ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate once-daily nepafenac 0.3% to prevent and treat ocular pain and inflammation after cataract surgery. SETTING: Sixty-five centers in the United States and Europe. DESIGN: Randomized double-masked vehicle- and active-controlled phase 3 study. METHODS: Patients received nepafenac 0.3% once daily, nepafenac 0.1% 3 times daily, or their respective vehicles from day -1 to day 14 after cataract extraction. An additional drop of study drug was administered 30 to 120 minutes preoperatively. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with a cure for inflammation (score of 0 for both aqueous cells and flare) at day 14. RESULTS: Of randomized patients, 817 received nepafenac 0.3%, 819 received nepafenac 0.1%, and 200 and 206 received the respective vehicles. Significantly more nepafenac 0.3% patients had no inflammation (68.4% versus 34.0%) and were pain free (91.0% versus 49.7%) at day 14 than vehicle patients (both P<.0001). Nepafenac 0.3% was noninferior to nepafenac 0.1% for inflammation (95% confidence interval [CI], -5.73% to 3.17%) and pain-free rates (95% CI, -3.08% to 2.70%). At all postoperative visits, fewer treatment failures (P≤.0012) and more clinical successes (P ≤ .0264) were observed with nepafenac 0.3% versus vehicle. Nepafenac 0.3% was well tolerated and had a safety profile comparable to that of nepafenac 0.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily nepafenac 0.3% was noninferior to nepafenac 0.1% 3 times daily for prevention and treatment of ocular inflammation and pain following cataract surgery. The safety of nepafenac 0.3% was comparable to that of nepafenac 0.1%, with the added convenience of once-daily dosing. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Drs. Modi, Lehmann, Walters, Fong, Christie, Roel, Nethery, and Reiser have been paid consultants to Alcon Research, Ltd. Ms. Sager is an employee of Alcon Research, Ltd. Drs. Tsorbatzoglou, Philipson, and Traverso have no financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/administration & dosage , Benzeneacetamides/administration & dosage , Endophthalmitis/prevention & control , Eye Pain/drug therapy , Lens Implantation, Intraocular , Phacoemulsification , Phenylacetates/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ophthalmic Solutions , Treatment Outcome , Young AdultABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To examine the efficacy and safety of a new gel formulation loteprednol etabonate 0.5% in the treatment of inflammation and pain after cataract surgery. SETTING: Seventeen United States clinical sites. DESIGN: Prospective double-masked parallel-group study. METHODS: Patients with anterior chamber cell (ACC) grade 2 or higher after cataract surgery were randomized to loteprednol etabonate 0.5% gel or vehicle 4 times a day for 14 days. Primary outcome measures included the proportion of patients with complete resolution of ACC and grade 0 (no) pain on postoperative day 8. Safety measures included adverse events, intraocular pressure (IOP), visual acuity, biomicroscopy and funduscopy findings, and tolerability (ocular symptoms and drop comfort). RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included 406 patients (203 per treatment). On day 8, 30.5% of patients in the loteprednol etabonate group and 16.3% of patients in the vehicle group had complete resolution of ACC, whereas 72.9% and 41.9%, respectively, had grade 0 pain (both P<.001). Significant treatment differences for complete resolution of ACC and grade 0 pain favoring loteprednol etabonate were also found on day 15 and day 18. One patient in each treatment group had a significant increase in IOP (≥ 10 mm Hg). Analyses of pain, photophobia, and tearing favored loteprednol etabonate at different time points beginning on day 3. More than 85% of patients in each treatment group reported no discomfort on drop instillation. CONCLUSION: Loteprednol etabonate gel 0.5% was efficacious and safe in treating postoperative inflammation and pain. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Dr. Rajpal is a consultant to Bausch & Lomb, Inc., Allergan, Inc., and Alcon Laboratories, Inc. Dr. Siou-Mermet and Ms. Erb are employees of Bausch & Lomb, Inc. Dr. Roel has no financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
