ReviewJournal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection2025
Efficacy and safety of water-free topical cyclosporine for moderate to severe dry eye disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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.
Corrections and comments
- Retracted
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDry eye disease (DED) is a widely prevalent ocular symptom, with an estimated global prevalence of around 12%. The increasing prevalence of this disease among adults poses a significant morbidity burden. The aim of this study is to analyze the efficacy and safety of water-free cyclosporine, a new intervention suggested to be more effective in treating DED.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted using databases as PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science. Keywords used include "dry eye", "water-free cyclosporine", and "DED" among others. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of water-free cyclosporine in patients with dry eye disease were included.
resultsA total of 4 RCTs were included in our analysis, consisting of 1,471 participants. Primarily, efficacy outcomes were evaluated such as total and central corneal fluorescence staining score (tCFS and cCFS) and dryness score. Our secondary outcomes evaluated the safety of these drugs by considering the treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported. Water-Free cyclosporine showed no significant improvement in tCFS (MD: -1.08; 95% CI, -3.48 to 1.32) and cCFS (MD: -0.21, 95% CI, -0.50 to 0.08). However, water free cyclosporine showed statistically and clinically significant results in improving the dryness score (MD, -7.48; 95% CI, -14.5 to -.082). Pooled analysis of total participants reporting TEAEs, ocular and serious TEAEs was not significant.
conclusionOur meta-analysis analyzed the safety and efficacy of water-free topical 0.1% cyclosporine eye drops for the treatment of moderate to severe DED. A significant reduction in dryness scores provides hope for further development of this drug, potentiated with the little to no significant increase in risk of adverse events. There is a need for diverse trials with a greater population to validate these results and generate rigorous evidence.
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.