ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of a low-dose version of bromfenac 0.075% in DuraSite® (bromfenac 0.075%) compared with DuraSite® vehicle (vehicle) alone for the treatment of postoperative inflammation and ocular pain after cataract surgery. METHODS: A multicenter, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial of 240 subjects randomized in a 2:1 ratio to bromfenac 0.075% or vehicle was conducted. Subjects were dosed BID beginning 1 day before the cataract surgery, the day of surgery, and 14 days after surgery. A slit lamp biomicroscopy examination was performed to evaluate the signs of inflammation, including anterior chamber cells (ACC) and anterior chamber flare (ACF). The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of subjects with an ACC grade of 0 at Day 15. Secondary efficacy endpoints included the proportion of subjects who achieved a pain score of 0 at each postsurgical visual analog scale (VAS) assessment and the proportion of subjects with an ACF grade of 0 at Day 15. RESULTS: At Day 15, proportionally more subjects in the bromfenac 0.075% group than in the vehicle group had an ACC grade of 0 (57.1% vs 18.8%, respectively; P<0.001). At each of the postsurgical time points (Days 1, 8, 15, and 29), proportionally more bromfenac 0.075%-treated subjects (76.8%, 90.5%, 92.9%, and 85.1%, respectively) had no pain (a VAS score of 0) compared with the vehicle-treated subjects (48.2%, 38.8%, 42.4%, and 47.1%, respectively), and at each time point, these differences in proportions were statistically significant (P<0.001). More subjects in the bromfenac 0.075% group had complete ACF resolution (151/167; 90.4%) compared to those in the vehicle group (54/85; 63.5%). There were no new safety signals reported. CONCLUSION: Bromfenac 0.075% in DuraSite is safe, well tolerated, and effective at reducing inflammation and preventing pain associated with cataract surgery.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of difluprednate ophthalmic solution 0.05% (Durezol; Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX) compared with prednisolone acetate ophthalmic suspension 1% (Pred Forte; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) for endogenous anterior uveitis. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, 90 patients with endogenous anterior uveitis [>10 anterior chamber (AC) cells and an AC flare score of ≥2 in at least 1 eye] received either difluprednate 4x /day (QID) (n=50) or prednisolone 8x/day (n=40) for 14 days, followed by a 2-week tapering regimen. The main outcome measure was change from baseline in AC cell grade on day 14. RESULTS: At day 14, mean AC cell grade improvement for difluprednate-treated patients was similar to prednisolone-treated patients (2.1 vs. 1.9, respectively), proving noninferiority. At day 14, 68.8% of difluprednate patients had AC cell clearing (grade 0:≥ 1cell) compared with 61.5% of prednisolone patients. In the prednisolone-treated group, 12.5% of patients were withdrawn because of investigator-determined lack of efficacy; no difluprednate-treated patients were withdrawn for this reason (P=0.01). Clinically significant intraocular pressure elevation occurred in 3 difluprednate-treated patients (6.0%) and 2 prednisolone-treated patients (5.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Difluprednate administered QID is at least as effective as prednisolone administered 8x/day in resolving the inflammation and pain associated with endogenous anterior uveitis. Difluprednate provides effective treatment for anterior uveitis and requires less frequent dosing than prednisolone acetate. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial NCT00501579 was registered at the National Institutes of Health Registry in July 2007 ( http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00501579?term=sirion&rank=4 ).
