Search

Purpose To determine host and pathogen factors predictive of outcomes in a large clinical cohort with keratoconjunctivitis. Design Retrospective analyses of the clinical and molecular data from a randomized, controlled, masked trial for auricloscene for keratoconjunctivitis (NVC-422 phase IIB, NovaBay; clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT01877694). Participants Five hundred participants from United States, India, Brazil, and Sri Lanka with clinical diagnosis of keratoconjunctivitis and positive rapid test results for adenovirus. Methods Clinical signs and symptoms and bilateral conjunctival swabs were obtained on days 1, 3, 6, 11, and 18. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis was performed to detect and quantify adenovirus in all samples. Regression models were used to evaluate the association of various variables with keratoconjunctivitis outcomes. Time to resolution of each symptom or sign was assessed by adenoviral species with Cox regression. Main Outcome Measures The difference in composite scores of clinical signs between days 1 and 18, mean visual acuity change between days 1 and 18, and time to resolution of each symptom or sign. Results Of 500 participants, 390 (78%) showed evidence of adenovirus by PCR. Among adenovirus-positive participants, adenovirus D species was most common (63% of total cases), but a total of 4 species and 21 different types of adenovirus were detected. Adenovirus D was associated with more severe signs and symptoms, a higher rate of subepithelial infiltrate development, and a slower decline in viral load compared with all other adenovirus species. The clinical courses of all patients with non–adenovirus D species infection and adenovirus-negative keratoconjunctivitis were similar. Mean change in visual acuity between days 1 and 18 was a gain of 1.9 letters; worse visual outcome was associated with older age. Conclusions A substantial proportion of keratoconjunctivitis is not associated with a detectable adenovirus. The clinical course of those with adenovirus D keratoconjunctivitis is significantly more severe than those with non–adenovirus D species infections or adenovirus-negative keratoconjunctivitis; high viral load at presentation and non-United States origin of participants is associated with poorer clinical outcome.

To compare the ocular hypotensive efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of the Rho kinase inhibitor netarsudil and latanoprost vs monotherapy with netarsudil or latanoprost.Three-month primary endpoint analysis of a randomized, double-masked, phase 3 clinical trial.Adults with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension (unmedicated intraocular pressure [IOP]20 and36 mm Hg at 8:00 AM) were randomized to receive once-daily netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, netarsudil 0.02%, or latanoprost 0.005% for up to 12 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean IOP at 8:00 AM, 10:00 AM, and 4:00 PM at week 2, week 6, and month 3.Mean treated IOP ranged from 14.8-16.2 mm Hg for netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, 17.2-19.0 mm Hg for netarsudil, and 16.7-17.8 mm Hg for latanoprost. Netarsudil/latanoprost FDC met the criteria for superiority to each active component at all 9 time points (all P .0001), lowering IOP by an additional 1.8-3.0 mm Hg vs netarsudil and an additional 1.3-2.5 mm Hg vs latanoprost. At month 3, the proportion of patients achieving mean diurnal IOP ≤15 mm Hg was 43.5% for netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, 22.7% for netarsudil, and 24.7% for latanoprost. No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported; treatment-related systemic adverse events were minimal. The most frequent ocular adverse event was conjunctival hyperemia (netarsudil/latanoprost FDC, 53.4%; netarsudil, 41.0%; latanoprost, 14.0%), which led to treatment discontinuation in 7.1% (netarsudil/latanoprost FDC), 4.9% (netarsudil), and 0% (latanoprost) of patients.Once-daily netarsudil/latanoprost FDC demonstrated IOP reductions that were statistically and clinically superior to netarsudil and latanoprost across all 9 time points through month 3, with acceptable ocular safety.

To evaluate efficacy and safety of travoprost in pediatric patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma and demonstrate its noninferiority to timolol.Patients aged 2 months to18 years with glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized to receive travoprost (0.004%) or timolol eye drops (0.25% for patients aged 2 months to3 years and 0.5% for patients ≥3 years old) for 3 months in this double-masked, parallel-group study. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured and patients were evaluated at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months after treatment. Change in IOP from baseline to 3 months was the primary endpoint, and the test of noninferiority was based on a margin of +3.0 mm Hg using the 95% 2-sided confidence interval of the mean change.Of 157 patients included (mean age, 9.6 years), 77 received travoprost and 75 timolol. All patients experienced a significant reduction in IOP in the study eye at 3 months: the mean IOP change from baseline was -5.4 mm Hg for travoprost; -5.3 mm Hg, for timolol. The mean difference between travoprost and timolol at month 3 was -0.1 mm Hg (95% CI, -1.5 to 1.4 mm Hg). The most common treatment-related adverse events for the travoprost group were ocular hyperemia and eyelash growth. No serious adverse events were reported.This study found travoprost to be noninferior to timolol in lowering IOP in patients with pediatric glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Travoprost was well-tolerated, and no treatment-related systemic adverse events were reported.