ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
Physician Satisfaction with Anti-Inflammatory Topical Medications for the Treatment of Dry Eye Disease.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of acoltremon ophthalmic solution 0.003% and cyclosporine 0.05% ophthalmic emulsion for increased tear production in patients with dry eye disease.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- Real-World Experience with Lifitegrast Ophthalmic Solution in Patients with Dry Eye Disease: A Provider Survey in the USA and Canada.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Potential of Combined 5% Lifitegrast and Tocopherol Eye Drops in Managing Inflammation and Oxidative Stress in Murine Dry Eye.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Lifitegrast in Treatment of Dry Eye Disease-A Practical, Narrative Expert Review.Journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Management of inflammation in dry eye disease: Recommendations from a European panel of experts.European journal of ophthalmology · 2023Review
- A Comparison of TearCare and Lipiflow Systems in Reducing Dry Eye Disease Symptoms Associated with Meibomian Gland Disease.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- Reproxalap Improves Signs and Symptoms of Allergic Conjunctivitis in an Allergen Chamber: A Real-World Model of Allergen Exposure.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- A Post-Acute Ocular Tolerability Comparison of Topical Reproxalap 0.25% and Lifitegrast 5% in Patients with Dry Eye Disease.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Trends in Topical Prescriptional Therapy for Old Patients With Dry Eye Disease in Six Major Areas of China: 2013-2019.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Effect of acupuncture versus artificial tears for dry eye disease: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2020Article
- Why Chain Length of Hyaluronan in Eye Drops Matters.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Impact of Attrition, Intercellular Shear in Dry Eye Disease: When Cells are Challenged and Neurons are Triggered.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDry eye disease (DED) is one of the most common ophthalmic disorders. Pathogenesis of the disease includes inflammation of the ocular surface and lacrimal gland. Two anti-inflammatory prescription treatments are currently available: cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% (CYC) and lifitegrast 5% ophthalmic solution (LIF). The objective of this survey-based study was to assess physician satisfaction with CYC and LIF for the treatment of DED.
methodsPhysicians currently treating DED patients with CYC or LIF were asked to rate the experiences of their patients currently or formerly using CYC and LIF, and their own perspectives on the two treatments.
resultsTwenty-one physicians participated in the survey, providing responses on behalf of 210 patients. Overall, physicians reported low levels of satisfaction with onset of action of CYC and LIF, and fewer than half considered either drug to be effective in managing symptoms or improving patient quality of life (QoL). Burning sensation and dysgeusia were the most frequently reported side effects. Onset of action and effectiveness after onset were the main switching drivers. Although two-thirds of physicians were satisfied with the overall effectiveness of CYC and LIF, all physicians agreed that more DED treatment options are needed, with >50% strongly agreeing.
conclusionPhysicians perceived a gap in DED management with currently available topical anti-inflammatory agents. Although satisfaction with CYC and LIF was high, few physicians considered these medications to be effective in managing symptoms or improving QoL.
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.