ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2014
Treatment of allergic conjunctivitis with bepotastine besilate ophthalmic solution 1.5%.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Randomized, Multicenter Phase 3 Clinical Trial Evaluating Intracanalicular Dexamethasone Insert for the Treatment of Allergic Conjunctivitis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Trial
- Efficacy and Toxicity Evaluation of Bepotastine Besilate 1.5% Preservative-Free Eye Drops Vs Olopatadine Hydrochloride 0.2% Bak-Preserved Eye Drops in Patients with Allergic Conjunctivitis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Trial
- Observer-masked trial comparing efficacy of topical olopatadine (0.1%), bepotastine (1.5%), and alcaftadine (0.25%) in mild to moderate allergic conjunctivitis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2019Trial
- A fluorescence-off based approach for sensitive determination of bepotastine in pharmaceutical and biological matrices considering human safety aspects: sustainability assessment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of cytotoxicities and anti-allergic effects of topical ocular dual-action anti-allergic agents.BMC ophthalmology · 2019Article
- Bepotastine besilate ophthalmic solution 1.5% for alleviating nasal symptoms in patients with allergic conjunctivitis.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2018Article
- Ocular itch associated with allergic conjunctivitis: latest evidence and clinical management.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2016Review
- An Investigator-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Effectiveness, Safety of Levocetirizine and Bepotastine in Chronic Urticaria.Indian journal of dermatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine the pooled per-protocol ocular end points from two conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) clinical trials of the dual-action antihistamine bepotastine besilate ophthalmic solution (BBOS) 1.5%.
methodsTwo Phase III, placebo-controlled, double-masked, randomized clinical trials were conducted at a total of six separate centers using the CAC model of allergic conjunctivitis. The same study design was employed for both clinical trials, with subjects randomly assigned to either BBOS 1.5% (n=78) or placebo (n=79) treatment. Each subject received one eye drop of the test agent bilaterally at different study visits 15 minutes, 8 hours, or 16 hours prior to a CAC. Primary ocular end points included changes in ocular itching reported at 3, 5, and 7 minutes and conjunctival hyperemia assessed at 7, 15, and 20 minutes following each CAC. Secondary ocular end points included chemosis as well as episcleral and ciliary hyperemia judged by investigators, and tearing (scored as either absent or present) and eyelid swelling judged by subjects.
resultsA statistically significant reduction in ocular itching was observed for BBOS 1.5% treatment compared to placebo at all time points (P<0.0001), while measures for onset and 8-hour persistence of action also reached clinical significance (ie, ≥1.0 unit difference) at a majority of time points. In addition, a significant reduction in conjunctival hyperemia was achieved at a majority of time points during the onset of action CAC test. Secondary end points were also significantly improved compared to placebo, most prominently for reduced tearing at all study visits and reduced eyelid swelling at the onset of action and 8-hour study visits. Adverse events were generally mild and transient.
conclusionBBOS 1.5% rapidly reduced CAC-induced ocular itching with duration of effectiveness of at least 8 hours after dosing. Certain secondary signs of inflammation were also significantly reduced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.