Long-Term Outcomes of 6-Week Treatment of Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution, 0.25%, for Demodex Blepharitis: A Noninterventional Extension Study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of lotilaner ophthalmic solution, 0.25%, in the treatment of Demodex blepharitis. METHODS: This observational, extension study included patients with Demodex blepharitis (N = 239) who completed the Saturn-1 study and presented for the day 180 visit. All participants were assessed at days 180 and 365 after the initiation of 6-week treatment with the study drug or its vehicle. RESULTS: The proportion of patients with 0 to 2 collarettes (grade 0) was significantly higher in the study group (N = 128 patients) than in the control group (N = 111 patients) (39.8% vs. 2.7% at day 180 and 23.5% vs. 2.9% at day 365; P < 0.0001). Similarly, the proportion of patients with ≤10 collarettes (collarette grade 0-1) in the study group was significantly higher than in the control group (70.3% vs. 18.0% at day 180 and 62.6% vs. 21.9% at day 365; P < 0.0001). In the study group, erythema continued to improve even after completion of the 6-week lotilaner treatment. No serious ocular adverse events were observed in the study group, and there was 1 treatment-related ocular adverse event in the study group, which was considered mild. CONCLUSIONS: After 6-week treatment with lotilaner ophthalmic solution, 0.25%, for Demodex blepharitis, no long-term concerns were observed during 1 year of follow-up. A high proportion of patients with 0 to 2 collarettes (grade 0) or ≤10 collarettes (collarette grade of 0 or 1) was observed throughout 1 year of follow-up, indicating that the efficacy of lotilaner ophthalmic solution, 0.25%, against Demodex blepharitis may last well after completion of therapy.

Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution 0.25% for Demodex Blepharitis: Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled, Multicenter, Phase 3 Trial (Saturn-2).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% compared with vehicle for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred twelve patients with Demodex blepharitis were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% (study group) or vehicle without lotilaner (control group). METHODS: Patients with Demodex blepharitis treated at 21 United States clinical sites were assigned either to the study group (n = 203) to receive lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% or to the control group (n = 209) to receive vehicle without lotilaner bilaterally twice daily for 6 weeks. Collarettes and erythema were graded for each eyelid at screening and at all visits after baseline. At screening and on days 15, 22, and 43, 4 or more eyelashes were epilated from each eye, and the number of Demodex mites present on the lashes was counted with a microscope. Mite density was calculated as the number of mites per lash. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included collarette cure (collarette grade 0), clinically meaningful collarette reduction to 10 collarettes or fewer (grade 0 or 1), mite eradication (0 mites/lash), erythema cure (grade 0), composite cure (grade 0 for collarettes as well as erythema), compliance with the drop regimen, drop comfort, and adverse events. RESULTS: At day 43, the study group achieved a statistically significant (P < 0.0001) higher proportion of patients with collarette cure (56.0% vs. 12.5%), clinically meaningful collarette reduction to 10 collarettes or fewer (89.1% vs. 33.0%), mite eradication (51.8% vs. 14.6%), erythema cure (31.1% vs. 9.0%), and composite cure (19.2% vs. 4.0%) than the control group. High compliance with the drop regimen (mean ± standard deviation, 98.7 ± 5.3%) in the study group was observed, and 90.7% of patients found the drops to be neutral to very comfortable. CONCLUSIONS: Twice-daily treatment with lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% for 6 weeks generally was safe and well tolerated and met the primary end point and all secondary end points for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis compared with vehicle control. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Demodex Blepharitis: A Comprehensive Review of the Disease, Current Management, and Emerging Therapies.

ABSTRACT: Demodex blepharitis is a common disease of the eyelid, affecting approximately 25 million Americans. This article reviews what is known about the mechanisms and impact of Demodex blepharitis, risk factors, signs and symptoms, diagnostic techniques, current management options, and emerging treatments. Demodex mites contribute to blepharitis in several ways: direct mechanical damage, as a vector for bacteria, and by inducing hypersensitivity and inflammation. Risk factors for Demodex blepharitis include increasing age, rosacea, and diabetes. The costs, symptom burden, and psychosocial effects of Demodex blepharitis are considerable. The presence of collarettes is pathognomonic for Demodex blepharitis. Redness, dryness, discomfort, foreign body sensation, lash anomalies, and itching are also hallmarks of the disease. Although a number of oral, topical, eyelid hygiene and device-based options have been used clinically and evaluated in studies for the management of Demodex blepharitis, none have been FDA approved to treat the disease. Recent randomized controlled clinical trials suggest that lotilaner ophthalmic solution, 0.25%, is a topical treatment with the potential to eradicate Demodex mites and eliminate collarettes and eyelid redness for an extended period.

Clinical diagnosis and management of Demodex blepharitis: the Demodex Expert Panel on Treatment and Eyelid Health (DEPTH).

BACKGROUND: Twelve ocular surface disease experts convened to achieve consensus about Demodex blepharitis (DB) using a modified Delphi panel process. METHODS: Online surveys were administered using scaled, open-ended, true/false, and multiple-choice questions. Consensus for questions using a 1 to 9 Likert scale was predefined as median scores of 7-9 and 1-3. For other question types, consensus was achieved when 8 of 12 panellists agreed. Questions were randomized, and results of each survey informed the following survey. RESULTS: Twelve practitioners comprised the Demodex Expert Panel on Treatment and Eyelid Health (DEPTH). Following 3 surveys, experts agreed that DB is chronic (n = 11) and recurrent (n = 12) and is often misdiagnosed. Consensus was achieved regarding inflammation driving symptoms (median = 7; range 7-9), collarettes as the most common sign (n = 10) and pathognomonic for DB (median = 9; range 8-9), and itching as the most common symptom (n = 12). Panellists agreed that DB may be diagnosed based on collarettes, mites, and/or patient symptoms (n = 10) and felt that patients unresponsive to typical therapies should be evaluated for DB (n = 12). Consensus about the most effective currently available OTC treatment was not reached. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi methodology proved effective in establishing consensus about DB, including signs, symptoms, and diagnosis. Consensus was not reached about the best treatment or how to grade severity. With increased awareness, eyecare practitioners can offer DB patients better clinical outcomes. A follow-up Delphi panel is planned to obtain further consensus surrounding DB treatment.

Delphi Panel Consensus Regarding Current Clinical Practice Management Options for Demodex blepharitis.

Purpose: To obtain consensus on Demodex blepharitis (DB) treatment using a modified Delphi panel process. Methods: Literature search identified gaps in knowledge surrounding treatment of DB. Twelve ocular surface disease experts comprised the Demodex Expert Panel on Treatment and Eyelid Health (DEPTH). They completed a live roundtable discussion in addition to 3 surveys consisting of scaled, open-ended, true/false, and multiple-choice questions pertaining to the treatment of DB. Consensus for scaled questions using a 1 to 9 Likert scale was predefined as median scores of 7-9 and 1-3. For other question types, consensus was achieved when 8 of 12 panelists agreed. Results: The experts agreed that an effective therapeutic agent for treatment of DB would likely decrease the necessity of mechanical intervention, such as lid scrubs or blepharoexfoliation (Median = 8.5; Range 2-9). When treating DB, panelists believed that collarettes serve as a surrogate for mites, and that eliminating or reducing collarettes should be the main clinical goal of treatment (Median = 8; Range 7-9). The panelists would treat patients with at least 10 collarettes, regardless of other signs or symptoms and agreed that DB can be cured, but there is always the possibility for a reinfestation (n = 12). There was also consensus that collarettes, and therefore mites, are the primary treatment target and the way by which clinicians can monitor patient response to therapy (Median = 8; Range 7-9). Conclusion: Expert panelists achieved consensus on key facets of DB treatment. Specifically, there was consensus that collarettes are pathognomonic for DB, that DB patients with >10 collarettes should be treated even in the absence of symptoms, and that treatment efficacy can be tracked by collarette resolution. By increasing awareness about DB, understanding the goals of and monitoring treatment efficacy, patients will receive better care and, ultimately, better clinical outcomes.