44 2033180199
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Journal of Plant Biology and Agriculture Sciences

Sign up for email alert when new content gets added: Sign up

Treatments for Dry Eye Disease: a Comparison Analysis

Author(s): F. Buck Willis

 Treatments for Dry Eye Disease: a Comparison Analysis

F. Buck Willis, MBBS, PhD, FACSM;Justus W. Thomas, MD; Mark C. Vital,
MD; Fiaz Zaman, MD;John D. Goosey, MD;

Description:  The purpose of this meeting is to examine and discuss the evidence-based comparisons of the current treatments for Dry Eye Disease (DED).

            Introduction:Dry eye Disease (DED) effects up to 30% of the global population (2.25 Billion people) and thisinflammatory condition of ocular surfaceshas symptoms of visual disturbances, eye discomfort, tear film instability, etc.In the United States the average cost of treating this anomaly is over $6,500 with incidence rate of up to 20 million patients.This meeting will discuss three primary treatments of Cyclosporine 5%, Lifitegrast, and studies showing significance and differences between these treatments.    

A recent Systematic Review with meta-analysis was conducted on studies of Topical Cyclosporine 5% (Restasis®; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA).  The 12 studies (mean 25 weeks) included 629 subjects receiving treatment of Restasis.  The outcome measure shared between these studies was the Schirmer #1 test and the mean score reduction was 2.7mm.

A retrospective case/control study was conducted, measuring efficacy of Lifitegrast (Xiidra® Shire, Inc. Lexington, MA) versus other treatments in over 2,000 eyes.  The mechanism of action is different than Cyclosporine because Lifitegrast reduces ocular inflammation as an integrin antagonist that blocks binding of ICAM-1 to LFA-1 on the T-cell surfaces.  Testing in this investigation was accomplished with Schirmer’s tests, Corneal staining, and tear film Break Up Time (tBUT) in different sub populations.  Even with different testing mechanisms, these Lifitegrast patients showed significant changes, particularly in short-term follow ups. 

 

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

PRESENTATION:  The presentation we are proposing is a 90-minutesession led by panel of physicians and scientists.  The target audience includes physicians who treat DED.The initial 30-minute presentation will include thepathological overviews of the underlying diseases or conditions which cause DED:

·         Keratoconjunctivitis Sicca

·         Lacrimal gland dysfunction

·         Primary aqueous tear deficiency

·         Sjögren’s syndrome

·         Meibomian Gland Disease, Blepharitis

·         Graft host disease 

·         Exposure keratopathy

·         Post-surgical effects (including Post-LASIK or Photorefractive Keratectomy)

·         Post-contacts lens wear

Lecturers will then discuss research on efficacy and differences between the current treatments of Cyclosporine 5%, Lifitegrast 5%, Punctum Plugs, and other treatment methods.  The topic will discuss the differential analysis between these treatments.  Research has shown unique outcomes and differences between the three primary treatments,including the combined therapy of Cyclosporine with Plugs. 

Prospective Funding will come from Shire Pharmaceutical and Allergan Pharmaceutical.  The unique feature this symposiais that it will be presented as an evidence-based comparison of treatments and outcomes from the current standard of care treatments for Dry Eye Disease.  Our dates for this oral presentation are flexible according to your needs.

For more information please contact me at [email protected]Thank you.   F Buck Willis, MBBS, PhD, FACSM.  (409) 457-7894 (cell). 

 


PDF
 
Top