ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Efficacy and Safety of 0.1% Cyclosporine versus 2% Cyclosporine in the Treatment of Severe Vernal Keratoconjunctivitis in Children.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immunosuppressants in women with repeated implantation failure in assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024Pooled it
- Vernal Keratoconjunctivitis: A Systematic Review.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2023Pooled it
- Pediatric Vernal Keratoconjunctivitis (VKC): Current State and Future Directions-A Narrative Review of Clinical Features, Diagnostic Strategies, and Emerging Therapies.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Vernal Keratoconjunctivitis: Immunopathological Insights and Therapeutic Applications of Immunomodulators.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Clinical Outcomes of Topical 0.1% Ciclosporin Cationic Emulsion Used on Label in Children with Vernal Keratoconjunctivitis.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- The impact of the use of immunosuppressive treatment after an embryo transfer in increasing the rate of live birth.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) is an inflammatory condition in children that can cause severe eye complications. Treatment is based on corticosteroid therapy during flare-ups, then antihistamines and cyclosporine in calmer periods. The dosage and posology of cyclosporine are subject to debate. Methods: The aim of the study is to compare the evolution in symptomatic and clinical scores, and need for topical corticosteroid treatment in a population of children with severe VKC treated with two dosages of cyclosporine treatment (0.1% and 2%). Data were compiled on inclusion then every three months from March, with a total follow-up duration of 12 months. Data concerning patient evolutions and complications were collected for the two treatment groups. Results: The mean age of the 46 children was 8.8 ±2.4 years with age at onset of symptoms of 5.1 ± 0.9 years. The cohort was predominantly (65%) male. Corticosteroid dependence on inclusion was present in 52% of the children included. A significant improvement in the various symptomatic and clinical scores was observed following treatment with cyclosporine (0.1% and 2%). Use of topical corticosteroid treatment reduced from 19 drops per month on inclusion to 4 drops per month at 12 months. Safety was comparable for the two groups. Conclusion: Treatments with cyclosporine 0.1% and 2% lead to a favourable evolution in clinical and symptomatic scores and reduced corticosteroid use. Cyclosporine 0.1% is an interesting alternative to the 2% dosage, particularly due to its availability and ease of handling.
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.