Effects of LATISSE (bimatoprost 0.03 per cent topical solution) on the ocular surface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: LATISSE is marketed for the treatment of hypotrichosis (loss of eyelashes), using a prostamide analogue and preserved with benzalkonium chloride, which is an effective preservative; however, it also causes irritation to the ocular surface. LATISSE is applied to the lid margin; however, with the blink, some solution may fall onto the ocular surface. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of LATISSE on the ocular surface over two months. METHODS: Non-dry eye participants interested in eyelash lengthening were invited to a prospective uncontrolled, open-label clinical study using LATISSE for two months. Eyelash length, subjective symptoms, tear film stability, osmolarity, ocular redness and intraocular pressure were evaluated at baseline (T0) and at one (T1) and two months (T2). RESULTS: Twenty-eight women (ages 18 to 29) entered the study. Fifteen completed the study with five who discontinued due to burning upon instillation and eight were lost to follow-up. Average eyelash length increased at each time (p < 0.001). Dryness, burning and grittiness remained low (less than 25/100) throughout the trial with dryness showing a significant change between T0 and T1 (p = 0.04), but not between T1 and T2 (p > 0.05). No difference (p > 0.05) was noted for the non-invasive break-up time, photochromametry or tear osmolarity. Intraocular pressure showed a decrease with time but translated to only a one to two mmHg change, which was not clinically relevant. CONCLUSIONS: LATISSE increases eyelash length within a short time (less than two months). Patients seeking eyelash enhancement options should be educated as to the use, precautions and any secondary effects, including the potential for discomfort upon instillation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".