SynthesisInternational ophthalmology2026
Efficacy and safety of varenicline nasal spray in dry eye disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in International ophthalmology, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDry eye disease is a multifactorial ocular surface disorder characterized by tear film instability and inflammation, leading to impaired visual function and reduced quality of life. Varenicline solution nasal spray is a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist stimulates the trigeminal pathway to enhance basal tear production.
methodsWe searched electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) from inception to February 2026 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing varenicline nasal spray (0.03 mg or 0.06 mg twice daily) in adults with dry eye symptoms. Primary outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 10-mm improvement in Schirmer test score (STS) and mean change in STS. Secondary outcomes included Eye Dryness Score (EDS), corneal fluorescein staining and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models. The primary analysis focused on the approved 0.06 mg dose, with dose-based subgroup analyses comparing 0.03 mg and 0.06 mg doses where data were available.
resultsSeven randomized controlled trials were included. In the primary 0.06 mg analysis, varenicline nasal spray significantly improved mean Schirmer test score change (MD = 5.52 mm; 95% CI: 4.08 to 6.97; p < 0.0001) and increased the proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 10-mm Schirmer test score improvement (RR = 1.86; 95% CI: 1.50 to 2.30; p < 0.0001). Eye Dryness Score showed a non-significant numerical improvement (MD = - 4.38; 95% CI: - 12.02 to 3.25; p = 0.2601). Dose-based subgroup analyses showed consistent Schirmer test benefits for both 0.03 mg and 0.06 mg doses. Corneal fluorescein staining was not significantly improved. Ocular adverse events and reduced visual acuity were comparable between groups, while non-ocular adverse events, particularly sneezing, were more frequent with varenicline.
conclusionsVarenicline nasal spray improved tear production, with less consistent effects on symptoms and corneal staining. Ocular safety was comparable, but sneezing was more frequent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42481782What 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.