throbber
Low-concentration Homogenized Castor Oil
`Eye Drops for Noninflamed Obstructive
`Meibomian Gland Dysfunction
`
`Eiki Goto, MD,1,2 Jun Shimazaki, MD,1 Yu Monden, MD,3 Yoji Takano, MD,1,2 Yukiko Yagi,1
`Shigeto Shimmura, MD,1,2 Kazuo Tsubota, MD1,2
`
`Objective: We developed low-concentration homogenized castor oil eye drops for the treatment of patients
`with noninflamed obstructive meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), a major cause of lipid-deficiency dry eye, and
`assessed the safety, stability, and efficacy of the eye drops.
`Design: Randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled crossover clinical trial.
`Participants: Forty eyes of 20 patients with noninflamed MGD.
`Methods: After a preliminary study of eye drops containing castor oil, 2% castor oil and 5% polyoxyethylene
`castor oil (emulsifier) were mixed to formulate homogenized oil eye drops. The patients were assigned randomly
`to receive oil eye drops or placebo six times daily for 2 periods of 2 weeks each.
`Main Outcome Measures: At the end of each treatment period, we assessed symptoms, tear interference
`grade, tear evaporation, fluorescein and rose bengal scores, tear break-up time (BUT), and meibomian gland
`orifice obstruction. Safety and stability tests were also performed.
`Results: Symptom scores, tear interference grade, tear evaporation test results, rose bengal scores, tear
`BUT, and orifice obstruction scores after the oil eye drop period showed significant improvement compared with
`the results after the placebo period. No complications attributable to the eye drops were observed. The oil eye
`drops were stable when stored at 4°C.
`Conclusions: The results indicate that castor oil eye drops are effective and safe in the treatment of MGD.
`The possible mechanisms of this treatment are improvement of tear stability as a result of lipid spreading, ease
`of meibum expression, prevention of
`tear evaporation, and the lubricating effect of
`the oil eye
`drops. Ophthalmology 2002;109:2030 –2035 © 2002 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology, Inc.
`
`Meibomian glands secrete lipids into tears, and the lipids
`expand to form the oily preocular tear film layer that is
`responsible for preventing excessive evaporation of tears
`while also providing a barrier function at the lid margin,
`lubrication during blinking, and producing a smooth optical
`surface.1–5 Noninflamed obstructive meibomian gland dys-
`function (MGD) is the major cause of lipid tear deficiency
`or evaporative dry eye and recently has attracted attention as
`
`Originally received: October 29, 2001.
`Manuscript no. 210908.
`Accepted: March 22, 2002.
`1 Department of Ophthalmology, Tokyo Dental College, Chiba, Japan.
`2 Department of Ophthalmology, Keio University School of Medicine,
`Tokyo, Japan.
`3 Department of Ophthalmology, Kurume University School of Medicine,
`Kurume, Japan.
`Supported by grants from the Japanese Ministry of Education and Science,
`Tokyo, Japan; Medical School Faculty and Alumni Grants of Keio Uni-
`versity Medical Science Fund, Tokyo, Japan; Hightech Research Center at
`Tokyo Dental College, Chiba, Japan; and Nihon Tenganyaku Kenkyusho
`Co. Ltd., Nagoya, Japan.
`Authors Eiki Goto, MD, Kazuo Tsubota, MD, and Nihon Tenganyaku
`Kenkyusho Co., Ltd., are in the process of obtaining a Japanese patent on
`the eye drops described herein and their clinical application.
`Correspondence and reprint requests to Kazuo Tsubota, MD, Department
`of Ophthalmology, Tokyo Dental College, 5-11-13 Sugano, Ichikawa-shi,
`Chiba, Japan 272-8513. E-mail: eikigoto@nifty.com.
`
`2030
`
`© 2002 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology, Inc.
`Published by Elsevier Science Inc.
`
`a cause of ocular discomfort.6 – 8 Meibomian gland dysfunc-
`tion causes a decreased lipid supply, which in turn leads to
`increased tear evaporation, decreased tear stability, loss of
`lubrication, and damage to ocular surface epithelium, result-
`ing in symptoms related to dry eye.7–9 The conventional
`treatment for blepharitis and MGD includes warm com-
`presses,
`lid hygiene, and topical or systemic medica-
`tion.5,10 –12 Nevertheless, long-term compliance with con-
`ventional therapy is often insufficient and thus results in
`only limited relief of symptoms. Another possible approach
`is direct supplementation with oil as the deficient compo-
`nent. Lipid-containing eye drops designed to simulate nat-
`ural tears previously have been reported to be an effective
`treatment for dry eye, but they have not been accepted
`generally.13,14 Because high-concentration oil eye drops and
`ointments are viscous and cause blurred vision, resulting in
`decreased patient satisfaction, we conducted a preliminary
`assessment of the efficacy of a low-concentration castor oil
`mixture, and in this study assessed the efficacy, safety, and
`stability of low-concentration and homogenized oil eye drops.
`
`Materials and Methods
`
`Preliminary Study to Choose Oil
`We used seven oil ingredients permitted as additives for eye drops
`and ointments in Japan to formulate a low-concentration mixture
`
`ISSN 0161-6420/02/$–see front matter
`PII S0161-6420(02)01262-9
`
`ARGENTUM - EX. 1017, p. 001
`
`

`
`Goto et al
`
`䡠 Castor Oil Eye Drops for MGD
`
`Table 1. Results of Preliminary Study using Castor Oil Mixture
`for Noninflamed Obstructive Meibomian Gland Dysfunction
`(Mean ⫾ Standard Deviation)
`
`Examination
`
`Face score (1–9)
`Tear evaporation rates
`(⫻10⫺7 g/second)
`Fluorescein score (0–9)
`Rose bengal score (0–9)
`Tear break-up time
`(sec)
`Schirmer’s test value (mm)
`
`Before*
`7.5 ⫾ 1.6
`30 ⫾ 9.0
`
`1.6 ⫾ 1.5
`1.2 ⫾ 1.4
`3.4 ⫾ 2.4
`
`After†
`5.3 ⫾ 1.4‡
`22 ⫾ 11‡
`
`0.20 ⫾ 0.60‡
`0.50 ⫾ 0.76
`9.0 ⫾ 3.6‡
`
`P
`Value
`
`0.01
`0.02
`
`0.005
`0.2
`0.002
`
`18 ⫾ 14
`
`16 ⫾ 12
`
`0.6
`
`Data were analyzed by Wilcoxon’s signed rank test for nonparametric
`paired data. A P value of ⬍0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.
`* Result before use of castor oil mixture.
`† Result after 2 weeks of application of castor oil mixture.
`‡ Statistically significant.
`
`with preservative-free artificial tears (Soft Santear; Santen Phar-
`maceutical Co, Ltd., Osaka, Japan) and tested them on normal and
`dry eye volunteers.15 Because the subjects reported that the castor
`oil (Astra Japan, Osaka, Japan) mixture eye drops were the most
`comfortable, this mixture was formulated for use in a preliminary
`trial and applied to 8 MGD patients 6 times daily for 2 weeks. The
`ocular surface and tear function were examined and compared
`before and after application. The examinations are described in
`detail in a later section. As shown in Table 1, the face score,
`fluorescein score, tear break-up time (BUT), and tear evaporation
`rates improved significantly. The mixture was simple to formulate,
`but being made from only hydrophobic oil, it may not spread
`readily over the ocular surface. We therefore decided to formulate
`homogenized oil eye drops with castor oil.
`
`Formulation, Safety, and Stability of Low-
`concentration Homogenized Oil Eye Drops
`To formulate low-concentration and homogenized oil eye drops
`(oil eye drops), 2% castor oil lubricant (castor oil; Yoshida Phar-
`maceutical Co., Tokyo, Japan), 5% polyoxyethylene castor oil
`(POE castor oil [emulsifier]; Sigma, St. Louis, MO), 0.3% sodium
`chloride, 0.15% potassium chloride, and 0.5% boric acid were
`stirred into distilled water under sterile conditions. The concentra-
`tion of castor oil in the preliminary study was changed to formulate
`an emulsion. The characteristics of the eye drops were: lucent,
`odorless, and low viscosity. The pH of the eye drops was 7.0, and
`their osmolarity was 260 mOsm/kg H2O. Bacterial and fungal
`cultures of the remaining unused eye drops were performed at the
`end of therapy under the usual conditions at room temperature.16
`The stability of the eye drops was assessed by testing for 4 weeks
`at 60°C and 4°C. Stress testing (testing at 60°C for 4 weeks) was
`performed instead of accelerated testing (testing at 40°C for 6
`months) for the eye drops.17 In these tests, the pH of the eye drops
`was measured, and the volunteers were checked for any irritation
`that might have been caused by administering the eye drops. The
`samples stored at 4°C remained stable at pH 7.0 for 4 weeks and
`did not cause irritation, whereas the pH value of the samples stored
`at 60°C changed to 5.8 and caused irritation.
`
`Subjects
`We examined a consecutive series of 20 patients (40 eyes) with
`MGD whose symptoms had not improved sufficiently despite
`
`conventional treatment, such as by lid hygiene and topical therapy
`with artificial tears, antibiotics, and corticosteroids or systemic
`antibiotics. Both eyes of patients were included. The participants
`consisted of 7 males and 13 females (52.1 ⫾ 11.0 years) with
`MGD. Nine patients had a Schirmer’s test value of less than 5 mm,
`indicating aqueous tear deficiency.9,18 Four patients of the aqueous
`tear deficiency group were diagnosed with Sjo¨gren’s syndrome
`according to aqueous tear deficiency.19 Eyes with anterior bleph-
`aritis of more than moderate severity, infectious conjunctivitis,
`MGD with acute inflammation, and eyes with excessive expression
`of meibum (seborrheic MGD) were excluded from the study. No
`patients used contact lenses.
`
`Criteria for Meibomian Gland Dysfunction
`Criteria for the diagnosis of MGD were: presence of meibomian
`gland dropout, poor meibum expression, and lack of active inflam-
`mation.7–9 Transillumination examination (meibography) with a
`fiber-optic device (L-3920; Inami Co., Tokyo, Japan) was per-
`formed.20 Visible loss of meibomian gland structure (gland drop-
`out) was observed during meibography and was considered evi-
`dence of MGD, because this finding was reported to be a good
`parameter for MGD-associated ocular surface changes.7–9 The
`degree of meibomian gland dropout was scored as described
`previously7-9: grade 0, no gland dropout; grade 1, gland dropout in
`less than half of the inferior tarsus; and grade 2, gland dropout in
`more than half of the inferior tarsus.
`To assess meibum expression and meibomian gland orifice
`obstruction, digital pressure was applied on the upper tarsus, and
`the degree of ease of expression of meibomian secretions
`(meibum) was evaluated semiquantitatively as follows: grade 0,
`clear meibum easily expressed; grade 1, cloudy meibum expressed
`with mild pressure; grade 2, cloudy meibum expressed with more
`than moderate pressure; and grade 3, meibum could not be ex-
`pressed even with strong pressure.7,9 Patients with a meibography
`score of grade 1 or 2 and meibomian gland orifice obstruction
`score of 2 or 3 were diagnosed as having MGD in this study.
`
`Assessment of Symptoms, Tears, Ocular Surface,
`and Meibomian Glands
`A questionnaire on overall comfort, complaints, and complications
`was administered by using a face score card that showed nine
`faces, each with a different expression.16 For example, the saddest
`face (scored as 9) described severe symptoms and irritation of the
`ocular surface, and the happiest face (scored as 1) represented no
`irritation of the ocular surface. This face score was used to assess
`patient sensation of lubrication and smoothness during blinking in
`this study.
`Tear interference images were assessed using a DR-1 camera
`(Kowa, Ltd., Nagoya, Japan) at ⫻12 magnification based on the
`grading previously reported: grade 1, somewhat gray color, uni-
`form distribution; grade 2, somewhat gray color, nonuniform dis-
`tribution; grade 3, a few colors, nonuniform distribution; grade 4,
`many colors, nonuniform distribution; grade 5, corneal surface
`partially exposed.21,22 Tear evaporation during normal blinking
`was measured by the method previously reported.23 The evapora-
`tion rate at 40% ambient humidity was used as a representative
`value.
`The ocular surface was examined by the double staining
`method. A 2-␮l volume of preservative-free solution consisting of
`1% fluorescein and 1% rose bengal dye was applied to the con-
`junctival sac. The intensity of the rose bengal staining of the
`cornea and conjunctiva was recorded, with a maximum score of 9.
`Fluorescein staining of the cornea was also rated from 0 to 9. Tear
`BUT was measured three times, and the measurements were av-
`
`2031
`
`ARGENTUM - EX. 1017, p. 002
`
`

`
`Ophthalmology Volume 109, Number 11, November 2002
`
`Table 2. Schedule of Examinations in Crossover Study of Castor Oil Eye Drops for Noninflamed Obstructive Meibomian Gland
`Dysfunction
`
`Group 1
`Group 2
`
`0
`Wash-out Period Began
`AT
`AT
`
`Week
`
`2
`Beginning of Study
`Oil eye drop* usage began
`Placebo† usage began
`
`4
`Patients Switched Eye Drops
`Switched to placebo†
`Switched to oil eye drops*
`
`6
`Completion of Study
`Completed
`Completed
`
`AT ⫽ preservative-free artificial tear.
`* Low-concentration homogenized castor oil eye drops.
`† Placebo eye drops.
`Groups 1 and 2 were divided randomly by a controller (YY). Participants used AT for 2 weeks during the washout period, used oil eye drops or placebo
`for 2 weeks, and then switched eye drops for the next 2 weeks. Examinations were performed at the end of each 2-week period of treatment.
`
`eraged.24 Schirmer’s test was performed to measure tear secre-
`tion.18,25 Assessment of meibum expression and meibomian gland
`orifice obstruction was recorded as described above in the inclu-
`sion criteria section.7,9
`
`Study Design
`A randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled
`crossover clinical study was performed after a 2-week wash-out
`period with preservative-free artificial tears (Soft Santear).26 Dur-
`ing the 2 periods of 2 weeks each, the patients were assigned
`randomly to receive oil eye drops or placebo eye drops six times
`daily (Table 2). We used normal saline solution as the placebo eye
`drops. At the end of each treatment period, i.e. the oil eye drop
`period and the placebo period the following examinations de-
`scribed below were performed.
`The examinations were carried out in the following order to
`avoid the influence of one procedure on another: subjective face
`scores,16 tear interference grading (DR-1,)22 tear evaporation
`test,23 fluorescein and rose bengal vital staining BUT measurement
`and assessment of meibomian gland orifice obstruction.7–9,16,24,25
`When the results of the oil eye drop period were better than those
`of the placebo period, the use of the oil eye drops was judged an
`improvement. Schirmer’s test was not performed during the study
`period to avoid any influence on the tear evaporation test, which is
`sensitive to ocular surface damage. Informed consent was obtained
`from all subjects. Institutional Review Board or Ethics Committee
`approval was not required for this study.
`
`Statistical Analysis
`All data are presented as means ⫾ standard deviation. Both eyes of
`each patient were studied separately. Symptoms and findings at the
`end of each treatment period, the oil eye drop period and the
`placebo period, were compared and analyzed by Wilcoxon’s
`signed rank test for nonparametric paired data. A P value of less
`than 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.
`
`Results
`
`Figures 1 and 2 show results from representative case with tear
`interference images, tear break-up, and rose bengal staining at the
`end of the placebo period (Fig 1) and at the end of oil eye drop
`period (Fig 2). Each result shows improvement from the oil eye
`drop period compared with the placebo period.
`The results at the end of placebo period and oil eye drop period
`are shown in Table 3. Compared with the placebo period, the
`
`2032
`
`subjective face score improved during the oil eye drop period from
`6.7 ⫾ 1.6 to 5.5 ⫾ 1.8 (P ⫽ 0.004), along with the improvement
`of the other tear examinations. Tear interference grade decreased
`from 3.1 ⫾ 0.71 to 2.0 ⫾ 0.77 (P ⬍ 0.0001), tear evaporation rates
`during normal blinking decreased from 13 ⫾ 6.2 (10⫺7 g/second)
`to 11 ⫾ 7.5 (10⫺7 g/second; P ⫽ 0.01), and tear BUT was
`prolonged from 4.6 ⫾ 2.8 seconds to 12 ⫾ 3.5 seconds (P ⬍
`0.0001). The improvement of the subjective score also was ac-
`companied by improvements of the rose bengal staining score
`(from 2.2 ⫾ 0.85 to 1.4 ⫾ 1.3; P ⫽ 0.007) and the meibomian
`gland orifice obstruction score (from 2.2 ⫾ 0.38 to 1.6 ⫾ 0.63; P
`⫽ 0.002), but not accompanied by the improvement of the fluo-
`rescein staining score (from 0.4 ⫾ 0.81 to 0.13 ⫾ 0.33; P ⫽ 0.06).
`Results of these improvements between the MGD without
`aqueous tear deficiency group (n ⫽ 11) and the MGD with aqueous
`tear deficiency group (n ⫽ 9) showed no statistically significant
`difference. Administration of the oil eye drops was well tolerated, and
`none of the subjects reported irritation or severe blurring. None of the
`collected samples tested positive for bacteria or fungi. Blinding
`among participants, persons performing the intervention, outcome
`assessors, and data analyses were performed entirely by protocol.
`
`Discussion
`
`This study demonstrated a clear benefit of using low-con-
`centration homogenized oil eye drops for the treatment of
`MGD. Because MGD is a major cause of ocular irritation,
`symptomatic relief is an essential aspect of treatment. The
`improvement in symptoms was accompanied by improve-
`ment of objective findings, including tear interference im-
`age, tear evaporation, tear BUT, rose bengal staining, and
`meibomian gland orifice obstruction. The improvements
`were attributed to the effects of the oil eye drops because all
`patients used eye drops in a double-blind protocol. The eye
`drops were stable and well tolerated, and they did not cause
`irritation or blurred vision at room temperature. By using
`low-concentration oil, we succeeded in avoiding the usual
`complications of oil administration, such as blurred vision
`and a viscous sensation.
`To supplement the missing tear lipid in MGD, we used
`POE castor oil to solubilize the castor oil in distilled water
`in a low concentration.27 It has been reported that a hydro-
`philic lipid is required to enable oil to spread over the
`human tear aqueous layer and that polar phospholipids exist
`as a hydrophilic lipid in tears.2– 4,27 The POE castor oil is a
`derivative of castor oil, a polar lipid having a hydrophilic
`
`ARGENTUM - EX. 1017, p. 003
`
`

`
`Goto et al
`
`䡠 Castor Oil Eye Drops for MGD
`
`Figure 1. Tear interference image, tear break-up, and rose bengal staining
`of the representative case at the end of the placebo period. A, The tear
`interference image shows a few colors and a nonuniform pattern. B, C,
`Slit-lamp photographs stained by fluorescein and rose bengal were taken
`immediately after eye opening. Note the remarkable tear break-up (B) and
`rose bengal staining of the ocular surface between the palpebral fissure (C).
`
`and a hydrophobic group, which is considered to be an ideal
`oil for artificial tears. Because the castor oil can spread over
`the ocular surface, it is expected to make the tear more
`stable, to decrease tear evaporation, and to decrease friction
`between the lid and ocular surface.28
`
`Figure 2. Tear interference image, tear break-up, and rose bengal staining
`of the same case as in Figure 1 at the end of oil eyedrop period. A, The tear
`interference shows a somewhat gray color and more uniform distribution.
`B, C, Slit-lamp photographs stained by fluorescein and rose bengal were
`taken immediately after eye opening. Tear break-up cannot be seen, and
`rose bengal staining was decreased. Figures 1B and 2B were enhanced
`digitally to show tear break-up using Adobe Photoshop (Adobe Systems
`Inc., San Jose, CA) from original photographs at brightness ⫺40 and
`contrast ⫹70. The reflex from the central cornea is the result of the digital
`enhancement.
`
`2033
`
`ARGENTUM - EX. 1017, p. 004
`
`

`
`Ophthalmology Volume 109, Number 11, November 2002
`
`Table 3. Results of Crossover Study during Placebo and Oil Eye
`Drop Periods for the Treatment of Noninflamed Obstructive
`Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (Mean ⫾ Standard Deviation)
`
`Examination
`
`Face score (1–9)
`Tear interference
`grading (1–5)
`Tear evaporation
`rates (⫻10⫺7
`g/second)
`Fluorescein score
`(0–9)
`Rose bengal
`score (0–9)
`BUT (sec)
`Orifice
`obstruction
`(0–3)储
`
`Placebo
`Period*
`6.7 ⫾ 1.6
`3.1 ⫾ 0.71
`
`13 ⫾ 6.2
`
`Oil Eye
`Drop Period†
`5.5 ⫾ 1.8§
`2.0 ⫾ 0.77§
`
`P Value‡
`
`0.004
`⬍0.0001
`
`11 ⫾ 7.5§
`
`0.01
`
`0.40 ⫾ 0.81
`
`0.13 ⫾ 0.33
`
`2.2 ⫾ 0.85
`
`4.6 ⫾ 2.8
`2.2 ⫾ 0.38
`
`1.4 ⫾ 1.3§
`
`12 ⫾ 3.5§
`1.6 ⫾ 0.63§
`
`0.06
`
`0.007
`
`⬍0.0001
`0.002
`
`BUT tear break-up time.
`* Placebo eye drops.
`† Low-concentration homogenized castor oil eye drops.
`‡ Data were analyzed by Wilcoxon’s signed rank test for nonparametric
`paired data. P value was determined between placebo and oil eye drop
`period. A P value of ⬍0.05 was statistically significant.
`§ Statistically significant.
`储 Meibomian gland orifice obstruction score.
`
`Both castor oil and POE castor oil are commercially
`available, are inexpensive, and have been proven to have
`minimal topical toxicity for the eye.15,28
`It was surprising to us that only a minimal amount of
`castor oil changed the ocular surface abnormality a great
`deal. Moreover, there was evidence that tears over the
`ocular surface were stabilized based on the improved tear
`interference image and increase of tear BUT. The tear
`interference pattern significantly showed a more uniform
`pattern of spreading of the lipid film layer after administra-
`tion of the castor oil eye drops than with administration of
`the placebo.21,22 Even though the amount of castor oil was
`minimal, the oil eye drops were well homogenized in the
`tear lipid layer and later spread to form a more stable tear
`lipid layer and to improve, the ocular surface condition
`(Figs 1A and 2A).21,22,29
`There is a concern for the clinical application of castor
`oil eye drops because of their limited shelf life stability.17 It
`is expected that oil quality may change during storage room
`temperature and may be an obstacle for clinical application.
`When we stored the castor oil at 4°C for 4 weeks, the oil
`maintained stability and was well preserved. Moreover, it
`did not cause any irritation to the volunteers. However, after
`storage of the castor oil eye drops at 60°C for 4 weeks, the
`ph changed to 5.8 and caused slight irritation to the patients.
`Castor oil itself is a very effective treatment for ocular
`surface diseases, but the storage method should be consid-
`ered before broad clinical application because of the insta-
`bility of the oil at higher temperatures.
`In conclusion, we have documented a beneficial effect of
`castor oil for the treatment of ocular surface disorders with
`MGD. Although the concept of administering oily eye drops
`has not been considered seriously, the application of castor
`
`2034
`
`oil eye drops should be considered more for the ideal
`artificial tears. Theoretically, patients with aqueous tear
`deficiency can benefit from the application of these artificial
`tears because MGD needs to be supplemented by oil or
`some other ingredient that can stabilize the ocular surface,
`decrease tear evaporation, and decrease friction between the
`lid and ocular surface. Based on study, it is necessary to
`develop a means of maintaining the stability of artificial
`tears with castor oil in rooms with higher temperatures;
`however, this randomized double-blind study clearly shows
`the benefit of the addition of castor oil to artificial tears.
`
`References
`
`1. Mishima S, Maurice DM. The oily layer of the tear film and
`evaporation from the corneal surface. Exp Eye Res 1961;1:
`39 – 45.
`2. Holly FJ. Tear film physiology. Am J Optom Physiol Opt
`1980;57:252–7.
`3. Tiffany JM. The role of meibomian secretion in the tears.
`Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K 1985;104:396 – 401.
`4. Tiffany JM. The lipid secretion of the meibomian glands. Adv
`Lipid Res 1987;22:1– 62.
`5. Driver PJ, Lemp MA. Meibomian gland dysfunction. Surv
`Ophthalmol 1996;40:343– 67.
`6. Lemp MA. Report of the National Eye Institute/Industry
`Workshop on Clinical Trials in Dry Eyes. CLAO J 1995;21:
`221–32.
`7. Shimazaki J, Sakata M, Tsubota K. Ocular surface changes
`and discomfort in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction.
`Arch Ophthalmol 1995;113:1266 –70.
`8. Lee SH, Tseng SCG. Rose bengal staining and cytologic
`characteristics associated with lipid tear deficiency. Am J
`Ophthalmol 1997;124:736 –50.
`9. Shimazaki J, Goto E, Ono M, et al. Meibomian gland dys-
`function in patients with Sjo¨gren syndrome. Ophthalmology
`1998;105:1485– 8.
`10. Key JE. A comparative study of eyelid cleaning regimens in
`chronic blepharitis. CLAO J 1996;22:209 –12.
`11. Korb DR, Greiner JV. Increase in tear film lipid layer thick-
`ness following treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction. In:
`Sullivan DA, ed. Lacrimal Gland, Tear Film, and Dry Eye
`Syndromes. New York: Plenum Press, 1994;293– 8.
`12. Smith RE, Flowers CW Jr. Chronic blepharitis: a review.
`CLAO J 1995;21:200 –7.
`13. Rieger G. Lipid-containing eye drops: a step closer to natural
`tears. Ophthalmologica 1990;201:206 –12.
`14. Tiffany JM. Lipid-containing eye drops [letter]. Ophthalmo-
`logica 1991;203:47–9.
`15. Japanese Pharmaceutical Excipients 1993. Tokyo: Yakuji
`Nippo, 1994; 109.
`16. Tsubota K, Goto E, Fujita H, et al. Treatment of dry eye by
`autologous serum application in Sjo¨gren’s syndrome. Br J
`Ophthalmol 1999;83:390 –5.
`17. Awata T. Stability of The Eye Drops. In: Ohashi Y, ed. The
`Eye Drops. Tokyo: Medical View Co, 1996;15–23.
`18. Xu KP, Yagi Y, Toda I, Tsubota K. Tear function index. A
`new measure of dry eye. Arch Ophthalmol 1995;113:84 – 8.
`19. Fox RI, Robinson CA, Curd JG, et al. Sjo¨gren’s syndrome.
`Proposed criteria for classification. Arthritis Rheum 1986;29:
`577– 85.
`20. Robin JB, Jester JV, Nobe J, et al. In vivo transillumination
`biomicroscopy and photography of meibomian gland dysfunc-
`tion. A clinical study. Ophthalmology 1985;92:1423– 6.
`
`ARGENTUM - EX. 1017, p. 005
`
`

`
`Goto et al
`
`䡠 Castor Oil Eye Drops for MGD
`
`21. Yokoi N, Takehisa Y, Kinoshita S. Correlation of tear lipid
`layer interference patterns with the diagnosis and severity of
`dry eye. Am J Ophthalmol 1996;122:818 –24.
`22. Yokoi N, Mossa F, Tiffany JM, Bron AJ. Assessment of
`meibomian gland function in dry eye using meibometry. Arch
`Ophthalmol 1999;117:723–9.
`23. Tsubota K, Yamada M. Tear evaporation from the ocular
`surface. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992;33:2942–50.
`24. Toda I, Tsubota K. Practical double vital staining for ocular
`surface evaluation [letter]. Cornea 1993;12:366 –7.
`25. van Bijsterveld OP. Diagnostic tests in the sicca syndrome.
`Arch Ophthalmol 1969;82:10 – 4.
`
`26. Rulo AH, Greve EL, Geijssen HC, Hoyng PFJ. Reduction of
`intraocular pressure with treatment of latanoprost once daily in
`patients with normal-pressure glaucoma. Ophthalmology
`1996;103:1276 – 82.
`27. Mitsui T. Physiochemistry of the Cosmetics. 1st ed. Tokyo:
`Nanzando, 1993; 128 –56.
`28. Nagai K. Polyoxyethylene castor oil derivatives. In: Saito
`Y, ed. Handbook of Pharmaceutical Excipients, Japanese
`Edition. Tokyo: The Pharmaceutical Society of Japan,
`1986;345– 8.
`29. Korb DR, Baron DF, Herman JP, et al. Tear film lipid layer
`thickness as a function of blinking. Cornea 1994;13:354 –9.
`
`2035
`
`ARGENTUM - EX. 1017, p. 006

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket