平野 耕治

Purpose: To classify secondary corneal amyloidosis (SCA) by its clinical appearance, to analyze the demographics of the patients, and to determine the involvement of lactoferrin. Design: Retrospective, observational, noncomparative, multicenter study. Participants: Twenty-nine eyes of 29 patients diagnosed with SCA by corneal specialists at 9 ophthalmologic institutions in Japan were studied. Methods: The clinical appearance of SCA was determined by slit-lamp biomicroscopy and was classified into 3 types. The demographics of the patients, for example, age, gender, and the duration of the basic disease (trichiasis, keratoconus, and unknown), were determined for each clinical type. Surgically excised tissues were stained with Congo red and antilactoferrin antibody. The postoperative prognosis also was determined. Main Outcome Measures: Clinical appearance of the 3 types of SCA, along with the gender, age, and duration of the basic diseases were determined. Results: Classification of SCA into 3 types based on clinical appearance found 21 cases with gelatinous drop-like dystrophy (GDLD)-like appearance (GDLD type), 3 cases with lattice corneal dystrophy (LCD)-like appearance (LCD type), and 5 cases with the combined type. Patients with the GDLD type were younger (average age: 40.9 years for the GDLD type, 74.3 years for the LCD type, and 46.8 years for the combined type), predominantly women (85.7% for the GDLD type, 33.3% for the LCD type, and 60% for the combined type), and had the basic disease over a longer time (average duration: 22.1 years for the GDLD type, 14.0 for the LCD type, and 11.4 for the combined type). The distribution of the basic diseases (trichiasis vs. keratoconus vs. unknown) was not significantly different for each type. Surgical treatments, for example, phototherapeutic keratectomy, lamellar keratoplasty, and simple keratectomy, resulted in a good resolution in all surgically treated cases. One subject dropped out of the study. Spontaneous resolution was seen in one subject after epilation of the cilia. Amorphous materials in the excised tissues showed positive staining results by Congo red and by antilactoferrin antibody. Conclusions: Secondary corneal amyloidosis can be classified into 3 clinical types based on its clinical appearance. Larger numbers of females and lactoferrin expression were seen in all 3 types. (C) 2013 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Objective: To investigate the dose-dependent efficacy and safety of diquafosol ophthalmic solution for the treatment of dry eye syndrome. Design: Randomized, double-masked, multicenter, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Participants: A total of 286 Japanese patients with dry eye who were prescribed topical diquafosol (1%, n = 96; 3%, n = 96) or placebo ophthalmic solution (n = 94). Methods: After a washout period of 2 weeks, qualified subjects were randomized to receive a single drop of 1% or 3% diquafosol or placebo ophthalmic solutions 6 times per day for 6 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was fluorescein corneal staining score assessment. The secondary outcome measures were Rose Bengal corneal and conjunctival staining scores, tear break-up time (BUT), and subjective symptom assessment. Safety measures were clinical blood and urine examination and recording of adverse events. Results: Fluorescein corneal staining scores significantly improved with both 1% and 3% topical diquafosol compared with placebo at 4 weeks, respectively (P = 0.037, P = 0.002). There was a dose-dependent effect among the groups. Rose Bengal corneal and conjunctival staining scores also improved significantly with both 1% and 3% diquafosol compared with placebo (P = 0.007 and P = 0.004, respectively). Subjective dry eye symptom scores significantly improved with both diquafosol ophthalmic solutions (P < 0.033), although there were no significant differences in BUT compared with placebo. No significant differences between the treatment groups were observed in relation to the occurrence of adverse events. Conclusions: Both 1% and 3% diquafosol ophthalmic solutions are considered effective and safe for the treatment of dry eye syndrome. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Ophthalmology 2012;119:1954-1960 (C) 2012 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Objective: To investigate the dose-dependent efficacy and safety of diquafosol ophthalmic solution for the treatment of dry eye syndrome. Design: Randomized, double-masked, multicenter, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Participants: A total of 286 Japanese patients with dry eye who were prescribed topical diquafosol (1%, n = 96; 3%, n = 96) or placebo ophthalmic solution (n = 94). Methods: After a washout period of 2 weeks, qualified subjects were randomized to receive a single drop of 1% or 3% diquafosol or placebo ophthalmic solutions 6 times per day for 6 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was fluorescein corneal staining score assessment. The secondary outcome measures were Rose Bengal corneal and conjunctival staining scores, tear break-up time (BUT), and subjective symptom assessment. Safety measures were clinical blood and urine examination and recording of adverse events. Results: Fluorescein corneal staining scores significantly improved with both 1% and 3% topical diquafosol compared with placebo at 4 weeks, respectively (P = 0.037, P = 0.002). There was a dose-dependent effect among the groups. Rose Bengal corneal and conjunctival staining scores also improved significantly with both 1% and 3% diquafosol compared with placebo (P = 0.007 and P = 0.004, respectively). Subjective dry eye symptom scores significantly improved with both diquafosol ophthalmic solutions (P < 0.033), although there were no significant differences in BUT compared with placebo. No significant differences between the treatment groups were observed in relation to the occurrence of adverse events. Conclusions: Both 1% and 3% diquafosol ophthalmic solutions are considered effective and safe for the treatment of dry eye syndrome. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Ophthalmology 2012;119:1954-1960 (C) 2012 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Objective: To investigate the dose-dependent efficacy and safety of diquafosol ophthalmic solution for the treatment of dry eye syndrome. Design: Randomized, double-masked, multicenter, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Participants: A total of 286 Japanese patients with dry eye who were prescribed topical diquafosol (1%, n = 96; 3%, n = 96) or placebo ophthalmic solution (n = 94). Methods: After a washout period of 2 weeks, qualified subjects were randomized to receive a single drop of 1% or 3% diquafosol or placebo ophthalmic solutions 6 times per day for 6 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was fluorescein corneal staining score assessment. The secondary outcome measures were Rose Bengal corneal and conjunctival staining scores, tear break-up time (BUT), and subjective symptom assessment. Safety measures were clinical blood and urine examination and recording of adverse events. Results: Fluorescein corneal staining scores significantly improved with both 1% and 3% topical diquafosol compared with placebo at 4 weeks, respectively (P = 0.037, P = 0.002). There was a dose-dependent effect among the groups. Rose Bengal corneal and conjunctival staining scores also improved significantly with both 1% and 3% diquafosol compared with placebo (P = 0.007 and P = 0.004, respectively). Subjective dry eye symptom scores significantly improved with both diquafosol ophthalmic solutions (P < 0.033), although there were no significant differences in BUT compared with placebo. No significant differences between the treatment groups were observed in relation to the occurrence of adverse events. Conclusions: Both 1% and 3% diquafosol ophthalmic solutions are considered effective and safe for the treatment of dry eye syndrome. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Ophthalmology 2012;119:1954-1960 (C) 2012 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.