Real-World Experience with Lifitegrast Ophthalmic Solution (Xiidra®) in the US and Canada: Retrospective Study of Patient Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Clinical Effectiveness in 600 Patients with Dry Eye Disease
Open Access
- 1 January 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in Clinical Ophthalmology
- Vol. 15, 1041-1054
- https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S296510
Abstract
Purpose: This study evaluated real-world treatment of dry eye disease (DED) with lifitegrast. Patients and Methods: Ophthalmologists and optometrists treating patients with DED were invited to participate through a healthcare provider (HCP)-based panel. HCPs completed a provider survey and contributed data toward a chart review for up to five qualifying patients with DED who initiated lifitegrast ophthalmic solution (index date) between 01/01/2017 (US) or 01/01/2018 (Canada) and 06/30/2019. Patient demographics, treatments, clinical characteristics, and outcomes (ie, severity, signs, symptoms) were collected for the 6-month pre-index period and up to 12-months post-index. Results: For this study, 517 HCPs contributed 600 patient charts. Among 554 and 281 patients with follow-up at 6 and 12-months post-index, 512 (92.4%) and 238 (84.7%) patients had ongoing lifitegrast treatment, respectively. Other DED-related treatments were less frequently used postindex with lifitegrast vs pre-index: over-the-counter artificial tear use (45.2% vs 75.5%), topical corticosteroids (3.8% vs 18.8%), any cyclosporine (3.0% vs 20.5%). At 3-months (n=571) and 12-months (n=320) post-index vs pre-index, fewer patients had eye dryness (47 [8.2%] and 16 [5.0%] vs 525 [87.5%]), blurred vision (28 [4.9%] and 11 [3.4%] vs 346 [57.7%]), ocular burning/stinging (25 [4.4%] and 8 [2.5%] vs 336 [56.0%]), depression (8 [1.4%] and 9 [2.8%] vs 55 [9.2%]), fatigue (4 [0.7%] and 1 [0.3%] vs 82 [13.7%]), and headache (1 [0.2%] and 0 vs 19 [3.2%]). At 3 and 12-months post-index vs pre-index, average corneal staining score was numerically lower (2.7 and 2.0 vs 6.5), and average Schirmer score (10.6 and 10 vs 6.3) and tear film break-up time (7.3 and 8.0 vs 4.8) higher. Conclusion: The majority of patients had ongoing lifitegrast treatment 6-months post-index with reduction in overall treatment burden. Improvement in DED signs and symptoms, including QoL impacts, was evident at 3 months and up to 12 months after lifitegrast initiation.This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluation of Objective Signs and Subjective Symptoms of Dry Eye Disease in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel DiseaseBioMed Research International, 2019
- Prevalence of Diagnosed Dry Eye Disease in the United States Among Adults Aged 18 Years and OlderAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology, 2017
- Lifitegrast for the Treatment of Dry Eye DiseaseOphthalmology, 2016
- Development of lifitegrast: a novel T-cell inhibitor for the treatment of dry eye diseaseClinical Ophthalmology, 2016
- Lifitegrast Ophthalmic Solution 5.0% versus Placebo for Treatment of Dry Eye DiseaseOphthalmology, 2015
- A Comprehensive Review on Dry Eye Disease: Diagnosis, Medical Management, Recent Developments, and Future ChallengesAdvances in Pharmaceutics, 2015
- Lifitegrast Ophthalmic Solution 5.0% for Treatment of Dry Eye DiseaseOphthalmology, 2014
- Dry Eye Disease: Impact on Quality of Life and VisionCurrent Ophthalmology Reports, 2013
- Etiology, prevalence, and treatment of dry eye diseaseClinical Ophthalmology, 2009
- Grading Of Corneal and Conjunctival Staining in the Context of Other Dry Eye TestsCornea, 2003