ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
A comprehensive analysis of dry eye disease clinical trials (2000-2024): research trends and gaps.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Target Discovery and Systemic Mechanism Analysis of Teriflunomide for Dry Eye Disease.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Research progress in animal models of dry eye disease: Types, mechanisms, and application prospects.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- Mitochondrial dysfunction and the regulatory cell death crosstalk network in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: from oxidative stress mechanisms to targeted therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dry eye disease (DED), also known as keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS), imposes a substantial global burden, yet the clinical trial landscape guiding therapeutic development remains incompletely characterized. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study mapping interventional dry eye disease trials (2000-2024) indexed in Trialtrove. We analyzed 1,171 prospectively registered trials with dry eye disease as the primary indication, characterizing design, phase, geography, sponsorship, endpoints, and therapeutics. Results: Trial activity rose steadily, peaking in 2023-2024, and was concentrated in the United States (n=773), followed by India (n=111), China (n=71), and Japan (n=58). Sponsorship was balanced between industry (45.5%) and academia (44.4%). Most trials were completed and in later phases (Phase 4: 40.3%; Phase 2: 25.0%; Phase 3: 17.0%). Adult cohorts predominated, yet 59.9% did not report severity strata, and where strata were prespecified, thresholds based on symptom questionnaires were heterogeneous. Monotherapy designs were most common (71.6%), with head-to-head comparisons in 22.4%. Frequently studied interventions included other ocular medications, ocular anti-inflammatory agents, and artificial tears. Primary endpoints centered on ocular surface staining, with the Ocular Surface Disease Index, tear film break-up time, and Schirmer's test commonly used. Discussion: These commonly used endpoints vary in psychometric validity and standardization, which can undermine data quality, complicate analysis and interpretation of individual trial results, and limit cross-trial comparability. Overall, the ecosystem appears mature but conservative, emphasizing later-phase, single-agent studies, traditional endpoints, and limited severity stratification and geographic diversity. Future trials should prespecify severity and subtype strata, use validated mechanism-aligned endpoints with standardized assessment windows and longer follow-up, and broaden geographic representation to improve generalizability and cross-trial comparability.
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.