1. Miyazaki D, Fukagawa K, Okamoto S, et al. Epidemiological aspects of allergic conjunctivitis. Allergol Int 2020; 69: 487-95.
2.
Leonardi A, Quintieri L, Presa IJ, et al. Allergic conjunctivitis management: update on ophthalmic solutions. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2024; 24: 347-60.
3.
Mueller A. Allergic conjunctivitis: an update. Handb Exp Pharmacol 2022; 268: 95-9.
4.
Ackerman S, Smith LM, Gomes PJ. Ocular itch associated with allergic conjunctivitis: latest evidence and clinical management. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 2016; 7: 52-67.
5.
Gong L, Sun X, Qu J, et al. Loteprednol etabonate suspension 0.2% administered QID compared with olopatadine solution 0.1% administered BID in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis: a multicenter, randomized, investigator-masked, parallel group study in Chinese patients. Clin Ther 2012; 34: 1259-72.
6.
Chigbu DI, Coyne AM. Update and clinical utility of alcaftadine ophthalmic solution 0.25% in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis. Clin Ophthalmol 2015; 9: 1215-25.
7.
Stokes TC, Feinberg G. Rapid onset of action of levocabastine eye-drops in histamine-induced conjunctivitis. Clin Exp Allergy 1993; 23: 791-4.
8.
Dupuis P, Prokopich CL, Hynes A, Kim H. A contemporary look at allergic conjunctivitis. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol 2020; 16: 5.
9.
Fukuda K, Ishida W, Wakasa Y, et al. Oral immunotherapy for allergic conjunctivitis using transgenic rice expressing hypoallergenic antigens. Cornea 2018; 37 Suppl 1: S67-73.
10.
Renuka, Ranjan A, Sinha AK. Comparative assessment of alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine hydrochloride 0.2% and bepotastine besilate 1.5% as anti-allergic conjunctivitis agents. Int J Pharm Clin Res 2021; 13: 412-9.
11.
McLaurin EB, Marsico NP, Ackerman SL, et al. Ocular itch relief with alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine 0.2% in allergic conjunctivitis: pooled analysis of two multicenter randomized clinical trials. Adv Ther 2014; 31: 1059-71.
12.
Borazan M, Karalezli A, Akova YA, et al. Efficacy of olopatadine HCI 0.1%, ketotifen fumarate 0.025%, epinastine HCI 0.05%, emedastine 0.05% and fluorometholone acetate 0.1% ophthalmic solutions for seasonal allergic conjunctivitis: a placebo-controlled environmental trial. Acta Ophthal 2009; 87: 549-54.
13.
Mishra MK, Kumari V, Singh RK. A comparative study of efficacy of topical olopatadine (0.1%), bepotastine (1.5%) and alcaftadine (0.25%) in mild to moderate allergic conjunctivitis at Sri Krishna Medical College, Muzaffarpur, Bihar, India. Int J Pharm Clin Res 2022; 14: 553-9.
14.
Fujishima H, Hasunuma T, Kawakita T, et al. Efficacy of alcaftadine 0.25% (AGN-229666) for once-daily prevention of cedar-pollen allergic conjunctivitis: a phase 3 randomized study. Ocular Immunol Inflam 2021; 29: 1621-6.
15.
Ayyappanavar S, Sridhar S, Kumar K, et al. Comparative analysis of safety and efficacy of alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine hydrochloride 0.2% and bepotastine besilate 1.5% in allergic conjunctivitis. Indian J Ophthalmol 2021; 69: 257-61.
16.
Kumari P, Prasad V, Najmi MA. In allergic conjunctivitis, comparative assessment of the safety and effectiveness of alcaftadine 0.25 percent, olopatadine hydrochloride 0.2 percent, and bepotastine besilate 1.5 percent. Eur J Mol Clin Med 2020; 7: 4550-6.
17.
Singh W, Pandey ML, Rana MK, Chugh K. Comparative Study between the effectiveness and associated adverse effects of olopatadine and alcaftadine when used in treating allergic conjunctivitis in a Tertiary Eye Care Centre of Northern India. J Pharm Neg Results 2022; 13: 3815-20.
18.
Krishnan A, Jayanthi C, Sridhar S. A comparative study of efficacy and safety of alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine hydrochloride 0.2% in allergic conjunctivitis at a tertiary care hospital, Kerala. J Ophthalmol 2022; 34: 227-33.
19.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009; 339: b2535.
20.
Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1. 0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011.
21.
Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1-12.
22.
Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Inter Med 2001; 135: 982-9.
23.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002; 21: 1539-58.
24.
Dudeja L, Janakiraman A, Dudeja I, et al. Observer-masked trial comparing efficacy of topical olopatadine (0.1%), bepotastine (1.5%), and alcaftadine (0.25%) in mild to moderate allergic conjunctivitis. Indian J Ophthalmol 2019; 67: 1400-4.
25.
Agarwal G. A comparative assessment of topical olopatadine (0.1%) and alcaftadine (0.25%) in cases of allergic conjunctivitis. J Adv Med Dent Sci Res 2017; 5: 107-10.
26.
Ackerman S, D’Ambrosio F Jr, Greiner JV, et al. A multicenter evaluation of the efficacy and duration of action of alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2% in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. J Asthma Allergy 2013; 6: 43-52.
27.
Greiner JV, Edwards-Swanson K, Ingerman A. Evaluation of alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution in acute allergic conjunctivitis at 15 minutes and 16 hours after instillation versus placebo and olopatadine 0.1%. Clin Ophthalmol 2011; 5: 87-93.
28.
Bonini S. Atopic keratoconjunctivitis. Allergy 2004; 59 Suppl 78: 71-3.
29.
Ono SJ, Lane K. Comparison of effects of alcaftadine and olopatadine on conjunctival epithelium and eosinophil recruitment in a murine model of allergic conjunctivitis. Drug Design Develop Ther 2011; 5: 577-84.
30.
Nakatani H, Gomes P, Bradford R, et al. Alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine 0.1% in preventing cedar pollen allergic conjunctivitis in Japan: a randomized study. Ocular Immunol Inflam 2019; 27: 622-31.
31.
Williams JI, Kennedy KS, Gow JA, et al. Prolonged effectiveness of bepotastine besilate ophthalmic solution for the treatment of ocular symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis. J Ocular Pharmacol Ther 2011; 27: 385-93.
