An evaluation of the efficacy of a cyclosporine-based dry eye therapy when used with marketed artificial tears as supportive therapy in dry eye.

摘要

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of marketed artificial tears in relieving the signs and symptoms of dry eye when used as supportive therapy to a cyclosporine-based ophthalmic emulsion. METHODS: Sixty-one patients were enrolled in this randomized, investigator-masked, parallel study of 6 months' duration. Eligible patients needed a Schirmer I score without anesthesia of 7 mm or less at day -7 and to answer that they needed artificial tears at least "some of the time." Corneal staining of 3 or more (National Eye Institute grid, 15 points) at day -7 and day 0 in the same eye was also required. Patients were randomized to one of three regimens: Restasis (0.05% cyclosporine) twice per day with Systane used a minimum of once per day (Restasis + Systane); Restasis twice per day with Refresh Tears used a minimum of once per day (Restasis + Refresh); and Systane alone used four times per day. Signs and symptoms were measured at days -7, 0, 7, 14, 28, 42, 120, and 180. RESULTS: A statistical difference was seen in favor of Restasis + Systane versus Restasis + Refresh for corneal staining (P = 0.0048) change from baseline and a trend (P = 0.0725) for increased tear film breakup time at 6 months. There were no differences between treatment groups for Schirmer score, conjunctival staining, or conjunctival injection. Significant differences were seen in favor of Restasis + Systane versus Restasis + Refresh for less ocular burning (P = 0.0210), stinging (P = 0.0314), grittiness (P = 0.0128), and dryness (P = 0.0132). Systane was better than Restasis + Refresh for less burning (P = 0.0288), dryness (P = 0.0480), and scratchiness (P = 0.0294). CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that the choice of concomitant therapy used with Restasis has significant effects on outcome measures. Both supportive therapies were compatible with Restasis.