ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Reproxalap Improves Ocular Redness, Tear Production, and Symptoms in a Pivotal Dry Eye Disease Chamber Trial.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Reproxalap Treatment on Dry Eye Disease Symptoms: Analysis of Pooled Data From Two Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled, 12-Week Clinical Trials.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Ophthalmic Treatments and Evolving Management of Sjögren's Disease: An Overview.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Dry Eye Disease: Perspectives of a Patient and Both US and UK Physicians.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
- Bridging Therapeutics and Nanotechnology in Dry Eye Disease: A Review of Risk Factors, Drug Delivery Barriers, and Recent and Future Endeavors for Disease Management.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Review
- Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating the Safety of Reproxalap in Patients With Dry Eye Disease.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Reproxalap 0.25% Ophthalmic Solution in Dry Eye Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The primary objective was to assess the acute efficacy of 0.25% reproxalap ophthalmic solution versus vehicle in patients with dry eye disease. Design: This was a vehicle-controlled, randomized-sequence, double-masked, 2-period crossover trial. Participants and Controls: Sixty-three patients with dry eye disease were treated with reproxalap or vehicle in 2 treatment periods. Methods: For each treatment period, patients were treated 4 times for 1 day, followed the next day by 1 dose before and 1 dose during a 90-minute dry eye chamber. Washout between treatment periods was 7 to 14 days. Main Outcome Measures: The primary endpoints were ocular redness during the chamber and Schirmer test 10 minutes after the fourth dose on the prechamber day. The key secondary endpoint was ≥10 mm unanesthetized Schirmer test responders. Other secondary endpoints included symptoms in the chamber. Results: Relative to vehicle, reproxalap treatment statistically significantly diminished ocular redness and increased Schirmer score and percent ≥10-mm responders. All symptoms assessed in the chamber were statistically significantly lower after treatment with reproxalap versus vehicle. The most common adverse event in patients treated with reproxalap was mild transient instillation site irritation, most commonly lasting ≤1 minute. Conclusions: Within minutes of administration to dry eye disease patients, reproxalap increased tear production, and decreased ocular redness and improved symptoms in a dry eye chamber. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.