We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of Subjective Responses to Cyclosporine 0.05% Versus Lifitegrast 5.0% in Individuals With Dry Eye Disease.
Cornea 2023 Februrary 28
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to examine subjective responses to cyclosporine A (CsA) 0.05% versus lifitegrast 5% in individuals with dry eye disease.
METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of individuals with clinically diagnosed dry eye disease treated with both CsA 0.05% and lifitegrast 5% over the course of their disease. Information collected included demographics, comorbidities, and dry eye disease signs. Treatment preferences were noted as mild or strong for a particular medication, no preference, or unable to tolerate either medication. The primary outcome measure was patient-reported medication preference. The secondary outcome measure was an examination of individual and eye factors that related to medication preference.
RESULTS: Sixty-four individuals (mean age 66.73 ± 13.17 years; 82.8% male, 71.9% White, 29.7% Hispanic) used both CsA and lifitegrast over the course of their disease. Of those, 33 preferred CsA (12.5% mildly and 39.1% strongly), 14 preferred lifitegrast (3.1% mildly and 18.8% strongly), 12 had no preference (18.8%), and 5 could not tolerate either medication (7.8%) due to side effects. No demographic characteristics, comorbidities, or ocular surface findings correlated with medication preference.
CONCLUSIONS: In individuals who used both CsA 0.05% and lifitegrast 5% over the course of their disease, a higher frequency of individuals preferred CsA. No clinical factors correlated with medication preference.
METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of individuals with clinically diagnosed dry eye disease treated with both CsA 0.05% and lifitegrast 5% over the course of their disease. Information collected included demographics, comorbidities, and dry eye disease signs. Treatment preferences were noted as mild or strong for a particular medication, no preference, or unable to tolerate either medication. The primary outcome measure was patient-reported medication preference. The secondary outcome measure was an examination of individual and eye factors that related to medication preference.
RESULTS: Sixty-four individuals (mean age 66.73 ± 13.17 years; 82.8% male, 71.9% White, 29.7% Hispanic) used both CsA and lifitegrast over the course of their disease. Of those, 33 preferred CsA (12.5% mildly and 39.1% strongly), 14 preferred lifitegrast (3.1% mildly and 18.8% strongly), 12 had no preference (18.8%), and 5 could not tolerate either medication (7.8%) due to side effects. No demographic characteristics, comorbidities, or ocular surface findings correlated with medication preference.
CONCLUSIONS: In individuals who used both CsA 0.05% and lifitegrast 5% over the course of their disease, a higher frequency of individuals preferred CsA. No clinical factors correlated with medication preference.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app