Background/Objectives: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are increasingly prescribed for type 2 diabetes in addition to other conditions such as obesity. As their use expands, understanding potential ocular safety signals is important, particularly in populations already at risk for diabetic eye disease. The aim of this study is to identify potential pharmacovigilance safety signals for ocular adverse events (AEs) related to GLP-1 RA medications to better inform future clinical practice. Methods: This study utilized the publicly available FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to obtain AE reports related to exenatide, tirzepatide, dulaglutide, liraglutide, and semaglutide from 2005 to 2024. Reports were categorized by demographic and geographic variables. Disproportionality analysis using reporting odds ratios (RORs) was performed to detect potential safety signals. Year-over-year trends in the proportional representation of each drug were also assessed through linear regression and time series plots. Results: Ocular AEs represented 3.61% of all GLP-1 RA related reports. Median age was 63 years, and 62.6% of reports involved female patients. Exenatide accounted for 33.61% of ocular AEs but showed a significant annual decline in reporting (–5.15% per year, p < 0.001). Semaglutide (31.37%) and tirzepatide (12.19%) demonstrated significant year-over-year increases in proportional reporting (2.23% and 0.79% per year, respectively; both p < 0.05), consistent with rapid uptake in clinical practice. Semaglutide demonstrated a modestly elevated ROR (1.46), while tirzepatide showed a low ROR (0.42), though this likely reflects shorter post-marketing exposure rather than lower clinical risk. The most frequently reported events were visual impairment, followed by vision blurred, cataract, and blindness. Conclusions: This pharmacovigilance analysis identifies potential ocular AE signals associated with GLP-1 RAs, particularly semaglutide. While semaglutide showed a statistically significant disproportional reporting signal for ocular AEs, the absence of exposure denominators, comparator groups, and the susceptibility of FAERS to reporting bias means these findings are hypothesis-generating rather than causal. Clinicians should remain vigilant and consider eye care referrals when indicated. Further research is needed to validate these associations and clarify underlying mechanisms.

Background: Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness around the world and is characterized as a group of irreversible optic neuropathies with multiple risk factors such as age, race/ethnicity, sex, and intraocular pressure (IOP), amongst many others that play a role in disease etiology. However, IOP is the only modifiable risk factor, with higher IOP often causing increased damage to the optic nerve, resulting in the vast majority of medical and surgical treatments aiming to reduce IOP. There are a number of interventions available to treat glaucoma including micro-invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS), whose usage has drastically increased due to its safety and efficacy. Studies also highlight the IOP-reducing effect of cataract surgery, which is the most common procedure performed globally. However, other, more targeted therapies and surgeries have been shown to have a more significant effect on IOP reduction. The objective of this study is to compare the IOP and medication reduction between cataract surgery (CS), MIGS, and MIGS and cataract surgery (MACS) clinical trials. Methods: This analysis consisted of publicly available data on CS, MIGS, and MACS clinical trials from 2005 to 2017 using ClinicalTrials.gov. Data reporting and synthesis adhered to PRISMA guidelines. MIGS interventions studied in this analysis include iStent^®, CyPass^® Micro-Stent, Ex-PRESS^®, Hydrus^®, PRESERFLO^™ MicroShunt, and XEN^® Gel Stent. The main variables of interest are the mean IOP and mean number of glaucoma medications used. The primary outcomes were the baseline, post-procedure, and reduction in IOP and glaucoma medication use. Cohorts were further subdivided by the follow-up period (6, 12, and 24 months), as well as their medicated or unmedicated status for pre-op IOP measurement. PROSPERO CRD42025102892. Results: A total of 21 trials were included in this review, comprising 3330 clinical trial participants: 7 CS trials (N = 570), 13 MIGS trials (N = 1577), and 9 MACS trials (N = 1183). All interventions studied resulted in a decrease in both the IOP and medication usage with varying degrees. At 12 months, the wash-out baseline IOP reduction (mmHg) was 6.9 (27.5%) for CS, 8.8 (34.0%) for MIGS, and 8.2 (32.6%) for MACS. The medication reduction was 0.8 (56.1%) following CS, 1.0 (39.5%) for MIGS, and 1.3 (86.4%) for MACS. At 24 months, the wash-out baseline IOP reduction was 6.3 (25.1%) for CS, 8.4 (33.1%) for MIGS, and 7.6 (30.1%) for MACS. At 24 months, the medication reduction was 0.9 (58.3%) for CS, 1.5 (79.8%) for MIGS, and 1.3 (86.1%) for MACS. Conclusions: The results indicate that CS, MIGS, and MACS all result in a decrease in the IOP and glaucoma medications; however, MIGS and MACS outperform CS in IOP and medication reduction. Adopting MIGS and MACS for patients with ocular hypertension or mild-to-moderate glaucoma will help improve patient outcomes through reducing the IOP and medication burden. Given that glaucoma affects certain populations to a greater degree, future research analyzing racial representation is critical in ensuring the appropriate applicability of clinical trial results toward diverse populations.

Background: Glaucoma is the leading cause of global irreversible blindness, and it disproportionately affects people of African descent, in addition to having slightly higher prevalence rates in females. Glaucoma is a group of diseases that are characterized by progressive and irreversible damage to the optic nerve, leading to eventual blindness without proper treatment. There are a number of interventions available to treat glaucoma, including MIGS, of which usage has drastically increased due to its safety and efficacy. However, with minority populations, such as people of African descent, having the highest disease burden, it remains critical to evaluate the diversity of clinical trial populations that are used in the study of glaucoma treatments. The objective of this study is to compare the representation of Black and other ethnic minorities, as well as female participants, between cataract surgery (CS), minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS), and MIGS and cataract surgery (MACS) trials. Methods: This analysis consisted of publicly available data on MIGS, CS, and MACS clinical trials from 2005 to 2017, using ClinicalTrials.gov as well as prevalence data sourced from the CDC. Data reporting and synthesis adhered to PRISMA guidelines. This study focuses on sex rather than gender, as this is how data was reported on ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcome was the participation-to-prevalence ratio (PPR) of each clinical trial. A PPR between 0.8 and 1.2 represents adequate representation, while a PPR less than 0.8 or greater than 1.2 can signify under- or over-representation, respectively. Results: A total of 21 trials were included in this review, comprising 3330 clinical trial participants: 7 CS trials (N = 570), 13 MIGS trials (N = 1577), and 9 MACS trials (N = 1183). All of the clinical trials included data on sex, while only 14 reported race data and 7 reported ethnicity data. The overall PPR of female participants was 1.00, with CS, MIGS, and MACS clinical trials having PPRs of 0.99, 1.00, and 1.00, respectively. On the other hand, the overall PPR of Black participants was 0.44, with CS, MIGS, and MACS clinical trials having PPRs of 0.27, 0.62, and 0.22, respectively. Further analysis demonstrated that the PPR of Black participants in trials sponsored by medical device companies and medical centers or universities was 0.41 and 1.25, respectively. The study was registered with Prospero CRD420251152586. Conclusions: Cataract surgery, MIGS, and MIGS and cataract surgery clinical trials under-represent Black individuals and appropriately represent females. Due to the disproportionate amount of Black individuals impacted by glaucoma, this lack of representation raises concerns about the applicability of the clinical trials to these populations. Understanding clinical trial disparities in the representation of minority races is a key first step toward promoting advancements in diversity and equitable healthcare. Clinical trials in the future need to make a genuine effort to include minority groups to improve the generalizability of results.

Background: Opaque bubble layers (OBLs) are a common intraoperative complication during flap creation in femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK (FS-LASIK). This study aims to evaluate how cone and flap sizes can be optimized to minimize OBL risk in VISUMAX 800 FS-LASIK. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent LASIK with the VISUMAX 800. Eyes were grouped by cone size and laser settings into S cone/M settings and M cone/L settings, in addition to OBL status (OBL vs. non-OBL). Generalized estimating equations were used to account for inter-eye correlation. Flap–cone edge gap was quantified from intraoperative images using FIJI (version 2.17.0, ImageJ). Results: OBL developed in 17 of 226 eyes (7.5%). The majority of OBLs (15/17) occurred in the M cone with L setting group. Eyes that developed OBLs had larger WTWs (p < 0.001) and larger mean flap diameters (p < 0.001). Among eyes with M cones and L settings, image analysis revealed that the average gap between flap and cone edge was significantly larger in the OBL group (p = 0.007). Conclusions: Our findings support the use of VISUMAX 800 in FS-LASIK and suggest that OBL formation may be associated with the distance between flap and cone edges, with larger average flap–cone gaps observed in eyes that developed OBL.

Background/Objectives: As the world becomes more connected, it is becoming critical for clinicians to understand other cultures, races, and ethnicities to provide the most effective therapy. A comprehensive understanding of all communities necessitates an examination of the social determinants of health (SDH). Eye diseases and many other conditions are influenced by SDH. To elucidate the impact of SDH on eye health, a comparative ecological analysis of Monroe and Erie Counties in New York State was conducted to identify any differences in SDH and glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and diabetic retinopathy prevalence. Methods: The CDC Vision and Eye Health Surveillance System (VEHSS) was utilized to collect glaucoma, AMD, and diabetic retinopathy data in Monroe and Erie Counties, New York State, and the USA for 2019. The American Community Survey, County Health Rankings, and Neighborhood Atlas data portals were used to collect the county socioeconomic demographics, along with other health statistics. Results: Overall, Erie County had a higher prevalence of AMD (9.56% vs. 6.61%, p < 0.0001) and glaucoma (13.05% vs. 11.71%, p < 0.0001) compared to Monroe County. Erie County also had a higher prevalence of AMD and glaucoma across all races, aside from North American Natives. Erie County also had a greater primary care shortage, with only 1 primary care physician for every 1230 individuals. Although income inequality and poverty were similar between Erie and Monroe Counties, Erie County also has more racial segregation regarding the residential layout (ranked 74 on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the most segregated). Conclusions: The results indicate that Erie County had an increased prevalence of AMD and glaucoma compared to Monroe County in 2019, along with a greater primary care shortage. Although this analysis targeted Western New York, disparities such as lack of primary care access and segregation are prevalent across the US, necessitating widespread action to address these problems.