Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32021079›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020

Clinical Evaluation of a Novel Electromechanical Topical Ocular Drug Delivery System: Two Phase 1 Proof of Concept Studies.

Hugo Quiroz-Mercado, Ehud Ivri, Roberto Gonzalez-Salinas, Iraklis C Kourtis, Joseph Gilbert, José Francisco Pérez-Vázquez, Mark Blumenkranz, Jesús Jiménez-Román, George Marcellino

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. MistGoJournal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hugo Quiroz-MercadoAssociation to Prevent Blindness, Hospital Sanchez-Bulnes, Mexico City, Mexico.
Ehud IvriKedalion Therapeutics Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
Roberto Gonzalez-SalinasAssociation to Prevent Blindness, Hospital Sanchez-Bulnes, Mexico City, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0001-6654-5191
Iraklis C KourtisKedalion Therapeutics Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
Joseph GilbertKedalion Therapeutics Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
José Francisco Pérez-VázquezAssociation to Prevent Blindness, Hospital Sanchez-Bulnes, Mexico City, Mexico.
Mark BlumenkranzKedalion Therapeutics Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3099-6489
Jesús Jiménez-RománAssociation to Prevent Blindness, Hospital Sanchez-Bulnes, Mexico City, Mexico.
George MarcellinoKedalion Therapeutics Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5002-281X
Neoleukin Therapeutics (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSelf-administration of topical ophthalmic therapies remains challenging for many patients as errors due to improper technique are common. The aim of the current studies was to evaluate a novel electromechanical topical ocular drug delivery device designed to facilitate precise dosing and accurate delivery with substantially lower drug exposure than conventional eye drops. PATIENTS AND

methodsTwo randomized Phase 1 studies were performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single dose of a topical ophthalmic solution administered as a ~9 μL microfluid stream via the test device compared with a ~30-40 μL drop delivered via conventional dropper in healthy subjects (Trial 1) and glaucoma patients (Trial 2). In Trial 1, a 1% tropicamide/2.5% phenylephrine solution was administered via the test device in one eye and by conventional dropper in the contralateral eye. Pupil dilation was measured at 30 min intervals post-instillation and subject comfort was assessed using a visual analogue scale (range, 0-100). In Trial 2, patients were randomized to receive latanoprost 0.005% via the test device or conventional dropper. Intraocular pressure was measured at baseline and 4-8 hrs post-instillation.

resultsIn Trial 1 (N=20), mean (SD) pupil diameter 30 mins post-instillation increased by 3.4 (0.9) and 3.5 (1.0) mm in the test and control eyes, respectively. The mean comfort score was 81.7 for the test device versus 57.3 for conventional dropper delivery. In Trial 2 (N=18), the mean change in intraocular pressure following administration of latanoprost was -5.0 (1.8) and -4.3 (3.3) mm Hg in the test and control groups, respectively. No serious adverse events were observed in either study.

conclusionAdministration of a single dose of topical ophthalmic therapy via an electromechanical drug delivery device resulted in comparable effects on pupil dilation and intraocular pressure with lower drug exposure and increased patient comfort compared with conventional dropper delivery.

Indexed as

glaucomaintraocular pressurelatanoprostmydriasisphenylephrinesafetytopical ocular drug deliverytropicamide

Identifiers

PMID32021079
PMCPMC6980856
OpenAlexW2999534620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.