Back to Journals » Clinical Ophthalmology » Volume 3

Management of allergic conjunctivitis: an evaluation of the perceived comfort and therapeutic efficacy of olopatadine 0.2% and azelastine 0.05% from two prospective studies

Authors Epstein A, Van Hoven PT, Kaufman A, Carr WW

Published 23 April 2009 Volume 2009:3 Pages 329—336

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S5223

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 5


Arthur B Epstein1, Peter T Van Hoven2, Alan Kaufman3, Warner W Carr4

1North Shore Contact Lens and Vision Consultants, Roslyn Heights, NY, USA; 2Primary Eyecare Group PC, Brentwood, TN, USA; 3Adult Allergy Clinic and the Division of Allergy and Immunology, Our Lady of Mercy Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA; 4Southern California Research, Mission Viejo, CA, USA

Purpose: Results from 2 patient-reported outcome studies of allergic conjunctivitis sufferers who used olopatadine 0.2% and azelastine 0.05% are analyzed.

Methods: The PACE (Pataday Allergic Conjunctivitis Evaluation) multi-center, prospective, open-label study examined patient perceptions of olopatadine 0.2% once daily (qd) and previous twice daily (bid) allergic conjunctivitis medications via questionnaire in allergic conjunctivitis sufferers who had previously used bid medication and then initiated olopatadine. A second conjunctival antigen challenge (CAC) study evaluated comfort of 4 allergic conjunctivitis medications.

Results: Forty-nine patients from the PACE study (N = 125) with prior azelastine use were examined. Significantly more patients rated themselves “very satisfied” with current olopatadine use compared with past azelastine use on drop comfort (p < 0.0001), speed of relief (p = 0.0004), and overall satisfaction (70% vs 16%, p < 0.0001). Significantly more patients reported olopatadine “very effective” against swelling compared with azelastine (47% vs 8%, p = 0.0404). In the CAC study (N = 36), data from olopatadine (n = 8), azelastine (n = 9) and placebo (N = 36) groups were reported. Olopatadine was rated significantly more comfortable than azelastine upon instillation (p = 0.0223), at 30 seconds (p = 0.0479), and at 1 minute after instillation (p = 0.0240).

Conclusion: In the reported studies, olopatadine 0.2% qd was more comfortable than azelastine 0.05% and preferred by patients with allergic conjunctivitis by a ratio of 4:1.

Keywords: allergic conjunctivitis, azelastine, ocular allergy, olopatadine, patient perceptions

Creative Commons License 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]