Observational studyScientific reports2025
Benefit of omidenepag isopropyl ophthalmic solution in treatment persistence in Japanese patients with glaucoma.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using a nationwide claims database (JMDC database) to investigate the treatment persistence of antiglaucoma ophthalmic solution monotherapy. Patients aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with glaucoma between November 2018 and August 2020, and prescribed omidenepag isopropyl (OMDI), prostaglandin F receptor agonists (FP), or beta-blockers (BB) monotherapies were included. A total of 36,450 patients (5,865 patients prescribed OMDI, 20,715 patients prescribed FP, and 9,870 patients prescribed BB) were analyzed. The cumulative treatment persistence rate at three years was 27.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25.9–28.1) in patients prescribed OMDI, which was significantly higher than 20.9% (95% CI: 20.4–21.5) in those prescribed FP; the hazard ratio was 0.835 (95% CI: 0.806–0.865, p < 0.0001), calculated with the multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. The median duration of treatment persistence, calculated with the Kaplan-Meier methods, was 281 days in those prescribed OMDI, 204 days in those prescribed FP, and 152 days in those prescribed BB; the treatment persistence of OMDI tended to be longer than FP or BB. OMDI had a longer treatment persistence compared to other antiglaucoma ophthalmic solutions in the real-world setting, suggesting that OMDI would be a promising first-line treatment option in the long-term management of glaucoma.
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.