ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Comparative Efficacy of Cyclosporine, Tacrolimus, and Neurostimulatory Nasal Sprays for Moderate-to-Severe Dry Eye Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of topical cyclosporine A (CsA) 0.05%, 0.09%, and 0.1%; tacrolimus 0.03%; and neurostimulatory nasal sprays (varenicline and simpinicline) in moderate-to-severe dry eye disease (DED), focusing on tear production, ocular surface integrity, and tear film stability. Clinical Relevance: DED management remains complex due to heterogeneous presentation and variable therapeutic responses. While immunomodulators like CsA and tacrolimus are widely used, novel neuromodulatory agents such as varenicline nasal spray are emerging. Comparative data across these treatment classes remain scarce. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL was performed up to January 2025. Randomized controlled trials assessing CsA 0.05%, 0.09%, or 0.1%; tacrolimus 0.03%; or nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist nasal sprays in moderate-to-severe DED were included. Primary endpoints included Schirmer test score (STS), tear break-up time (TBUT), corneal fluorescein staining (CFS), and ocular surface disease index (OSDI). A Bayesian network meta-analysis estimated comparative efficacy using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Results: Twenty-nine RCTs (n = 8453 patients) were included in the systematic review; fourteen qualified for network meta-analysis. CsA 0.09% and 0.1% ranked highest for CFS improvement at the evaluated time points. Tacrolimus 0.03% showed favorable early STS and TBUT trends but did not consistently improve longer-term ocular surface outcomes. Varenicline improved tear production but lacked CFS data. Placebo ranked favorably for STS and TBUT at 3 months and beyond, possibly because several vehicles had lubricating or tear-stabilizing effects. CsA 0.05% showed modest efficacy. Conclusion: CsA 0.09% and 0.1% showed the most favorable corneal healing outcomes, while tacrolimus 0.03% showed an early tear-stimulating effect. Varenicline offers a distinct neurostimulatory mechanism but requires further comparative validation. These findings support phenotype-guided therapy and future head-to-head trials.
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.