Phase 3 Randomized Study of Efficacy and Safety of a Dexamethasone Intracanalicular Insert in Patients With Allergic Conjunctivitis

Early Real-World Patient and Staff Experience with an Intracanalicular Dexamethasone Insert

Purpose

To evaluate both the early experience of real-world patients treated with dexamethasone ophthalmic insert (0.4 mg; DEXTENZA®), hereafter referred to as DEX, after cataract surgery as well as staff/practice integration of DEX relative to eyedrops.

Patients and Methods

This was a cross-sectional survey study of 23 cataract practices in the United States. Respondents were patients and practice staff who had experience with DEX following cataract surgery. Both patients and practice staff completed an online survey. Descriptive statistics summarized the survey responses to portray the experience of the respondents.

Results

Surveys were completed by 62 patients and 19 practice staff. Almost all patients (93%) were satisfied or extremely satisfied with DEX. Patients highly preferred DEX (93%) to topical steroid drops (7%) based on past experiences with topical steroid drops. Most practice staff (95%) were satisfied or highly satisfied with DEX, reporting a 45% reduction in time spent educating patients on postoperative drop use and a 46% decrease in time spent addressing calls from pharmacies regarding postoperative medications.

Conclusion

Incorporating the DEX insert into clinical practice in cataract surgery practices can improve patient adherence, while potentially providing significant savings to practices in terms of time spent educating patients and responding to patient and pharmacy call-backs.

Comparing Intracanalicular and Topical Steroid Use in Patients Undergoing Pterygium Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The study received funding from Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., Bedford, MA.We undertook this study to compare the efficacy of intracanalicular dexamethasone 0.4 mg with topical prednisolone acetate (PA) 1% in controlling postoperative pain and inflammation in patients undergoing pterygium surgery.

METHODS

This was an open-label, prospective, interventional, nonrandomized comparative trial. Thirty patients were assigned to one of the following groups: Group A [intracanalicular insert of 0.4 mg dexamethasone placed into upper and lower puncta during the procedure, followed by at postoperative month 1 visit institution of topical PA 1% twice daily × 2 weeks then once daily × 2 weeks] or Group B [nonintervention group with institution on postoperative day 1 topical PA 1% every 2 hours × 2 weeks then four times per day × 2 weeks then twice daily × 2 weeks then once daily × 2 weeks].

RESULTS

Fifteen cases and 15 controls were enrolled. There was no statistical difference in patient-reported pain or satisfaction between the case and control groups at 1 day; 1 week; and 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. There was no significant difference in time to an ocular hyperemia score of 0 between the two groups. There was no difference in the rate of corneal reepithelialization and recurrence rate (two controls). Nine eyes had transient ocular hypertension (seven cases and two controls).

CONCLUSION

Intracanalicular dexamethasone 0.4 mg may reduce the medication burden for patients who need prolonged postoperative steroid therapy as is routine in the setting of pterygium surgery. It is a safe and effective alternative to PA 1% drops alone for postoperative control of pain and inflammation in pterygium surgery.

DEXTENZA versus Topical Steroid or Antihistamine Therapy for Treatment of Allergic Conjunctivitis

Purpose

To compare clinical outcomes and patient preference for the dexamethasone intracanalicular insert (DEX) versus topical loteprednol (LOT) or olopatadine (OLO) for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis in a real-world model of allergen exposure.

Methods

This was a prospective comparative trial. Adults with testing-confirmed bilateral allergic conjunctivitis received DEX in the more symptomatic eye and either LOT 2 times daily or OLO once daily for 30 days in the fellow eye. The primary outcome was patient preference for treatment. Clinical outcomes included ocular itching and hyperemia, lid swelling, and watering/tearing. Safety outcomes included intraocular pressure (IOP).

Results

Thirty patients participated and completed the study. All received DEX in the eye with worse symptoms and 15 received LOT and the other 15 received OLO in the other eye. Patients preferred DEX (10/15; 66.7%) over LOT (4/15; 26.7%), with one patient having no preference (p = 0.0103). Patients had no preference between DEX (8/15; 53.3%) and OLO (6/15; 40%), with one patient having no preference (p = 0.1044). In the DEX/LOT cohort, ocular itching and hyperemia improved more with DEX than LOT (p ≤ 0.009), while in the DEX/OLO cohort, the DEX eyes showed greater improvement in conjunctival hyperemia (p < 0.0001) but not itching (p = 0.074). No between-group differences were seen in eyelid swelling or tearing/watering in either cohort. Mean change in IOP was similar between the DEX and LOT eyes (p = 0.4921), and mean IOP rose more in the DEX eyes than the OLO eyes (by <1 mmHg; p = 0.0403).

Conclusion

Overall, this real-world study demonstrated that the dexamethasone intracanalicular insert was as effective as a topical antihistamine/mast cell stabilizer and more effective than topical steroids in relieving the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis. This insert should be considered as an alternative to topical therapy for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.

Effects of Punctal Occlusion on Ocular Itching and Conjunctival Redness Associated with Allergic Conjunctivitis

PURPOSE

Punctal occlusion using punctal plugs has been successfully used to treat the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease. However, the effects of punctal occlusion on the symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis (AC) have been less well documented. There is some concern among clinicians that punctal occlusion may make signs/symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis worse by trapping allergens on the eye. The objective of this post hoc analysis was to address this question and thus assess the effect of punctal occlusion alone on ocular itching and conjunctival redness associated with AC.

METHODS

This was a pooled post hoc analysis of three randomized, double-blind, placebo insert-controlled clinical trials in subjects with AC. Enrolled subjects were generally healthy adults with ocular allergies and a positive skin test reaction to perennial and/or seasonal allergens. The study used a modified version of the traditional conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) model, which included multiple, repeated allergen challenges following placement of the intracanalicular insert. Subjects were rechallenged on Days 6, 7 and 8; Days 13, 14 and 15; and Days 26, 27 and 28.

RESULTS

The data set included 128 subjects that were administered placebo. Baseline mean (SD) ocular itching and conjunctival redness scores were 3.52 (0.44) and 2.97 (0.39), respectively. On post-insertion Days 7, 14 and 28, mean itching scores were 2.62, 2.26 and 1.91, respectively, representing 26%, 36% and 46% itching reductions, respectively (p < 0.001). On Days 7, 14 and 28, mean conjunctival redness scores were 1.98, 1.90, and 2.08, respectively, representing 33%, 36%, and 30% redness reductions, respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this post hoc pooled analysis, punctal occlusion with a resorbable hydrogel intracanalicular insert did not worsen ocular itching or conjunctival redness in this patient population.

Identifying and addressing common contributors to nonadherence with ophthalmic medical therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss common reasons for nonadherence and review existing and emerging options to reduce nonadherence with ocular medical therapy and optimize therapeutic outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Nonadherence can arise from patient-related issues (e.g. physical, cognitive) and healthcare-related issues (e.g. cost, access to care). Multiple strategies have been developed and evaluated to overcome these barriers to adherence. Identifying nonadherence and its cause(s) facilitates the development of strategies to overcome it.

SUMMARY

Many common causes of nonadherence can be mitigated through a variety of strategies presented.

In Situ Forming Hydrogel as a Tracer and Degradable Lacrimal Plug for Dry Eye Treatment

Lacrimal plug is an effective and widely therapeutic strategy to treat dry eye. However, almost all commercialized plugs are fixed in a certain design and associated with many complications, such as spontaneous plug extrusion, epiphora, and granuloma and cannot be traced in the long-term. Herein, a simple in situ forming hydrogel is developed as a tracer and degradable lacrimal plug to achieve the best match with the irregular lacrimal passages. In this strategy, methacrylate-modified silk fibroin (SFMA) is served as a network, and a self-assembled indocyanine green fluorescence tracer nanoparticle (FTN) is embedded as an indicator to develop the hydrogel plug using visible photo-crosslinking. This SFMA/FTN hydrogel plug has excellent biocompatibility and biodegradability, which can be noninvasively monitored by near-infrared light. In vivo tests based on dry eye rabbits show that the SFMA/FTN hydrogel plug can completely block the lacrimal passages and greatly improve the various clinical indicators of dry eye. These results demonstrate that the SFMA/FTN hydrogel is suitable as an injectable and degradable lacrimal plug with a long-term tracking function. The work offers a new approach to the development of absorbable plugs for the treatment of dry eye.

Thermal Pulsation with or without Dexamethasone Intracanalicular Insert for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: A Prospective, Masked Trial

Significance

Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) is among the most common causes of dry eye disease worldwide. Few studies have compared treatment options, and the basis for an evidentiary approach to MGD management is lacking. We have conducted a non-randomized trial evaluating the additive benefit of a recently developed therapy.

Purpose

To compare the efficacy of thermal pulsation therapy alone or combined with the dexamethasone intracanalicular insert (Dextenza) on the signs and symptoms of MGD.

Methods

This was a prospective, patient-masked, sham-controlled, non-randomized trial. All subjects underwent thermal pulsation therapy using the LipiFlow system. The dexamethasone intracanalicular insert was placed in the inferior canaliculus of the more symptomatic eye (DEX group), while sham punctal dilation of the fellow eye was performed to preserve patient masking (SHAM group). Key outcomes were improvement in meibum expressibility at 1, 4, and 12 weeks and patient treatment preference at week 12.

Results

Nineteen subjects underwent thermal pulsation therapy and received the DEX insert. Meibomian gland expressibility scores improved significantly in both groups at 1, 4, and 12 weeks, with significantly greater improvement in DEX eyes than SHAM eyes at 12 weeks (P=0.027). Improvement from baseline in TBUT was significant at all time points in DEX eyes and only at week 4 in SHAM eyes, with significantly greater improvement in DEX eyes over SHAM eyes at week 12 (P=0.028). Mean best-corrected visual acuity and intraocular pressure remained unchanged from baseline throughout follow-up in both groups, and no adverse events were noted. Combined therapy with DEX was preferred by 61% of subjects.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated a significant benefit of combining thermal pulsation therapy with the dexamethasone intracanalicular insert on signs of MGD including TBUT and meibomian gland expressibility score. Consequently, a majority of patients preferred combination therapy to thermal pulsation therapy alone.

Therapeutic Targets in Allergic Conjunctivitis

Allergic conjunctivitis (AC) is a common condition resulting from exposure to allergens such as pollen, animal dander, or mold. It is typically mediated by allergen-induced crosslinking of immunoglobulin E attached to receptors on primed conjunctival mast cells, which results in mast cell degranulation and histamine release, as well as the release of lipid mediators, cytokines, and chemokines. The clinical result is conjunctival hyperemia, tearing, intense itching, and chemosis. Refractory and chronic cases can result in ocular surface complications that may be vision threatening. Patients who experience even mild forms of this disease report an impact on their quality of life. Current treatment options range from non-pharmacologic therapies to ocular and systemic options. However, to adequately control AC, the use of multiple agents is often required. As such, a precise understanding of the immune mechanisms responsible for this ocular surface inflammation is needed to support ongoing research for potential therapeutic targets such as chemokine receptors, cytokine receptors, non-receptor tyrosine kinases, and integrins. This review utilized several published articles regarding the current therapeutic options to treat AC, as well as the pathological and immune mechanisms relevant to AC. This review will also focus on cellular and molecular targets in AC, with particular emphasis on potential therapeutic agents that can attenuate the pathology and immune mechanisms driven by cells, receptors, and molecules that participate in the immunopathogenesis and immunopathology of AC.