Search

Background OnabotulinumtoxinA 20 U reduces glabellar line (GL) severity at maximum frown for approximately 3 to 4 months. Small studies have suggested that >20-U doses may increase the efficacy and duration of response for GLs. Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate safety, pharmacodynamic response, and treatment satisfaction with onabotulinumtoxinA doses ≥20 U for GLs. Methods This 48-week, double-blind study compared 40, 60, and 80 U onabotulinumtoxinA vs 20 U and placebo in women with moderate or severe dynamic GLs on the Allergan Facial Wrinkle Scale. The following parameters were evaluated: the percentage of subjects with investigator-assessed ≥1-grade Facial Wrinkle Scale improvement from baseline at maximum frown (responders) at Week 24; the estimated median duration of response; the proportion of mostly/very satisfied responders on the Facial Line Satisfaction Questionnaire follow-up Items 1 to 5; and treatment-emergent adverse events. Results The modified intent-to-treat population (N = 226) had a mean age of 48.0 years, with similar baseline GL severity between treatment groups. Week 24 responder rates were 0% for placebo and 16.0%, 32.0%, 30.6%, and 38.5% for onabotulinumtoxinA 20, 40, 60, and 80 U, with significant (P Conclusions GL treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA doses >20 U demonstrated longer duration of response and higher patient-reported satisfaction vs the on-label 20-U dose with no apparent impact on safety variables. Level of Evidence: 2

The real-world use of onabotulinumtoxinA and incobotulinumtoxinA for cervical dystonia and blepharospasm treatment was assessed in two separate retrospective studies using identical protocols (TRUDOSE and TRUDOSE II). The studies were conducted in Mexico, Norway, and United Kingdom and designed to evaluate dose utilization of the two botulinum toxins in clinical practice. Eighty-three patients treated with both onabotulinumtoxinA and incobotulinumtoxinA for ≥2 years for each botulinum toxin were included, (52, cervical dystonia, 31, blepharospasm). All patients switched from onabotulinumtoxinA to incobotulinumtoxinA for administrative/financial reasons. A range of dose ratios (incobotulinumtoxinA to onabotulinumtoxinA) was reported, with the majority of dose ratios being &gt, 1. The mean dose ratio was &gt, 1 regardless of the study site or underlying clinical condition. The inter-injection interval was significantly longer for onabotulinumtoxinA versus incobotulinumtoxinA when assessed for all patients (15.5 vs. 14.3 weeks, p = 0.006), resulting in fewer onabotulinumtoxinA treatments over the study time period. Consistent with product labeling, no single fixed-dose ratio exists between incobotulinumtoxinA and onabotulinumtoxinA. The dosage of each should be individualized based on patient needs and used as per product labeling. These real-world utilization data may have pharmacoeconomic implications.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX) (Ozurdex; Allergan plc, Dublin, Ireland) is approved for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). This study assessed the real-world effectiveness, safety, and reinjection interval of DEX in adult patients with DME. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase 4, prospective, multicenter (18 U.S. sites), observational study. RESULTS: The study population comprised 177 patients (180 eyes; 93.8% previously treated). Baseline mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness (CRT) were 54.4 letters and 424.6 μm, respectively. DEX was administered as monotherapy or with other DME therapy (55%/45%). The mean reinjection interval was 5.0 months. Mean maximum BCVA change from baseline after the first three DEX injections was +9.1 letters, +7.7 letters, and +7.0 letters, respectively ( P < .001); 36.0% of eyes achieved 15-letter or greater BCVA improvement. Mean maximum CRT change from baseline was −137.7 μm ( P < .001). CONCLUSION: DEX used alone or with other DME therapy improved visual and anatomic outcomes in DME patients in clinical practice, with no new safety concerns. [ Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina . 2018;49:425–435.]

Phenotypic alterations in keratinocyte behavior are essential for maintaining epidermal integrity during growth and wound repair and rely on co-ordinated cell signaling events. Numerous growth factors and cytokines have been shown to be instrumental in guiding such changes in keratinocyte activity; here we provide evidence which proposes a novel epidermal signaling pathway mediated by the excitatory amino acid glutamate. Glutamate is the major excitatory neurotransmitter at synaptic junctions within the central nervous system; however, we have identified expression in vivo of several regulatory molecules associated with glutamate signaling in keratinocytes. In resting rat skin epidermis, different classes of glutamate receptors, transporters, and a recently described clustering protein were shown to display distinct distribution patterns, supportive of a multifunctional cellular communication pathway. Immunoreactive N -methyl-D-aspartate-type, α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole propionate-type, and metabotropic-type glutamate receptors were colocalized with the specific glutamate transporter EAAC1 in basal layer keratinocytes, and GLT-1, a related transporter, was expressed suprabasally. In full-thickness rat skin wounds, marked modifications in the distribution of N -methyl-D-aspartate receptors and EAAC1 were observed during re-epithelialization, and alterations in N -methyl-D-aspartate receptor expression accompanied embryonic epidermal development, implicating glutamate signaling in these important biologic events. Furthermore, we provide evidence that these receptors are functional in vitro . These data provide strong evidence to support a role for glutamate in the control of epidermal renewal, and therefore suggest potentially novel therapeutic targets for the treatment of skin disease and enhancement of wound healing.

Stefan Pfennigsdorf,1 Leo de Jong,2 Stefan Makk,3 Yvette Fournichot,4 Alain Bron,5 Robert J Morgan-Warren,6 John Maltman6 1Ophthalmology Practice, Polch, Germany; 2Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; 3Ophthalmology Practice, Graz, Austria; 4Ophthalmology Practice, Schlieren, Switzerland; 5Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Dijon, France; 6Allergan Ltd, Marlow, UK Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a fixed combination of bimatoprost 0.03% and timolol (BTFC) in a clinical setting, in a large sample of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and insufficient intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering on prior therapy. Methods: Patient data were combined (n = 5556) from five multicenter, observational, non-controlled, open-label studies throughout Europe. Patients were identified from 830 sites in Austria, France, Germany, The Netherlands, and Switzerland. Assessments were made at baseline, 6 weeks (in Austrian, German and Swiss centers), and 12 weeks in all centers. Results: BTFC lowered mean IOP from baseline by 5.4 mmHg over the 12-week duration of the studies (P < 0.0001). At study entry, 92.9% of patients were receiving another ocular hypotensive medication. In patients with no previous treatment (n = 311), BTFC reduced IOP by -9.1 mmHg, corresponding to a reduction from baseline of 36.4% (P < 0.0001). In patients receiving prior therapy of a prostaglandin analog, a ß-blocker, or a fixed combination, BTFC reduced IOP by a further 24.5%, 25.9%, and 21.4%, respectively. The majority of patients (90.3%) reported no adverse events. The most common adverse events were conjunctival hyperemia (3.2%) and eye irritation (2.8%). BTFC was rated as "good" or "very good" by 92.5% of physicians and 88.0% of patients. Most patients (96.3%) were equally or more compliant with BTFC than with their previous treatment. Conclusion: In routine clinical practice, BTFC achieved consistent IOP lowering in both previously treated and untreated patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. BTFC was associated with significant IOP reductions, good tolerability, and good compliance. Keywords: bimatoprost 0.03%, intraocular pressure, ocular hypotensive medication, prostaglandin analog, ß-blocker

Botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) products are injectable biologic medications derived from Clostridium botulinum bacteria. Several different BoNTA products are marketed in various countries, and they are not interchangeable. Differences between products include manufacturing processes, formulations, and the assay methods used to determine units of biological activity. These differences result in a specific set of interactions between each BoNTA product and the tissue injected. Consequently, the products show differences in their in vivo profiles, including preclinical dose response curves and clinical dosing, efficacy, duration, and safety/adverse events. Most, but not all, published studies document these differences, suggesting that individual BoNTA products act differently depending on experimental and clinical conditions, and these differences may not always be predictable. Differentiation through regulatory approvals provides a measure of confidence in safety and efficacy at the specified doses for each approved indication. Moreover, the products differ in the amount of study to which they have been subjected, as evidenced by the number of publications in the peer-reviewed literature and the quantity and quality of clinical studies. Given that BoNTAs are potent biological products that meet important clinical needs, it is critical to recognize that their dosing and product performance are not interchangeable and each product should be used according to manufacturer guidelines., Video abstract