Treatment Trends in Dry Eye Disease and Factors Associated with Ophthalmic Follow-up Discontinuation in Japan

United States Regulatory Approval of Topical Treatments for Dry Eye

PURPOSE

To report the heterogeneity in methodology of clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of topical dry eye treatments.

DESIGN

Comparative analysis of clinical trials' methods.

METHODS

We reviewed the online, publicly available FDA database, application review files, ClinicalTrials.gov registry records, and journal articles for each FDA-approved topical dry eye treatment. For each trial, we extracted information about the study, patient demographics, treatment names and doses, sample size in each arm, and the measurement instrument in a systematic fashion.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials were included that assessed 5 topical treatments for dry eye (cyclosporine 0.05%, cyclosporine 0.09%, lifitegrast 5%, and loteprednol 0.25% eye drops and varenicline 0.03-mg nasal spray). Median treatment duration was 12 weeks (range, 2-24 weeks). In all trials, treatments, including varying concentrations of the same treatment, were compared with vehicle. Twelve trials (85.7%) evaluated a primary clinician-measured clinical sign, and 10 trials (71.4%) evaluated a primary patient-reported symptom. Corneal staining was the most frequently evaluated clinical sign primary outcome, reported in half (6 of 12) of the trials, and was graded using 4 different scoring systems. Conjunctival staining, conjunctival hyperemia, and tear production were each measured using 2 different scoring systems. Ocular discomfort, the only patient-reported symptom primary outcome, was measured using 5 different instruments.

CONCLUSION

A variety of outcome measures were used in these clinical trials. Clinically meaningful dry eye outcome measures and standardized measurements can optimize the assessment of and comparison of therapeutic benefits.

Estimated Annual Economic Burden of Dry Eye Disease Based on a Multi-Center Analysis in China: A Retrospective Study

Purpose: To conduct a multi-center analysis and assess the economic burden due to dry eye disease (DED) in China. Design: A retrospective and cross-sectional study. Methods: Patients (n = 598) with diagnosed DED were recruited from 3 eye centers (in central, southeast, and northeast China) from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2018. Data were collected regarding the examination, pharmacological therapy, and non-pharmacological therapy fees. Sub-group analyses were stratified by eye center, DED severity, types of DED, number of visits to physicians, and residential area. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to investigate the variables influencing total costs. Results: The per capita costs devoted to DED at the 3 centers were 422.6, 391.3, and 265.4 USD, respectively. The costs of non-pharmacological therapy accounted the largest part in three centers (75.6, 76.4, 76.5%, respectively). Patients with severe DED sustained the largest economic burden. Patients with mixed type of DED spent the most comparing to patients with either evaporative or aqueous-deficient types of DED. Patients spent more during the first visit compared with subsequent visits. Patients living in urban areas spent significantly more than did those living in rural areas (P = 0.001). The logistics regression analysis showed that total costs were significantly influenced by DED severity, number of visits to physicians, and area of residence (beta = 2.83, 0.83, 1.48; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: DED is a chronic ocular disease that timely non-cost counseling, early diagnosis, and efficacious treatment can reduce its economic burden on patients and the society.

Tear film interferometry assessment after intense pulsed light in dry eye disease: A randomized, single masked, sham-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Inadequate meibomian glands (MGs) secretion can lead to dry eye signs and symptoms. Tear film lipid layer (TFLL) secreted by MGs protects and prevents rapid evaporation of tear film. The purpose was to assess TFLL alteration and function in patients with evaporative dry eye (EDE) using tear interferometry after optimal pulse light technology (OPT) intense pulsed light (IPL).

METHODS

This prospective randomized examiner-masked sham- controlled study included 86 participants (142 eyes) with DED. IPL or sham procedure was performed on day 0, 21, and 42. Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), non-invasive breakup time (NITBUT), interferometric fringe pattern determined TFLL quality, fluorescein staining (FS), and meibum gland (MG) were assessed at day 0, 21, 42 and 3-month.

RESULTS

At 3-month, TFLL, NITBUT, MG drop-out, MG quality, MG expressibility, FS and OSDI improved significantly (P < 0.05) in the IPL group, while the sham group had no significant improvements. Except for Meibo-score and FS, all parameters significantly correlated with the improvement in TFLL following IPL treatment. Additionally, artificial tears usage was significantly less in the IPL group from D-42 onwards.

CONCLUSION

IPL treatment demonstrated the ability to improve TFLL quality and clinically reduced sign and symptoms of DED thereby reducing the frequency of artificial tears use.

Heterogeneity of eye drop use among symptomatic dry eye individuals in Japan: large-scale crowdsourced research using DryEyeRhythm application

PURPOSE

To determine eye drop type and usage frequency and investigate risk factors for no eye drop use in individuals with symptomatic dry eye (DE) in Japan.

STUDY DESIGN

Crowdsourced observational study.

METHODS

This study was conducted using the DryEyeRhythm smartphone application between November 2016 and September 2019. Data collected included the type and frequency of eye drop use, demographics, medical history, lifestyle, and self-reported symptoms. Symptomatic DE was defined as an Ocular Surface Disease Index total score of ≥ 13. Risk factors for no eye drop use were identified using multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Among 2619 individuals with symptomatic DE, 1876 did not use eye drops. The most common eye drop type was artificial tears (53.4%), followed by hyaluronic acid 0.1% (33.1%) and diquafosol sodium 3% (18.7%). Risk factors (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) for no eye drop use were age (0.97 [0.97-0.98]), body mass index (1.04 [1.01-1.07]), brain disease (0.38 [0.15-0.98]), collagen disease (0.30 [0.13-0.68]), mental illness other than depression and schizophrenia (0.65 [0.45-0.93]), cataract surgery (0.12 [0.02-0.59]), ophthalmic surgery other than cataract and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (0.55 [0.34-0.88]), current (0.47 [0.38-0.57]) or past (0.58 [0.43-0.77]) contact lens use, >8 h screen exposure time (1.38 [1.05-1.81]), <6 h (1.24 [1.01-1.52]) and >9 h (1.34 [1.04-1.72]) sleep time, and water intake (0.97 [0.94-0.98]).

CONCLUSION

Many participants with symptomatic DE did not use optimized eye drop treatment and identified risk factors for no eye drop use. The DryEyeRhythm application may help improve DE treatment.

False Myths versus Medical Facts: Ten Common Misconceptions Related to Dry Eye Disease

Since the first definition of dry eye, rapid progress has been made in this field over the past decades that has guided profound changes in the definition, classification, diagnosis and management of the disease. Although dry eye is one of the most frequently encountered ocular conditions, various “old” misconceptions persist, in particular among comprehensive ophthalmologists not specialized in ocular surface diseases. These misconceptions hamper the correct diagnosis and the proper management of dry eye in the routine clinical practice. In the present review, we described the 10 most common misconceptions related to dry eye and provided an evidence-based guide for reconsidering them using the format “false myth versus medical fact”. These misconceptions concern the dry eye definition and classification (#1, #2, #3), disease physiopathology (#4), diagnosis (#5), symptoms (#6, #7) and treatment (#8, #9, #10). Nowadays, dry eye is still an under-recognized and evolving disease that poses significant clinical challenges to ophthalmologists. The two major reasons behind these challenges include the heterogeneity of the conditions that fall under the umbrella term of dry eye and the common discrepancy between signs and symptoms.