Publications

Detailed Information

Comparison of 0.05% cyclosporine and 3% diquafosol solution for dry eye patients: a randomized, blinded, multicenter clinical trial

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorPark, Chang Hyun-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Hyung Keun-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Mee Kum-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Eun Chul-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Jae Yong-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Tae-im-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Hong Kyun-
dc.contributor.authorSong, Jong Suk-
dc.contributor.authorYoon, Kyung Chul-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Do Hyung-
dc.contributor.authorChung, Tae-Young-
dc.contributor.authorChoi, Chul Young-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Hyun Seung-
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-01T07:51:08Z-
dc.date.available2019-07-01T16:51:46Z-
dc.date.issued2019-06-17-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Ophthalmology. 19(1):131ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn1471-2415-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/156087-
dc.description.abstractBackground
This study is aim to compare the clinical effectiveness between the two most prominent dry eye disease (DED)-specific eye drops, 0.05% cyclosporine (CN) and 3% diquafosol (DQ).

Methods
This is a multi-centered, randomized, masked, prospective clinical study. A total of 153 DED patients were randomly allocated to use CN twice per day or DQ six times daily. Cornea and conjunctival staining scores (NEI scale), tear break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer test scores, and ocular surface disease index (OSDI) score were measured at baseline, 4 and 12 weeks after treatment.

Results
At 12 weeks after treatment, NEI scaled scores were significantly reduced from the baseline by − 6.60 for CN and − 6.63 for DQ group (all P < 0.0001, P = 0.9739 between groups). TBUT and Schirmer values for CN were significantly improved from the baseline at 4 and 12 weeks (P = 0.0034, P < 0.0001 for TBUT, P = 0.0418, P = 0.0031 for Schirmer test). However, for DQ, TBUT showed significant improvement at 12 weeks only (P = 0.0281). Mean OSDI score differences from the baseline to 12 weeks were improved by − 13.03 ± 19.63 for CN and − 16.11 ± 20.87 for DQ, respectively (all P < 0.0001, P = 0.854 between groups). Regarding drug compliance, the mean instillation frequency of CN was less than that of DQ (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant intergroup differences in safety evaluation.

Conclusions
The level of improvement regarding NEI, TBUT, and OSDI scores were not significantly different between the two treatment groups. However, with regards to the early improvement of TBUT and patient compliance, patients using CN improved faster and with greater adherence to drug usage than did those treated with DQ.


Trial registration
KCT0002180, retrospectively registered on 23 December 2016.
ko_KR
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Taejoon Pharm (Seoul, Korea), which affords funding only, but has not any other contribution to our research.ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherBioMed Centralko_KR
dc.subjectDry eye diseaseko_KR
dc.subjectCyclosporineko_KR
dc.subjectDiquafosolko_KR
dc.subjectTear break-up timeko_KR
dc.subjectSchirmer’s testko_KR
dc.subjectOcular surface disease indexko_KR
dc.titleComparison of 0.05% cyclosporine and 3% diquafosol solution for dry eye patients: a randomized, blinded, multicenter clinical trialko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박창현-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이형근-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김미금-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김은철-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김재영-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김태임-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김홍균-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor송종석-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor윤경철-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이도형-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor정태영-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor최철영-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김현-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12886-019-1136-8-
dc.language.rfc3066en-
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).-
dc.date.updated2019-06-23T03:40:55Z-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share