Efficacy of nepafenac ophthalmic suspension 0.1% in improving clinical outcomes following cataract surgery in patients with diabetes: an analysis of two randomized studies
Received 9 January 2017
Accepted for publication 11 April 2017
Published 29 May 2017 Volume 2017:11 Pages 1021—1029
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser
Rishi P Singh,1 Giovanni Staurenghi,2 Ayala Pollack,3 Adeniyi Adewale,4 Thomas M Walker,4 Dana Sager,4 Robert Lehmann5
1Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; 2Department of Biomedical and Clinical Science Luigi Sacco, Luigi Sacco Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; 3Ophthalmology Department, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel; 4Alcon Research Ltd., Fort Worth, TX, 5Lehmann Eye Center, Nacogdoches, TX, USA
Objective: To assess the efficacy of nepafenac 0.1% ophthalmic suspension in improving the clinical outcomes following cataract surgery (CS) in patients with nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy.
Methods: In two similar multicenter, randomized studies, patients received either nepafenac 0.1% or vehicle, instilled three times daily starting a day prior to surgery and continuing for 90 days postoperatively. A post hoc analysis of these two studies was conducted to assess 1) the likelihood for development of postoperative macular edema (ME), based on the percentage of patients who developed ME (≥30% increase from preoperative baseline in central subfield macular thickness) within 90 days following CS and 2) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) endpoints, including the percentage of patients with a BCVA improvement of ≥15 letters from preoperative baseline to Day 14 and maintained through Day 90. Results for individual studies and their pooled estimates (only visual acuity endpoints) are reported. Primary inference was based on odds ratio (OR).
Results: This post hoc analysis included 411 patients (nepafenac 0.1%: 205; vehicle: 206). The incidence of postoperative ME within 90 days of CS was notably lower in the nepafenac-treated patients than in vehicle-treated patients (study 1: 3.2% vs 16.7%; OR =0.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] =0.1, 0.5, P=0.001; study 2: 5.0% vs 17.5%; OR =0.2, 95% CI =0.1, 0.8, P=0.018). A higher percentage of nepafenac-treated patients than vehicle-treated patients gained ≥15 letters from preoperative baseline to Day 14, which was maintained through Day 90 (study 1: 38.4% vs 21.4%; OR =2.4, 95% CI =1.4, 4.2, P=0.003; study 2: 35.0% vs 25.0%; OR =1.6, 95% CI =0.8, 3.2, P=0.172; pooled: 37.1% vs 22.8%; OR =2.0, 95% CI =1.3, 3.1, P=0.001). The odds of >5-letter and >10-letter loss in BCVA from postoperative Day 7 were higher in vehicle-treated than in nepafenac-treated patients.
Conclusion: These results support the clinical benefit of prophylactic use of nepafenac 0.1% for reducing the risk of postoperative ME and for improvement in BCVA outcomes following CS in patients with nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy.
Keywords: cataract surgery, nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy, nepafenac 0.1%, postoperative macular edema, visual outcomes
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]