Therapeutic targeting of cellular senescence in diabetic macular edema: preclinical and phase 1 trial results.

Compromised vascular endothelial barrier function is a salient feature of diabetic complications such as sight-threatening diabetic macular edema (DME). Current standards of care for DME manage aspects of the disease, but require frequent intravitreal administration and are poorly effective in large subsets of patients. Here we provide evidence that an elevated burden of senescent cells in the retina triggers cardinal features of DME pathology and conduct an initial test of senolytic therapy in patients with DME. In cell culture models, sustained hyperglycemia provoked cellular senescence in subsets of vascular endothelial cells displaying perturbed transendothelial junctions associated with poor barrier function and leading to micro-inflammation. Pharmacological elimination of senescent cells in a mouse model of DME reduces diabetes-induced retinal vascular leakage and preserves retinal function. We then conducted a phase 1 single ascending dose safety study of UBX1325 (foselutoclax), a senolytic small-molecule inhibitor of BCL-xL, in patients with advanced DME for whom anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy was no longer considered beneficial. The primary objective of assessment of safety and tolerability of UBX1325 was achieved. Collectively, our data suggest that therapeutic targeting of senescent cells in the diabetic retina with a BCL-xL inhibitor may provide a long-lasting, disease-modifying intervention for DME. This hypothesis will need to be verified in larger clinical trials. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04537884 .

Safety and efficacy of bromfenac ophthalmic solution (Bromday) dosed once daily for postoperative ocular inflammation and pain.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and ocular safety of bromfenac ophthalmic solution (bromfenac) 0.09% dosed once daily for the treatment of ocular inflammation and pain after cataract surgery with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. DESIGN: Randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled or active-controlled, multicenter, clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS AND CONTROLS: A total of 872 subjects (872 study eyes: bromfenac in 584, placebo in 288). METHODS: Four randomized, double-masked, vehicle or active-controlled, clinical trials were conducted at 134 ophthalmology clinics in the United States. Subjects aged ≥ 18 years were randomized to receive either bromfenac 0.09% or placebo dosed once daily beginning 1 day before cataract surgery (day -1), continuing on the day of surgery (day 0), and continuing for an additional postoperative 14 days. Subjects were evaluated for efficacy and safety on days 1, 3, 8, 15, and 22. The primary efficacy end point was cleared ocular inflammation, measured by the summed ocular inflammation score (SOIS; anterior chamber cells and flare) by day 15. The secondary efficacy end point was the number of subjects who were pain-free at day 1. The data from the 4 trials were pooled for analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The SOIS and ocular pain. RESULTS: The proportion of subjects who had cleared ocular inflammation by day 15 was significantly higher in the bromfenac 0.09% group than in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). The mean SOIS in the bromfenac 0.09% group was significantly lower than in the placebo group at days 3, 8, 15, and 22 (P < 0.0001). The proportion of subjects who were pain-free at days 1, 3, 8, and 15 was significantly higher in the bromfenac 0.09% group than in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). The incidence of adverse events reported in the bromfenac 0.09% group was significantly lower than in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). On day 15, 84.0% of the bromfenac subjects had ≥ 1-line improvement in visual acuity compared with 66.1% of placebo subjects (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Bromfenac 0.09% dosed once daily was clinically safe and effective for reducing and treating ocular inflammation and pain associated with cataract surgery. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Once daily dosing of bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.09% for postoperative ocular inflammation and pain.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and ocular safety of bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.09% dosed once daily for the treatment of ocular inflammation and pain following cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. METHODS: A total of 455 subjects (455 study eyes: 230 bromfenac, 225 placebo) were enrolled in two randomized double-masked, placebo-controlled, clinical trials at 64 ophthalmology clinics in the United States. Subjects were randomized to receive either bromfenac 0.09% or placebo dosed once daily. Dosing began 1 day before cataract surgery (Day -1), continued on day of surgery (Day 0), and for 14 days following surgery. Evaluations were completed on Days 1, 3, 8, 15 and 22. The primary efficacy endpoint was cleared summed ocular inflammation score (SOIS) by Day 15. The secondary efficacy endpoint was the number of subjects who were pain-free at Day 1. RESULTS: The bromfenac 0.09% group was significantly higher compared to the placebo group in the primary endpoint of the proportion of subjects who had cleared ocular inflammation by Day 15 (P < 0.0001). The mean SOIS for the bromfenac 0.09% group was lower than the placebo group at Days 3, 8, 15, and 22 (P < 0.0001). More bromfenac 0.09% subjects were pain free at Days 1, 3, 8, and 15 (P < 0.0001). Fewer subjects in the bromfenac 0.09% group withdrew from the clinical trials due to lack of efficacy at Day 15 (P < 0.0001). Fewer adverse events were reported in the bromfenac 0.09% group than the placebo group. Limitations included advanced age, female predominance, and surgical nuances among cataract surgeons, making cross-trial comparisons difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.09% dosed once daily is clinically safe and effective for the treatment of ocular inflammation and the reduction of ocular pain associated with cataract surgery.

Non-clinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and safety findings for the antihistamine bepotastine besilate.

SCOPE: The purpose of this review is to examine published non-clinical literature on the antihistamine bepotastine besilate, including pharmacokinetic and pharmacologic properties. METHODS: Standard literature searches using diverse databases were used to find articles on bepotastine besilate published between 1997 and 2009. Articles primarily described non-clinical data utilized for the development of an oral formulation of bepotastine besilate and were published in Japanese. No publications of non-clinical data for an ophthalmic formulation were found in the database searches. FINDINGS: Bepotastine besilate is a second-generation antihistamine drug possessing selective histamine H(1) receptor antagonist activity. Bepotastine has negligible affinity for receptors associated with undesirable adverse effects, including histamine H(3), α(1)-, α(2)-, and ß-adrenergic, serotonin (5-HT(2)), muscarinic, and benzodiazepine receptors. Bepotastine possesses additional anti-allergic activity including stabilization of mast cell function, inhibition of eosinophilic infiltration, inhibition of IL-5 production, and inhibition of LTB(4) and LTD(4) activity. Bepotastine in vivo dose-dependently inhibited the acceleration of histamine-induced vascular permeability and inhibited homologous passive cutaneous anaphylaxis in guinea pig studies. In mouse models of itching, oral bepotastine inhibited the frequency and duration of scratching behavior. Multiple in vivo animal toxicology studies have demonstrated bepotastine to be safe with no significant effects on respiratory, circulatory, central nervous, digestive, or urinary systems. The concentration of bepotastine after intravenous administration of bepotastine besilate (3 mg/kg) in rats was lower in the brain than in plasma, predicting reduced sedation effects compared to older antihistamines. CONCLUSION: Non-clinical in vitro and in vivo studies have demonstrated bepotastine is a histamine H(1) receptor antagonist with favorable pharmacokinetic, pharmacologic, safety, and antihistamine properties as well as operating on other pathways leading to allergic inflammation beyond those directly involving the histamine H(1) receptor.