References
- Leonardi A, Capobianco D, Benedetti N, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of ketotifen in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis: comparison between ketotifen 0.025% and 0.05% eye drops. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 2018:1–5. doi:10.1080/09273948.2018.1530363.
- Boboridis KG, Konstas AGP. Evaluating the novel application of cyclosporine 0.1% in ocular surface disease. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2018;19:1027–1039. doi:10.1080/14656566.2018.1479742.
- Pauly A, Brasnu E, Riancho L, Brignole-Baudouin F, Baudouin C. Multiple endpoint analysis of BAC-preserved and unpreserved antiallergic eye drops on a 3D-reconstituted corneal epithelial model. Mol Vis. 2011;17:745–755.
- Leonardi A, Zafirakis P. Efficacy and comfort of olopatadine versus ketotifen ophthalmic solutions: a double-masked, environmental study of patient preference. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:1167–1173. doi:10.1185/030079904125004321.
- Mortemousque B, Bourcier T, Khairallah M, et al. Comparison of preservative-free ketotifen fumarate and preserved olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops in the treatment of moderate to severe seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2014;37:1–8. doi:10.1016/j.jfo.2013.02.007.