: a pilot study

PURPOSE

Based on findings of the Asian low-concentration atropine for myopia progression study, a concentration of 0.05% has been proposed as a good compromise between safety and efficacy for myopia control. However, no data on side effects have been published so far in Caucasian children receiving this dose.

METHODS

Prior to commencement of bilateral atropine treatment with 0.05% atropine, 19 myopic children aged 5 to 15 years were treated in only one eye at bedtime leaving the other eye as a control. Pupil size, accommodation amplitude and near visual acuity were measured at 10:00 a.m. the next day and compared to the untreated contralateral control eye. The results were then compared to a cohort of 18 children whose treatment with 0.01% atropine commenced in a similar fashion.

RESULTS

Twelve children (63%) reported visual impairment or reading difficulties. Anisocoria was 2.9 ± 1.1 mm. In comparison, 0.01% atropine led to a significantly less anisocoria of 0.8 ± 0.7 mm (p < 0.0001). Accommodation was decreased by - 4.2 ± 3.8 D in 0.05% atropine treated eyes, whereas 0.01% atropine induced hypoaccommodation of - 0.05 ± 2.5 D (p < 0.01). Near visual acuity was not significantly reduced in eyes treated with 0.05% atropine compared to 0.01% atropine (p = 0.26).

CONCLUSION

Compared to 0.01%, our data indicate stronger more relevant side effects of 0.05% topical atropine in young Caucasian children with progressive myopia as recently reported in Asian children, potentially compromising acceptance and compliance.

Age Effect on Treatment Responses to 0.05%, 0.025%, and 0.01% Atropine: Low-Concentration Atropine for Myopia Progression Study

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of age at treatment and other factors on treatment response to atropine in the Low-Concentration Atropine for Myopia Progression (LAMP) Study.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis from a randomized trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred fifty children aged 4 to 12 years who originally were assigned to receive 0.05%, 0.025%, or 0.01% atropine or placebo once daily, and who completed 2 years of the LAMP Study, were included. In the second year, the placebo group was switched to the 0.05% atropine group.

METHODS

Potential predictive factors for change in spherical equivalent (SE) and axial length (AL) over 2 years were evaluated by generalized estimating equations in each treatment group. Evaluated factors included age at treatment, gender, baseline refraction, parental myopia, time outdoors, diopter hours of near work, and treatment compliance. Estimated mean values and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of change in SE and AL over 2 years also were generated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Factors associated with SE change and AL change over 2 years were the primary outcome measures. Associated factors during the first year were secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

In 0.05%, 0.025%, and 0.01% atropine groups, younger age was the only factor associated with SE progression (coefficient of 0.14, 0.15, and 0.20, respectively) and AL elongation (coefficient of -0.10, -0.11, and -0.12, respectively) over 2 years; the younger the age, the poorer the response. At each year of age from 4 to 12 years across the treatment groups, higher-concentration atropine showed a better treatment response, following a concentration-dependent effect (P_trend <0.05 for each age group). In addition, the mean SE progression in 6-year-old children receiving 0.05% atropine (-0.90 diopter [D]; 95% CI, -0.99 to -0.82) was similar to that of 8-year-old children receiving 0.025% atropine (-0.89 D; 95% CI, -0.94 to -0.83) and 10-year-old children receiving 0.01% atropine (-0.92 D; 95% CI, -0.99 to -0.85). All concentrations were well tolerated in all age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Younger age is associated with poor treatment response to low-concentration atropine at 0.05%, 0.025%, and 0.01%. Among concentrations studied, younger children required the highest 0.05% concentration to achieve similar reduction in myopic progression as older children receiving lower concentrations.

Efficacy in myopia control

There is rapidly expanding interest in interventions to slow myopia progression in children and teenagers, with the intent of reducing risk of myopia-associated complications later in life. Despite many publications dedicated to the topic, little attention has been devoted to understanding 'efficacy' in myopia control and its application. Treatment effect has been expressed in multiple ways, making comparison between therapies and prognosis for an individual patient difficult. Available efficacy data are generally limited to two to three years making long-term treatment effect uncertain. From an evidence-based perspective, efficacy projection should be conservative and not extend beyond that which has been empirically established. Using this principle, review of the literature, data from our own clinical studies, assessment of demonstrated myopia control treatments and allowance for the limitations and context of available data, we arrive at the following important interpretations: (i) axial elongation is the preferred endpoint for assessing myopic progression; (ii) there is insufficient evidence to suggest that faster progressors, or younger myopes, derive greater benefit from treatment; (iii) the initial rate of reduction of axial elongation by myopia control treatments is not sustained; (iv) consequently, using percentage reduction in progression as an index to describe treatment effect can be very misleading and (v) cumulative absolute reduction in axial elongation (CARE) emerges as a preferred efficacy metric; (vi) maximum CARE that has been measured for existing myopia control treatments is 0.44 mm (which equates to about 1 D); (vii) there is no apparent superior method of treatment, although commonly prescribed therapies such as 0.01% atropine and progressive addition spectacles lenses have not consistently provided clinically important effects; (viii) while different treatments have shown divergent efficacy in the first year, they have shown only small differences after this; (ix) rebound should be assumed until proven otherwise; (x) an illusion of inflated efficacy is created by measurement error in refraction, sample bias in only treating 'measured' fast progressors and regression to the mean; (xi) decision to treat should be based on age of onset (or refraction at a given age), not past progression; (xii) the decreased risk of complications later in life provided by even modest reductions in progression suggest treatment is advised for all young myopes and, because of limitations of available interventions, should be aggressive.

Slowing the Progression of Myopia in Children with the MiSight Contact Lens: A Narrative Review of the Evidence

Myopia has become a major public health problem in the world due to the increase in its prevalence in the past few decades and due to sight-threatening pathologies associated with high myopia such as cataracts, glaucoma and especially myopic maculopathy. This article is a narrative review of the evidence that currently exists on a contact lenses (CLs) specifically designed to correct myopia and to slow its progression. To contextualise the topic we discuss the different classifications and definitions that have been used for myopia, the current burden of being myopic, and current treatment options to prevent and control its progression. There is evidence that exposure to sunlight reduces the risk of myopia onset and pharmacological treatment with atropine has been shown to be the most effective therapy for controlling its progression, followed by optical interventions such as CL fitting (orthokeratology or CLs specific for myopia control) designed to decrease retinal peripheral hyperopic defocus that seems to be the theory that suggests that axial elongation is driven by this defocus and explains why the eye continues to grow abnormally after emmetropisation and generates myopia. We will especially focus on MiSight CLs. MiSight is a daily replacement soft contact lens that has been clinically proven and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to control the progression of myopia in children. We analyse the optical design of MiSight CLs, as well as the results of the different efficacy and safety studies that led to the approval of the lens by the FDA. We also expose current knowledge gaps, limitations and future directions.

Interventions to slow progression of myopia in children

BACKGROUND

Nearsightedness (myopia) causes blurry vision when one is looking at distant objects. Interventions to slow the progression of myopia in children include multifocal spectacles, contact lenses, and pharmaceutical agents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions, including spectacles, contact lenses, and pharmaceutical agents in slowing myopia progression in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; the LILACS Database; and two trial registrations up to February 2018. A top up search was done in February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We excluded studies when most participants were older than 18 years at baseline. We also excluded studies when participants had less than -0.25 diopters (D) spherical equivalent myopia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 studies (6772 participants). Twenty-one studies contributed data to at least one meta-analysis. Interventions included spectacles, contact lenses, pharmaceutical agents, and combination treatments. Most studies were conducted in Asia or in the United States. Except one, all studies included children 18 years or younger. Many studies were at high risk of performance and attrition bias. Spectacle lenses: undercorrection of myopia increased myopia progression slightly in two studies; children whose vision was undercorrected progressed on average -0.15 D (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.29 to 0.00; n = 142; low-certainty evidence) more than those wearing fully corrected single vision lenses (SVLs). In one study, axial length increased 0.05 mm (95% CI -0.01 to 0.11) more in the undercorrected group than in the fully corrected group (n = 94; low-certainty evidence). Multifocal lenses (bifocal spectacles or progressive addition lenses) yielded small effect in slowing myopia progression; children wearing multifocal lenses progressed on average 0.14 D (95% CI 0.08 to 0.21; n = 1463; moderate-certainty evidence) less than children wearing SVLs. In four studies, axial elongation was less for multifocal lens wearers than for SVL wearers (-0.06 mm, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.04; n = 896; moderate-certainty evidence). Three studies evaluating different peripheral plus spectacle lenses versus SVLs reported inconsistent results for refractive error and axial length outcomes (n = 597; low-certainty evidence). Contact lenses: there may be little or no difference between vision of children wearing bifocal soft contact lenses (SCLs) and children wearing single vision SCLs (mean difference (MD) 0.20D, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.47; n = 300; low-certainty evidence). Axial elongation was less for bifocal SCL wearers than for single vision SCL wearers (MD -0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.08; n = 300; low-certainty evidence). Two studies investigating rigid gas permeable contact lenses (RGPCLs) showed inconsistent results in myopia progression; these two studies also found no evidence of difference in axial elongation (MD 0.02mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10; n = 415; very low-certainty evidence). Orthokeratology contact lenses were more effective than SVLs in slowing axial elongation (MD -0.28 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.19; n = 106; moderate-certainty evidence). Two studies comparing spherical aberration SCLs with single vision SCLs reported no difference in myopia progression nor in axial length (n = 209; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical agents: at one year, children receiving atropine eye drops (3 studies; n = 629), pirenzepine gel (2 studies; n = 326), or cyclopentolate eye drops (1 study; n = 64) showed significantly less myopic progression compared with children receiving placebo: MD 1.00 D (95% CI 0.93 to 1.07), 0.31 D (95% CI 0.17 to 0.44), and 0.34 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.60), respectively (moderate-certainty evidence). Axial elongation was less for children treated with atropine (MD -0.35 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.31; n = 502) and pirenzepine (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.12; n = 326) than for those treated with placebo (moderate-certainty evidence) in two studies. Another study showed favorable results for three different doses of atropine eye drops compared with tropicamide eye drops (MD 0.78 D, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.07 for 0.1% atropine; MD 0.81 D, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.05 for 0.25% atropine; and MD 1.01 D, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.28 for 0.5% atropine; n = 196; low-certainty evidence) but did not report axial length. Systemic 7-methylxanthine had little to no effect on myopic progression (MD 0.07 D, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.24) nor on axial elongation (MD -0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.03) compared with placebo in one study (n = 77; moderate-certainty evidence). One study did not find slowed myopia progression when comparing timolol eye drops with no drops (MD -0.05 D, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.11; n = 95; low-certainty evidence). Combinations of interventions: two studies found that children treated with atropine plus multifocal spectacles progressed 0.78 D (95% CI 0.54 to 1.02) less than children treated with placebo plus SVLs (n = 191; moderate-certainty evidence). One study reported -0.37 mm (95% CI -0.47 to -0.27) axial elongation for atropine and multifocal spectacles when compared with placebo plus SVLs (n = 127; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared with children treated with cyclopentolate plus SVLs, those treated with atropine plus multifocal spectacles progressed 0.36 D less (95% CI 0.11 to 0.61; n = 64; moderate-certainty evidence). Bifocal spectacles showed small or negligible effect compared with SVLs plus timolol drops in one study (MD 0.19 D, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.32; n = 97; moderate-certainty evidence). One study comparing tropicamide plus bifocal spectacles versus SVLs reported no statistically significant differences between groups without quantitative results. No serious adverse events were reported across all interventions. Participants receiving antimuscarinic topical medications were more likely to experience accommodation difficulties (Risk Ratio [RR] 9.05, 95% CI 4.09 to 20.01) and papillae and follicles (RR 3.22, 95% CI 2.11 to 4.90) than participants receiving placebo (n=387; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antimuscarinic topical medication is effective in slowing myopia progression in children. Multifocal lenses, either spectacles or contact lenses, may also confer a small benefit. Orthokeratology contact lenses, although not intended to modify refractive error, were more effective than SVLs in slowing axial elongation. We found only low or very low-certainty evidence to support RGPCLs and sperical aberration SCLs.

Efficacy of atropine 0.01% for the treatment of childhood myopia in European patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atropine 0.01% in slowing myopia progression in European paediatric patients.

METHODS

Retrospective, medical records review study. Medical charts of paediatric patients with a myopia progression > 0.5 D/year treated with atropine 0.01% for at least 1 year were included. Patients receive a complete ophthalmic examination before and 12 months after initiation of atropine treatment. A group of myopic untreated children serves as a control group. The rate of myopia progression at baseline and 12 months after treatment with atropine was evaluated. The rate of myopia progression in treated and untreated patients was also compared. Adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

Medical records of 52 treated and 50 control subjects were analysed. In the atropine group, the mean rate of myopia progression after 12 months of treatment (-0.54 ± 0.61 D) was significantly slower compared with the baseline progression (-1.20 ± 0.64 D; p < 0.0001) and to the progression in the control group (-1.09 ± 0.64; p < 0.0001). The responders patients were 41/52 (79%), whereas 11/52 patients (21%) showed a progression > 0.50 D despite treatment. The only adverse event was temporary photophobia in five patients (9.6%), severe adverse events were not reported, and none of the patients discontinued the treatment.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose atropine significantly slowed the rate of myopia progression in European paediatric patients with a favourable safety profile.

Atropine 0.01% Eye Drops for Myopia Control in American Children: A Multiethnic Sample Across Three US Sites

INTRODUCTION

Topical atropine eye drops at low concentrations have been shown to slow myopia progression in East Asian studies. This study explored the effect of atropine 0.01% eye drops on controlling myopia progression in a multiethnic cohort of children in the USA.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective case-control study (n = 198) quantified the effect of adding nightly atropine 0.01% eye drops to treatment as usual on the progression of childhood (ages 6-15 years) myopia. Cases included all children treated with atropine for at least 1 year. Controls were matched to cases on both age (± 6 months) and baseline spherical equivalent refraction (SER) (± 0.50 diopters, D) at treatment initiation. The primary endpoint was the average SER myopia progression after 1, 1.5, and 2 years of therapy. A secondary outcome was the percentage of subjects with a clinically significant worsening of myopia, defined as a greater than - 0.75 D SER increase in myopia.

RESULTS

The average baseline SERs for the atropine (n = 100) and control (n = 98) groups were similar (- 3.1 ± 1.9 D and - 2.8 ± 1.6 D, respectively) (p = 0.23). The average SER increase from baseline was significantly less for the atropine group than the control group at year 1 (- 0.2 ± 0.8 D compared with - 0.6 ± 0.4 D, p < 0.001) and at year 2 (- 0.3 ± 1.1 D compared with - 1.2 ± 0.7 D, p < 0.001). Secondary analysis at year 2 revealed that 80% of the control group vs. 37% of the atropine group experienced clinically significant worsening myopia of at least - 0.75 D (p < 0.001). There were no major safety issues reported in either group.

CONCLUSION

Similar to results reported in Asia, atropine 0.01% eye drops significantly reduced myopia progression in a cohort of US children over 2 years of treatment.

FUNDING

Nevakar, Inc. Plain language summary available for this article.

A Pilot Study on the Efficacy and Safety of 0.01% Atropine in German Schoolchildren with Progressive Myopia

INTRODUCTION

Although the interest is growing in topical low-dose atropine to control myopia in schoolchildren worldwide, its use in children of European ancestry remains controversial and solid evidence is sparse. The Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (OCEBM) classifies the evidence for this therapy as level I for East Asian populations, but only level IV in non-Asian populations.

METHODS

Fifty-six children, aged a median of 11 years (range 6-17), were analysed after 12 months of topical treatment with 0.01% preservative-free atropine in both eyes at bedtime every day. Efficacy was assessed during treatment every 6 months. In a subset of 20 patients, treatment of the second eye was delayed by 1 day to enable a controlled safety assessment of side effects such as pupil dilation, hypoaccommodation, and near vision reduction.

RESULTS

Prior to treatment, the mean myopic progression was estimated as 1.05 D/year; after 12 months of treatment with 0.01% atropine, it was 0.40 D/year (p < 0.0001). The only consistently measurable side effect was the induction of 1 mm pupil dilatation, which was only noticeable in comparison to the non-treated eye during the safety investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical low-dose atropine appears to be safe and efficacious also in a cohort of European schoolchildren. These data should motivate researchers to conduct more randomised clinical trials.

Atropine 0.01% eye drops slow myopia progression: a systematic review and Meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate the effects of atropine 0.01% on slowing myopia progression.

METHODS

We searched for relevant studies in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Ovid, CBM, CNKI, VIP and Wan Fang Data in Chinese. A supplementary search was conducted in OpenGrey (System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe), the ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) from the dates of inception to June 30, 2018.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 1079 subjects were included (505 in the atropine 0.01% group and 574 in the control group). The results showed that the atropine 0.01% group exhibited significantly greater control of axial growth than the control group [MD=-0.12, 95%CI (-0.19, -0.06)]. There was also a statistically significant difference between the atropine 0.01% and control groups in the changes in axial length [MD=-0.14, 95%CI (-0.25, -0.03)], but the quality of evidence was low. There were no significant differences between the atropine 0.01% and control groups in the overall effect with respect to diopter value, change in diopter, distance vision and intraocular pressure [MD=0.08, 95%CI (-0.27, 0.42); MD=0.09, 95%CI (-0.17, 0.36); MD= -0.01, 95%CI (-0.02, 0.00); MD=0.08, 95%CI (-0.56,0.40)]. The sensitivity analysis showed that the conclusion of the Meta-analysis is relatively stable. With respect to adverse events, there were significant differences between the atropine 0.01% and control groups [OR=0.26, 95%CI (0.11, 0.61)].

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, atropine 0.01% eye drops offer benefits in controlling axial growth and safety without causing significant differences in diopter values, distance vision and intraocular pressure.

[Treatment options for progressive myopia in childhood]

The incidence of myopia is increasing worldwide. The associated increase in secondary and vision-threatening eye diseases will pose major challenges to patients, ophthalmologists, optometrists, opticians and healthcare systems. Since myopia begins in childhood and adolescence, progression can only be influenced in this phase of life. This article gives an overview of optical and pharmacological treatment options, which show average effect sizes of up to 50% progression reduction with a comparatively favorable side effect profile.

Update in myopia and treatment strategy of atropine use in myopia control

The prevalence of myopia is increasing globally. Complications of myopia are associated with huge economic and social costs. It is believed that high myopia in adulthood can be traced back to school age onset myopia. Therefore, it is crucial and urgent to implement effective measures of myopia control, which may include preventing myopia onset as well as retarding myopia progression in school age children. The mechanism of myopia is still poorly understood. There are some evidences to suggest excessive expansion of Bruch’s membrane, possibly in response to peripheral hyperopic defocus, and it may be one of the mechanisms leading to the uncontrolled axial elongation of the globe. Atropine is currently the most effective therapy for myopia control. Recent clinical trials demonstrated low-dose atropine eye drops such as 0.01% resulted in retardation of myopia progression, with significantly less side effects compared to higher concentration preparation. However, there remain a proportion of patients who are poor responders, in whom the optimal management remains unclear. Proposed strategies include stepwise increase of atropine dosing, and a combination of low-dose atropine with increase outdoor time. This review will focus on the current understanding of epidemiology, pathophysiology in myopia and highlight recent clinical trials using atropine in the school-aged children, as well as the treatment strategy in clinical implementation in hyperopic, pre-myopic and myopic children.