ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2022
Dose Uniformity of Loteprednol Etabonate (Submicron) Ophthalmic Gel 0.38% Compared with Prednisolone Acetate Ophthalmic Suspension 1.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual-Delivery Temperature-Sensitive Hydrogel with Antimicrobial and Anti-Inflammatory Brevilin A and Nitric Oxide for Wound Healing in Bacterial Infection.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
Abstract
introductionLoteprednol etabonate (submicron) ophthalmic gel 0.38% (LE SM gel 0.38%) is a corticosteroid formulation designed to retain the nonsettling characteristics of loteprednol etabonate ophthalmic gel 0.5%, but with reduced drug particle size to improve ocular penetration, allowing for reduced dosing frequency. This study compared the dose uniformity of LE SM gel 0.38% with branded and generic prednisolone acetate (PA) 1% suspensions under simulated in-use dosing conditions.
methodsDrug concentrations in drops of LE SM gel 0.38% and PA 1% suspensions, expressed from bottles that were shaken or not shaken, were determined during 2 weeks of simulated on-label dosing (LE SM gel 0.38%: three times daily; PA suspensions: four times daily). Sedimentation of drug particles was assessed for each product using dispersion analysis.
resultsThe mean (SD) percent declared drug concentration of LE SM gel 0.38% over 2 weeks was 103.2% (1.3%) when the drug was dispensed from shaken bottles and 103.3% (1.5%) when dispensed from unshaken bottles. However, for branded and generic PA suspensions, mean (SD) percent declared concentrations were 102.2% (1.4%) and 98.3% (2.9%), respectively, when dispensed from shaken bottles; and 89.2% (18.6%) and 78.3% (13.5%), respectively, when dispensed from unshaken bottles. Dispersion analysis showed that drug particles in LE SM gel 0.38% remained fully suspended under accelerated sedimentation conditions, whereas both branded and generic PA suspension drug particles settled out of suspension.
conclusionsLE SM gel 0.38% delivered the drug consistently at the declared concentration over the entire 2 weeks of simulated in-use dosing conditions, regardless of whether the drug was dispensed from shaken or unshaken bottles. However, both branded and generic PA suspensions required the bottle to be shaken to provide a consistent drug concentration.
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.