Perception and quality of life associated with the use of olopatadine 0.2% (Pataday™) in patients with active allergic conjunctivitis

• DOI: 10.1007/bf02877768
• Publication Date: 2008-04-05T10:59:40Z
• Authors: Stephen V. Scoper; Gregg J. Berdy; Steven J. Lichten...; Jay M. Rubin; Marc Bloomenstein; Robert E. Prouty; Cullen T. Vogelson; Michael R. Edwards; Curtis Waycaster; Terri Pasquine; Robert D. Gross; Stella M. Robertson
• Keywords: Adult; Aged, 80 and over; Male; Adolescent; Middle Aged; 3. Good health; 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Patient Satisfaction; Child, Preschool; Acute Disease; Anti-Allergic Agents; Quality of Life; Humans; Female; Perception; Child; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Dibenzoxepins; Aged; Conjunctivitis, Allergic

This 28-d, open-label, multicenter, single-arm clinical study was designed to evaluate perceptions of olopatadine 0.2% in patients with active ocular allergic signs and symptoms. The study enrolled 330 patients, 5 to 94 y of age, who had previously used olopatadine 0.1% for active allergic conjunctivitis. Most patients were white (n=230; 70.1%) and female (n=239; 72.9%). Of all enrolled patients, 328 were evaluable for analysis. Throughout the study, patients instilled 1 drop of olopatadine 0.2% into each eye once daily; adverse events were documented and ocular evaluations were conducted to ensure patient safety. Direct evaluations of efficacy were not performed. On days 1 and 7, patients completed the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, recorded their perceptions of olopatadine 0.1% (day 1) or 0.2% (day 7), and had their ocular allergies assessed globally. On each of the first 6 d of treatment, patients also completed a telephone-based perception questionnaire. On day 28, patients returned to the study center, reported their treatment perceptions, had their ocular allergies assessed, and exited the trial. Overall, patients had a positive perception of olopatadine 0.2%. Patients were more satisfied with olopatadine 0.2% than they remembered being with olopatadine 0.1% (289 vs 257 patients; 87.6% vs 77.8%; P<.05). The majority of the 48 patients who wore contact lenses (n=42; 88%) believed that they could wear their contacts as desired. Significant improvement was noted in all categories of the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (P<.0001). No unexpected safety findings were reported. Patients perceived olopatadine 0.2% to be effective and well tolerated.