-
Eye & Contact Lens Aug 2023Demodex blepharitis is a common disease of the eyelid, affecting approximately 25 million Americans. This article reviews what is known about the mechanisms and impact... (Review)
Review
Demodex blepharitis is a common disease of the eyelid, affecting approximately 25 million Americans. This article reviews what is known about the mechanisms and impact of Demodex blepharitis, risk factors, signs and symptoms, diagnostic techniques, current management options, and emerging treatments. Demodex mites contribute to blepharitis in several ways: direct mechanical damage, as a vector for bacteria, and by inducing hypersensitivity and inflammation. Risk factors for Demodex blepharitis include increasing age, rosacea, and diabetes. The costs, symptom burden, and psychosocial effects of Demodex blepharitis are considerable. The presence of collarettes is pathognomonic for Demodex blepharitis. Redness, dryness, discomfort, foreign body sensation, lash anomalies, and itching are also hallmarks of the disease. Although a number of oral, topical, eyelid hygiene and device-based options have been used clinically and evaluated in studies for the management of Demodex blepharitis, none have been FDA approved to treat the disease. Recent randomized controlled clinical trials suggest that lotilaner ophthalmic solution, 0.25%, is a topical treatment with the potential to eradicate Demodex mites and eliminate collarettes and eyelid redness for an extended period.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Mite Infestations; Mites; Blepharitis; Eyelids; Inflammation; Eyelashes; Eye Infections, Parasitic
PubMed: 37272680
DOI: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000001003 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jan 2024Blepharitis is a common chronic inflammatory condition affecting the eyelid margins; the pathophysiology of blepharitis is complex and not fully understood. The disease...
Blepharitis is a common chronic inflammatory condition affecting the eyelid margins; the pathophysiology of blepharitis is complex and not fully understood. The disease is anatomically divided into anterior (inflammation of eyelashes) and posterior (meibomian gland dysfunction) types. Diagnosis relies on clinical examination, revealing characteristic features like scurf, vascular changes, and meibomian gland dysfunction. The main goals of blepharitis treatment are symptom relief, recurrence prevention, and complication risk minimization. Treatment options include lid hygiene, topical and systemic antibiotics, topical corticosteroids, and omega-3 supplements. However, it is important to highlight reported cases of blepharitis as side effects of systemic therapies, particularly in the context of chemotherapy, bortezomib, cetuximab, TNFα inhibitors, and dupilumab. It is crucial to monitor patients undergoing such treatments regularly and attentively in order to promptly set up adequate supportive therapy. Of even more importance is future research on the pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for the occurrence of these ocular side effects in order to find a nosological cure for the issue.
PubMed: 38337403
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13030710 -
Ugeskrift For Laeger Jul 2023Blepharitis is a chronic condition and full recovery is difficult to achieve. It requires good patient compliance and an individual treatment regime. There are many... (Review)
Review
Blepharitis is a chronic condition and full recovery is difficult to achieve. It requires good patient compliance and an individual treatment regime. There are many conditions which can cause blepharitis, and it is essential to find the cause to give the proper treatment. There is scarce evidence for the recommended guidelines. Blepharitis itself rarely causes vision loss, but in case of complications like keratitis it is more frequently observed. When patients do not respond to the treatment it is important to consider if it is caused by immunological diseases or carcinoma, as argued in this review.
Topics: Humans; Blepharitis; Keratitis; Chronic Disease
PubMed: 37539802
DOI: No ID Found -
Ophthalmology Oct 2023To evaluate the safety and efficacy of lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% compared with vehicle for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
PURPOSE
To evaluate the safety and efficacy of lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% compared with vehicle for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis.
DESIGN
Prospective, randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial.
PARTICIPANTS
Four hundred twelve patients with Demodex blepharitis were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% (study group) or vehicle without lotilaner (control group).
METHODS
Patients with Demodex blepharitis treated at 21 United States clinical sites were assigned either to the study group (n = 203) to receive lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% or to the control group (n = 209) to receive vehicle without lotilaner bilaterally twice daily for 6 weeks. Collarettes and erythema were graded for each eyelid at screening and at all visits after baseline. At screening and on days 15, 22, and 43, 4 or more eyelashes were epilated from each eye, and the number of Demodex mites present on the lashes was counted with a microscope. Mite density was calculated as the number of mites per lash.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Outcome measures included collarette cure (collarette grade 0), clinically meaningful collarette reduction to 10 collarettes or fewer (grade 0 or 1), mite eradication (0 mites/lash), erythema cure (grade 0), composite cure (grade 0 for collarettes as well as erythema), compliance with the drop regimen, drop comfort, and adverse events.
RESULTS
At day 43, the study group achieved a statistically significant (P < 0.0001) higher proportion of patients with collarette cure (56.0% vs. 12.5%), clinically meaningful collarette reduction to 10 collarettes or fewer (89.1% vs. 33.0%), mite eradication (51.8% vs. 14.6%), erythema cure (31.1% vs. 9.0%), and composite cure (19.2% vs. 4.0%) than the control group. High compliance with the drop regimen (mean ± standard deviation, 98.7 ± 5.3%) in the study group was observed, and 90.7% of patients found the drops to be neutral to very comfortable.
CONCLUSIONS
Twice-daily treatment with lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% for 6 weeks generally was safe and well tolerated and met the primary end point and all secondary end points for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis compared with vehicle control.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)
Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Mite Infestations; Prospective Studies; Ophthalmic Solutions; Blepharitis; Mites; Eyelashes; Erythema; Eye Infections, Parasitic
PubMed: 37285925
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.05.030 -
Drugs Nov 2023Lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% (XDEMVY™), a gamma-aminobutyric acid-gated chloride channel (GABA-Cl) inhibitor selective for mites, is being developed by Tarsus... (Review)
Review
Lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% (XDEMVY™), a gamma-aminobutyric acid-gated chloride channel (GABA-Cl) inhibitor selective for mites, is being developed by Tarsus Pharmaceuticals for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis and meibomian gland dysfunction in patients with Demodex lid infestation (Demodex-induced meibomianitis). On 24 July 2023, lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% received its first approval in the USA for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis. The agent is also currently in phase 3 development for Demodex blepharitis in China and phase 2 development for Demodex-induced meibomianitis in the USA. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of lotilaner ophthalmic solution 0.25% leading to this first approval for the treatment of Demodex blepharitis in the USA.
Topics: Humans; Mite Infestations; Blepharitis; Ophthalmic Solutions; Eye Infections, Parasitic; Meibomitis
PubMed: 37843754
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-023-01947-9 -
The Ocular Surface Oct 2023To identify and assess the quality of current validated questionnaires that could be used to evaluate ocular neuropathic pain and its associated aetiologies. (Review)
Review
AIM
To identify and assess the quality of current validated questionnaires that could be used to evaluate ocular neuropathic pain and its associated aetiologies.
METHODS
A literature search was performed on MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library. Articles evaluating questionnaires for ocular neuropathic pain and its associated aetiologies were included. Data on psychometric properties, validity, and reliability of the questionnaires was extracted and analysed using a set of quality criteria. Clinical and demographical associations with ocular neuropathic pain were also reviewed.
RESULTS
The search generated 1738 results with 61 publications meeting the inclusion criteria. The 61 publications covered 28 questionnaires including 3 ocular pain, 12 dry eye disease, 2 blepharitis, 2 refractive surgery, 3 contact lens wear, 3 Sjogren's Syndrome, and 3 that were non-disease-specific. Only 57 publications provided enough data on psychometric properties and validity of the questionnaire to be included for quality assessment. The Contact Lens Discomfort Index (CLDI) had the highest rated psychometric properties, whereas the English version of the Ocular Comfort Index (OCI) provided the most data on psychometric properties (9 out of 10 criteria). Most ocular pain and disease-specific questionnaires contained appropriate items to assess ocular pain in specific populations. However, non-disease-specific ophthalmic questionnaires demonstrated poor reliability and validity when evaluating ocular pain.
CONCLUSION
Ocular pain questionnaires can potentially diagnose ocular neuropathic pain. Disease-specific questionnaires were limited to their target populations, and non-disease-specific ophthalmic questionnaires were unreliable. Further studies are required to determine the most appropriate questionnaire to evaluate ocular neuropathic pain.
Topics: Humans; Reproducibility of Results; Neuralgia; Dry Eye Syndromes; Sjogren's Syndrome; Refractive Surgical Procedures; Eye Pain; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 37748645
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2023.09.009