| Literature DB >> 29416314 |
Achini K Makuloluwa1, Fatemeh Shams1.
Abstract
Cystinosis is a rare, autosomal recessive disorder leading to defective transport of cystine out of lysosomes. Subsequent cystine crystal accumulation can occur in various tissues, including the ocular surface. This review explores the efficacy of cysteamine hydrochloride eye drops in the treatment of corneal cystine crystal accumulation and its safety profile.Entities:
Keywords: CTNS gene; cystadrops; cystaran; cysteine
Year: 2018 PMID: 29416314 PMCID: PMC5789046 DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S133516
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Ophthalmol ISSN: 1177-5467
Summary of efficacy studies of cysteamine hydrochloride eye drop solutions
| Study | Year of publication | Location | Duration of investigations | Type of study | Number of patients | Mean age | Inclusion criteria | End point | Drug under investigation | Results | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaiser- Kupfer et al | 1990 | Bethesda, Maryland, USA | November 1985 to September 1989 | Double- blind randomized placebo- controlled | 25 | 7.2±8.3 years | Typical clinical presentation Leukocyte cysteine concentration of >3 nmol half- cystine/mg protein (normal <0.2) All patients under age 4 on oral cysteamine | Blinded observers Difference in the density of corneal crystals in the two eyes and a decrease in the corneal cystine crystal density in the “better” eye from previous visit Library of standard transparency slides with a corneal cystine crystal score using arbitrary scale from 0 to 3.00 (0.125 increments) | 0.1%–0.5% cysteamine hydrochloride drops (in 0.9% NaCl) in one eye Versus 0.9% NaCl in the second eye | 10 reached end point (8/16 from the group under age of 4 years and 2/9 from the group between ages 4–31 years) | |||
| Jones et al | 1991 | Manchester, UK | NA | Case report | 1 | 2 years | Typical clinical presentation | Nonblinded observer Clinical and photographic change of corneal cystine crystal density | 0.5% cysteamine eye drops in one eye (nil other details) | Complete clearance of visual axis and significant but incomplete clearance of peripheral cornea | |||
| Bradbury et al | 1991 | Leeds, UK | December 1989 to May 1990 | Double- blind randomized placebo- controlled | 5 | 11.2±3.3 years | Typical clinical presentation >3 nmol half- cystine/mg protein or fibroblast culture 4/5 patients on oral cysteamine | Blinded observers Corneal cysteine crystal score using arbitrary scale from 0 to 4.00 (0.5 increments) | 0.2% cysteamine hydrochloride +0.9% | All patients had at least a 0.5 unit improvement in crystal density score | |||
| Iwata et al | 1998 | Bethesda, Maryland, USA | NA | Double- blind randomized | 14 | 15.2±9.5 years | Typical clinical presentation >3 nmol half- cystine/mg protein All patients had oral cysteamine | Blinded observers Corneal cysteine crystal score using arbitrary scale from 0 to 3.00 (0.25 increments) | 0.5% cysteamine with BAC | Mean reduction in corneal density score of 1.02 units in the cysteamine eyes compared to 0.07 unit reduction in cystamine eyes | |||
| Tsilou et al | 2003 | Bethesda, Maryland, USA | September 1998 to July 1999 | Double- blind randomized | 15 | 6 years (2–11 years) | Typical clinical presentation >2 nmol half- cystine/mg protein | Blinded observers Corneal cystine crystal score using arbitrary units 0–3.00 (0.25 increments) | Cysteamine hydrochloride 0.55% with BAC 0.01% in one eye | Median reduction in corneal cysteine crystal score of 0.75 with the standard formulation and no change with the new formulation | |||
| Al- Hemidan et al | 2017 | King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia | 2004–2012 | Prospective study | 32 | 8 years (8 months to 19 years) | Typical clinical presentation >2 nmol half- cystine/mg protein | Clinical assessment of corneal cysteine crystal score | Cysteamine 0.55% to both eyes | 21 patients had a stable score and 11 patients had worsening of the score | |||
| Labbé et al | 2014 | Quinze-Vingts National Eye Center, Paris, France | January 2008 to March 2012 | Phase I/IIa Open-label Dose– response, pilot study (The Cystadrops OCT-1 Study) | 8 | 12.1±4.6 years | Typical clinical presentation >1.5 nmol half- cystine/mg protein All patients received oral cysteamine | In vivo confocal microscopy total score of corneal cysteine crystal density on both epithelium and stroma independently using a 400×400 µm image area | Cysteamine hydrochloride 0.1% in both eyes for 1 month | IVCM score was stable with 0.1% cysteamine hydrochloride treatment at 11.38±2.94, from a baseline score of 11.38±3.30 | |||
| Liang et al | 2017 | Quinze-Vingts National Eye Center, Paris, France | January 2013 to June 2013 | Open-label randomized phase III trial | 31 | 17.1±13.0 years | Typical clinical presentation >1.5 nmol half- cystine/mg protein | In vivo confcal microscopy total score of corneal cysteine crystal density on both epithelium and stroma independently using a 400×400 µm image area | Cysteaine hydrochloride 0.55%, carmellose sodium (similar to Cystadrop gel) in both eyes | IVCM score reduced to 6.0±2.1 by 40.4%±16.0% from baseline score of 10.6±4.2 in the cysteamine 0.55% gel group and to 9.8±3.8 by 0.7%±33.0% from baseline score of 0.8±3.5 in the cysteamine 0.1% group ( | |||
Abbreviations: AGEPS, Pharmacie Centrale des Hôpitaux de Paris; BAC, benzalkonium chloride; CCCS, Corneal Cystine Crystal Scoring; EDTA, edetate; IND, Investigational New Drug; IVCM, in vivo confocal microscopy; NaCl, sodium chloride.