Evidence Hub

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lifitegrast 5% eye drops: A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial in Indian patients with dry eye disease

Namrata Sharma, S. Basu, Rohit Shetty, Pramod Kumar, A. Mondal, P. Babu, Richa Srivastava, R. Pande et al.

Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 2024

370 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lifitegrast 5% versus carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) 0.5% in adult patients with dry eye disease (DED). Methods: A total of 370 eligible patients with DED were randomized equally to receive twice-daily doses of a single drop in each eye of either lifitegrast 5% or CMC 0.5% for 12 weeks. Follow-up at weeks 2, 6, and 12 evaluated changes from baseline in primary [eye dryness score (EDS), ocular discomfort score (ODS), ocular surface disease index (OSDI), and tear film break-up time (TFBUT)] and secondary [Schirmer tear test (STT) score and corneal fluorescein staining (CFS) score] endpoints. Global improvement, safety, and tolerability were also assessed. Results: At week 2, values of ocular discomfort score, OSDI, and conjunctival redness were significantly more favorable in patients treated with lifitegrast compared to CMC. At week 6, values of all study variables were better in patients treated with lifitegrast compared to CMC; differences between the groups were statistically significant for all except photophobia. This trend was also maintained at week 12. Global improvement and tolerability were found to be better with lifitegrast than with CMC. No serious safety concerns were reported in any treatment group. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first active-controlled trial informing on the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lifitegrast 5%. Significantly more favorable values for EDS (except…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 370 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free