@entity6850 and @entity13205 in the treatment of XXXX : a real-world comparison of efficacy and ocular comfort.

@entity1 @entity13205 @entity450 @entity56 @entity10 @entity6850
This 3-week prospective, randomized, double-masked, parallel-group study compared @entity6850 fumarate 0.025% ophthalmic solution and @entity13205 0.1% ophthalmic solution in 66 @entity1 with @entity56 . The drugs were instilled twice daily. Signs and symptoms were assessed on days 5 (visit 2) and 21 (visit 3). Other efficacy variables were the responder rate ( @entity1 with excellent or good global efficacy on days 5 and 21) and @entity1 and investigator ratings of global efficacy. Comfort was evaluated immediately after instillation of the first drop and at each follow-up visit. The frequency of adverse events was the safety assessment. The responder rate was higher with @entity6850 than with @entity13205 on day 5 (72% vs 54% for @entity1 assessment, 88% vs 55% for investigator assessment) and day 21 (91% vs 55%, 94% vs 42%). Global efficacy ratings were higher with @entity6850 , and severity scores for @entity450 and itching were significantly lower. Both drugs elicited comparable comfort ratings. The most common adverse events were burning/stinging and @entity10 .
