Skip to main content
. 2025 Sep 17;88:103511. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103511

Table 2.

Analysis of primary and secondary outcomes.

ATT group Control group Relative risk or Hazard ratio (95% CI) p
Primary outcomes
 As intention-to-treat population
 N 37 39
 Complete uveitis resolution 30 (81.1%) 20 (51.3%) 1.58 (1.12–2.23) 0.0060
 As per-protocol population
 N 33 30
 Complete uveitis resolution 27 (81.8%) 16 (53.3%) 1.53 (1.06–2.22) 0.0150
Secondary outcomes (intention-to-treat analysis)
 Details of uveitis resolution
 Complete 30 (81.1%) 20 (51.3%) 0.0040
 Partial 0 (0%) 8 (20.5%)
 Non-responsive 7 (18.9%) 11 (28.2%)
 Estimated mean time-to-any resolution (in months) 3.6 (2.1–5.7) 3.0 (1.8–4.2) 0.96 (0.59–1.58) 0.8888
 Incidence of uveitis relapse 2/34 (5.9%) 7/24 (29.2%) 0.20 (0.05–0.89) 0.0210
 Estimated mean time-to-uveitis relapse (in months) 17.7 (16.1–19.4) 14.3 (9.2–19.4) 0.14 (0.03–0.69) 0.0160
 Ocular outcomes
 Visual acuity changes
 Increase 8 (14.5%) 11 (18.3%) 0.7550
 Stable 33 (60.0%) 32 (53.3%)
 Decrease 14 (25.5%) 17 (28.3%)
 Secondary glaucoma or increased intraocular pressure 18 (32.7%) 18 (30.0%) 1.05 (0.61–1.81) 0.7530

The last observation carried forward (LOCF) method was used to handle missing outcomes in both the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses.