Efficacy and Safety of Single-dose OC-02 (Simpinicline Solution) Nasal Spray on Signs and Symptoms of Dry Eye Disease: The PEARL Phase II Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Dry eye disease is a multifactorial disorder that affects the ocular surface, with symptoms including ocular irritation, impaired vision, and pain. Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonists are novel treatments for dry eye disease; this study investigates the nAChR agonist OC-02 (simpinicline solution) as an aqueous nasal spray. METHODS: PEARL (Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of OC-02 Nasal Spray on Signs and Symptoms of Dry Eye Disease) was a Phase II study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of OC-02 (simpinicline solution) nasal spray (OC-02 SNS) in adult patients with dry eye disease. Patients ≥22 years of age were eligible if they had an Ocular Surface Disease Index score ≥23, corneal fluorescein staining score ≥2 in >1 region or ≥4 for all regions, or Schirmer test score (STS) ≤10 mm; there were no restrictions on eye dryness score (EDS). Patients (N = 165) were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to vehicle (control; n = 42) or OC-02 SNS (0.11 mg, 0.55 mg, or 1.1 mg; n = 41 per group) and received a single dose of study drug (100 µL using a nasal spray atomizer) at visit 1 and visit 2 (15-19 days after visit 1). Primary efficacy outcomes were change in the STS from baseline to immediately after treatment administration (visit 1) and change in the EDS from before to 5 minutes after treatment during controlled adverse environment exposure (visit 2). FINDINGS: Baseline demographic and ocular clinical characteristics were similar across all groups. Single-dose OC-02 SNS improved the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease. For the STS, statistically significant and dose-dependent improvements were found from before to after treatment with OC-02 SNS versus vehicle (least-squares mean change from baseline: vehicle, 3.0 mm; 0.11 mg OC-02 SNS, 9.0 mm; 0.55 mg, 17.5 mm; and 1.1 mg, 19.6 mm). For EDS, statistically significant and dose-dependent improvements were found from before to 5 minutes after treatment with higher doses of OC-02 SNS versus vehicle (least-squares mean change from baseline: vehicle, -6.5; 0.11 mg OC-02 SNS, -9.4; 0.55 mg, -17.4; and 1.1 mg, -20.7). OC-02 SNS was well tolerated: only 2 ocular adverse events were reported (eye pruritis and keratitis), and the most common nonocular events were cough and throat irritation. IMPLICATIONS: Single-dose OC-02 SNS over a range of doses immediately and significantly increased tear production and improved eye dryness. Together with previous studies of OC-01 (varenicline solution) nasal spray, our findings suggest that agonist stimulation of nAChRs in the nasal cavity is a valid and effective mechanism to elicit natural tear production in patients with dry eye disease. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT03452397.

A Randomized Phase 2 Trial Comparing Omidenepag Isopropyl 0.002% Once and Twice Daily in Subjects With Primary Open-angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension (SPECTRUM-6).

PRCIS: No significant difference was found between the intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering of omidenepag isopropyl 0.002% once daily (QD) and twice daily (BID). However, adverse events (AEs) were higher in the BID arm; thus, QD dosing is the preferred dosing frequency for further investigation. PURPOSE: This phase 2, randomized, double-masked, parallel-arm, multicenter study (NCT03858894) was conducted in the United States to examine whether the efficacy and safety of omidenepag isopropyl 0.002% BID dosing was superior to QD dosing in subjects with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS: Randomized subjects (1:1) received omidenepag isopropyl 0.002% QD (n=50) or BID (n=48) for 6 weeks (after a ≤4-week washout period). IOP was measured at 8:00 am, 12:00 pm, and 4:00 pm at baseline and weeks 2 and 6. The primary efficacy endpoint was IOP at each timepoint at weeks 2 and 6. AEs were evaluated. RESULTS: Baseline mean diurnal IOP (±SD) post washout was 25.4±2.9 mm Hg (BID) and 24.6±1.9 mm Hg (QD). At weeks 2 and 6, clinically significant IOP reductions from baseline were observed for omidenepag isopropyl BID and QD treatments. Least-squares mean (±SE) IOP differences (BID versus QD) were not statistically significant (week 2: 0.44±0.68 to 1.08±0.65 mm Hg; week 6: 0.36±0.63 to 0.68±0.68 mm Hg) at any timepoint (all P > 0.05). AEs were 3-fold greater in the BID arm (41.7%; QD: 14.0%); the most frequently reported AE was conjunctival/ocular hyperemia (BID: 22.9%; QD: 2.0%). Five subjects discontinued omidenepag isopropyl prematurely, 4 of 5 owing to AEs (BID: 4; QD: 0). CONCLUSION: In this study, the benefit-risk profile of omidenepag isopropyl 0.002% QD was more favorable than the benefit-risk profile of BID. This difference was driven by a higher incidence of local tolerability issues in the BID arm.

A Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Two Lipid-Based Lubricant Eye Drops for the Management of Evaporative Dry Eye Disease.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two lipid-based lubricant eye drops in patients with lipid-deficient dry eye. METHODS: This Phase IV, multicenter, prospective, double-masked study enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) who had a tear film breakup time (TFBUT) of ≤15 seconds(s), and unanesthetized Schirmer I test of ≥3 mm to ≤12 mm in at least one eye, at both screening and baseline visits. Eligible patients (n=231) were randomized (1:1) and received either Systane® Balance (SYSB; n=117) or Refresh® Optive Advanced (RFO-Ad, n=114), four-times a day, for 35 days. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority for change from baseline in TFBUT at Day 35 (non-inferiority was established if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference between the treatment groups was > -1.0 s); secondary endpoints (test of superiority) were change in TFBUT and global ocular discomfort visual analog scale (VAS) score at Day 35. Other endpoints included the impact of dry eye on everyday life (IDEEL) treatment satisfaction scores (inconvenience and effectiveness) and safety. RESULTS: At Day 35, the mean change from baseline in TFBUT was 0.998 s in the SYSB and 0.868 s in the RFO-Ad groups with a treatment difference: 0.130 s; (95% CI -0.34, 0.60; P<0.0001) demonstrating non-inferiority of SYSB to RFO-Ad. The global ocular discomfort VAS scores improved in both groups, with a mean change from baseline of -9.7 and -8.8 in SYSB and RFO-Ad groups (treatment difference -0.8; P=0.62), respectively. No meaningful difference was observed in IDEEL treatment effectiveness and treatment inconvenience scores between SYSB vs RFO-Ad (P>0.05 for treatment difference). Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: SYSB lubricant eye drops were non-inferior to RFO-Ad for improvement in TFBUT in patients with lipid-deficient dry eye. Both lubricant eye drops improved TFBUT and ocular discomfort scores in patients with lipid-deficient dry eye.

A Review of Topical Cyclosporine A Formulations-A Disease-Modifying Agent for Keratoconjunctivitis Sicca.

Keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS) is a multifactorial disease characterized by tear hyperosmolarity, inflammation, and ocular surface damage. Cyclosporine A (CsA) is used as an effective disease-modifying agent to improve the signs and symptoms of KCS by reducing inflammation, which interferes with tear production. This review provides an overview of efficacy, safety, and limitations of currently marketed topical CsA formulations-including CsA ophthalmic emulsion, cationic nanoemulsion, and aqueous nanomicelles-and highlights newer technologies for controlled ocular delivery of CsA and their clinical implications. Long available emulsion formulations of CsA are oil-based and have several limitations, including slow onset of efficacy and low intraocular penetration and bioavailability. Aqueous CsA nanomicelle carriers produce rapid improvement in objective signs of KCS such as corneal and conjunctival staining as early as 4 weeks and have acceptable safety profiles. CsA formulations using semifluorinated alkanes or polyaphrons are currently in clinical development, having recently completed Phase 2 studies. Other carriers for CsA currently in the preclinical phase include microemulsions, polymeric aqueous and lyophilized micelles, and hydrogels; these novel formulations have yet to undergo clinical trials. Formulations that improve tissue availability of CsA may be beneficial in clinical practice by providing faster onset of relief and improving patient adherence.

Symptom improvement in dry eye subjects following intranasal tear neurostimulation: Results of two studies utilizing a controlled adverse environment.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the intranasal tear neurostimulator (ITN) in improving dry eye symptoms assessed in a controlled adverse environment (CAE®). METHODS: Study 1: Multicenter, subject-masked, randomized-sequence, crossover design. Single intranasal (active) and extranasal (control) ITN administration during CAE exposure. Study 2: Single-arm, open-label design. Intranasal ITN administration ≥2 times/day for 45 days, CAE assessment at days 0 and 45. In both studies, upon CAE entry, and every 5 min thereafter, subjects assessed eye dryness score (visual analog scale, 0-100 mm; EDS-VAS), and ocular discomfort score (ODS; Ora Calibra™, 0-4), for ≈2 h. Study 1: when ODS was ≥3 at 2 consecutive timepoints, subjects applied ITN intranasally or extranasally for ≈3 min, and again when achieving the same ODS criteria in randomized sequence. Study 2: days 0 and 45, ITN was applied for ≈3 min employing the same ODS criteria as Study 1. RESULTS: Study 1: Significantly greater pre- to post-application reductions in mean [SEM] EDS (-16.5 [1.7] vs -3.1 [1.7], P < 0.0001) and ODS (-0.93 [0.08] vs -0.34 [0.08], P < 0.0001; n = 143) with intranasal vs extranasal stimulation. Study 2: On day 0 (n = 52) and day 45 (n = 48), significant pre- to post-application reductions in mean [SEM] EDS (-15.9 [2.7] and -15.2 [2.4]; P < 0.0001), and ODS (-1.3 [0.2] and -1.3 [0.1]; P < 0.0001). Few device-related adverse events were reported, none serious. CONCLUSIONS: Acute symptom relief is significant with the ITN and remains undiminished after daily use.

Clinical Outcomes of Fixed Versus As-Needed Use of Artificial Tears in Dry Eye Disease: A 6-Week, Observer-Masked Phase 4 Clinical Trial.

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical effects of using fixed (four times daily [QID]) versus as-needed (PRN) dosing of an artificial tear product (polyethylene glycol/propylene glycol [PEG/PG]; Systane Ultra) in individuals with dry eye disease. Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, observer-masked, active-control, parallel-group trial, participants were randomized (1:2 allocation) to receive 1 drop of PEG/PG QID (n = 34) or PRN (n = 63) for 28 days. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in the total ocular surface staining (TOSS) score (according to the Oxford scale) at day 28. Results: At day 28, the change from baseline in least squares mean (LSM) TOSS scores for QID and PRN groups were -1.19 and -0.94, respectively (treatment difference [TD]: -0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -∞ to 0.21; P = 0.184); superiority of QID versus PRN dosing was not established, as the upper limit of one-sided 95% CI for TD was not <0 (prespecified limit). At day 28, for QID and PRN groups, the LSM change from baseline in Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) scores was symptom-bother, -7.0 and -2.94 (TD: -4.06, P = 0.037); treatment effectiveness, 2.43 and 0.16 (TD: 2.28, P = 0.278); and treatment-related inconvenience, -11.56 and -2.77 (TD: -8.8, P = 0.996), respectively. Incidence of adverse events was low (≤3.2%) in both the groups; no serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions: QID dosing of PEG/PG was not superior to PRN dosing in terms of ocular staining. The IDEEL symptom-bother score favored QID dosing, suggesting that regular use of artificial tears may provide better symptomatic relief than PRN use. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02446015.).