4.2 Article

Safety and Efficacy of Cortisol Phosphate in Hyaluronic Acid Vehicle in the Treatment of Dry Eye in Sjogren Syndrome

期刊

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jop.2016.0147

关键词

inflammation; Sjogren syndrome; corticosteroids; dry eye; cortisol; hyaluronic acid

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Evaluation of 0.3% cortisol phosphate eye drops in hyaluronic acid vehicle in the treatment of dry eye in Sjogren Syndrome. Methods: This prospective, single-center, masked (single blind), randomized controlled study included 40 female patients divided into 2 groups, group 1 treated with Idracemi, 0.3% cortisol phosphate eye drops twice a day, and group 2 treated with Cortivis, 0.3% cortisol phosphate in hyaluronic acid vehicle, with the same posology. Screening (day -7), randomization (day 0), follow-up (day 7), and termination (day 28) visits were conducted. Symptoms (VAS) questionnaire, tear film breakup time, corneo-conjunctival stain, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement, and fundus examination were performed at each visit. Conjunctival impression cytology for human leukocyte antigen-DR (HLA-DR) expression at visit 1 and 4 was also performed. Results: No changes in IOP or fundus examination were observed in either group at each time point. Group 1 showed at day 28a statistically significant amelioration of symptoms and reduction of HLA-DR expression. Group 2 showed at day 7 statistically significant improvement of corneal and conjunctival stain versus baseline and versus group 1; the symptom score was statistically significantly better than baseline and versus group 1 after 28 days too. The HLA-DR expression and the epithelial cell area were statistically significantly reduced versus baseline and versus group 1 at the same time. Conclusions: Cortisol phosphate proved to be safe and effective in treating dry eye in Sjogren Syndrome patients in both formulations. However, the formula with hyaluronic acid vehicle proved to be more effective. Both formulations were very well tolerated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据