Efficacy and Safety of Interferon Alpha 2A and Pegylated Interferon Alpha 2A in Inflammatory Macular Edema

Couret, C.; Servant, Marion; Lebranchu, Pierre; Hamidou, M.; Weber, Michel

doi:10.1080/09273948.2019.1604001

Cited by 13 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…IFN-α and -β were used in several ocular inflammatory diseases since long time. IFN-α therapies appear to have a profile close to anti-TNF-α bDMARDs agents, in terms of fast acting and controlling ocular inflammation, such as in ocular Behcet disease and refractory CME [ 76 , 77 ]. Both IFN-α2a and -β1a were proven effective in resolving uveitic CME, even though most of the trials were dedicated in studying IFN- α2a.…”

Section: Biologic Dmardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

New pharmacotherapy options for noninfectious posterior uveitis

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Noninfectious inflammation of the posterior eye segment represents an important cause of visual impairment. It often affects relatively young people and causes a significant personal and social impact. Although steroids and nonbiologic- Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (nbDMARDs) are effective both in acute and long- lasting diseases, however they are increasingly being replaced by biologic (DMARDs). bDMARD. This article therefore aims to identify recent advances in the therapy of noninfectious posterior segment uveitis. Methods A Medline-search was conducted using the terms: nbDMARD, bDMARD, posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, treatment, corticosteroid. In addition, clinical studies were included as registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. Results Currently two major lines of treatments can be identified: (1) the intraocular application of anti-inflammatory agents and (2) the introduction of new agents, e.g., (bDMARDs) and small-molecule-inhibitors. Whereas intravitreal treatments have the advantage to avoid systemic side effects, new systemic agents are progressively earning credit on the basis of their therapeutic effects. Conclusion Even when current treatment strategies are still hampered by the limited number of randomized controlled trials, promising progress and continuous efforts are seen.

show abstract

Section: Biologic Dmardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

New pharmacotherapy options for noninfectious posterior uveitis

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, new therapies have been developed based on immunomodulation and immunosuppression, and great benefits are expected from these novel agents, such as adalimumab (Humira ® ) [104]. However, this approach is associated with several important drawbacks, such as being expensive, requiring subcutaneous injections once every two weeks [105,106] and the risk of causing important side effects such as infections (tuberculosis, pneumonia), nervous system problems, heart failure and immune reactions, among others [107]. Therefore, efficient and cost-effective therapies with less side effects are of great interest.…”

Section: Uveitismentioning

confidence: 99%

Cannabinoid-Based Ocular Therapies and Formulations

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interest in the pharmacological applications of cannabinoids is largely increasing in a wide range of medical areas. Recently, research on its potential role in eye conditions, many of which are chronic and/or disabling and in need of new alternative treatments, has intensified. However, due to cannabinoids’ unfavorable physicochemical properties and adverse systemic effects, along with ocular biological barriers to local drug administration, drug delivery systems are needed. Hence, this review focused on the following: (i) identifying eye disease conditions potentially subject to treatment with cannabinoids and their pharmacological role, with emphasis on glaucoma, uveitis, diabetic retinopathy, keratitis and the prevention of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections; (ii) reviewing the physicochemical properties of formulations that must be controlled and/or optimized for successful ocular administration; (iii) analyzing works evaluating cannabinoid-based formulations for ocular administration, with emphasis on results and limitations; and (iv) identifying alternative cannabinoid-based formulations that could potentially be useful for ocular administration strategies. Finally, an overview of the current advances and limitations in the field, the technological challenges to overcome and the prospective further developments, is provided.

show abstract