Перегляд вихідного коду сторінки Etoposide, The Impeccable Enjoyment!

No serious adverse events  were reported among patients diagnosed with DME. Table 5 Treatment-related adverse events occurring in >1% of all patients The [http://www.selleckchem.com/MEK.html MEK pathway] proportion of eyes in the DME, RVO, and uveitis subgroups with IOP increases of at least 10 mmHg ranged from 20.6% to 24.1% (Figure 5). Those with an absolute IOP reading of ��25 mmHg or ��35 mmHg recorded at any follow-up visit after DEX implant(s) ranged from 17.4% to 26.7% and from 2.9% to 6.7%, respectively (Figure 5). The proportions of DME, RVO, and uveitis study eyes requiring topical IOP-lowering therapy at any point following treatment with the DEX implant in the study were 29.4%, 16.7%, and 8.7%, respectively (Figure 6). Cases of new onset elevated IOP were reported in 70.0% of DME, 80.0% of RVO, and 50.0% of uveitis study eyes. In this set of eyes, only one DME eye with a history of steroid response had new onset elevated IOP. Figure 5 Increase in IOP following treatment with the DEX implant. Figure 6 The proportion of study eyes requiring use of topical IOP-lowering medication(s) at any follow-up visit after DEX implant injection. The proportions of DME, RVO, and uveitis eyes that had a history of steroid response and also experienced an IOP increase of at least 10 mmHg following DEX implant treatment(s) were 40.0%, 20.0%, and 37.5%, respectively. The proportions of DME, RVO, and uveitis  eyes that had a history of steroid response and also presented at follow-up visits with absolute IOP readings ��25 mmHg were 20.0%, 20.0%, and 37.5%, respectively. Only study eyes with uveitis (12.5%) and other ocular diagnoses (28.6%; not including those with DME or RVO) had both a history of steroid response and an absolute IOP reading ��35 mmHg recorded at any follow-up visit after treatment with the DEX implant(s). The proportions of DME, RVO, and uveitis eyes with a history of steroid response requiring topical IOP-lowering medications following treatment with the DEX implant in the study were 30.0%, 40.0%, and 62.5%, respectively. In the uveitis study eye cohort, four eyes had glaucoma surgery prior to treatment with the DEX implant. The adverse event report revealed that one eye had an IOP increase related to DEX implant injection that resolved following treatment  with topical IOP-lowering medication. Another eye had ongoing mild pain deemed by the investigator to be unrelated to the DEX implant injection and did not require any treatment. The other two uveitis eyes that had undergone prior glaucoma surgery did not have any new safety concerns following treatment with DEX implant(s) over the duration of the study. In total, 1.7% (2/120) of study eyes receiving the DEX implant underwent glaucoma surgery during the study. One eye with CRVO and no history of prior steroid response underwent glaucoma surgery at 2.