What changed for Uveitis

How to read these changes: every figure on this page is the difference between two snapshots of what Voxsanity had tracked on each date. Voxsanity only began taking daily snapshots in July 2026 and is still ingesting the public registries, so a rise here is mostly our own coverage expanding rather than new research appearing. Read it as our tracked coverage growing, not as a claim about real-world research changing this fast: it overstates how much actually changed.

Comparing the two most recent snapshots, 27 July 2026 and 28 July 2026.

• Trials recruiting at Australian sites 1 to 3 (+2)
• Trials recruiting worldwide 34 to 46 (+12)
• Late-stage (Phase 3) trials 3 to 5 (+2)
• Trials on record 369 to 451 (+82)

Newly subsidised on the PBS

No medicines were newly subsidised on the PBS for Uveitis in July 2026. Voxsanity tracks 4 PBS-subsidised medicines for this condition; none of them was listed for the first time this month.

Source: Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), © Commonwealth of Australia. Data used and redistributed under permission; not modified from its original wording where displayed verbatim.

Past updates

Tracking began in July 2026. Month on month changes will appear here once a second month of data has been recorded. Until then, the comparison above shows the most recent movement.

Recent trend

Recent trial results

The 30 most recent of 74 trials tracked for Uveitis that have reported results to a public registry.

AI generated results summary. Written by an AI model from the official source data and checked on a sample basis. It can contain mistakes, so confirm anything important against the original source. How we use AI

• NCT05286203 · results posted 26 June 2026

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (called OPTICS) looked at people with a type of serious eye inflammation that may be caused by infection. The trial ran in two phases. In Phase I, 100 people took part and 92 completed that phase. In Phase II, participants were split into two groups: 12 people received standard diagnostic care and 9 people had a specialised test called Metagenomic Deep Sequencing (MDS), which analyses genetic material to look for signs of infection. The trial was measuring things like eye improvement, whether treatment was considered appropria...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT05042609 · results posted 20 May 2026

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT05042609) enrolled 139 participants in total — 90 in the TRS01 group and 49 in the Active Comparator group. The trial was measuring eye inflammation, specifically looking at cells visible in the front part of the eye (called the anterior chamber) as a way to track how inflammation changed over 28 days. The main question the trial asked was how many participants had no detectable inflammation cells by Day 28. The reported data shows that by Day 28, 44 participants in the TRS01 group and 15 in the Active Comparator group ha...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03586284 · results posted 10 February 2026

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 51 people across three groups: 19 received oral valganciclovir (an antiviral tablet), 15 received topical ganciclovir 2% (an antiviral eye drop), and 17 received a placebo (a dummy treatment with no active ingredient). The trial was measuring changes in the amount of a virus called CMV (cytomegalovirus) detected inside the eye, as well as whether participants' eye inflammation settled down by the end of the study. Not everyone completed the trial — all 19 in the oral tablet group finished, while 2 people in each of th...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03841357 · results posted 23 January 2026

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at whether a medicine called abatacept (given alongside usual care) might influence the course of a form of childhood arthritis compared to usual care alone. The trial ran across two parts. In Part I, 20 participants received abatacept plus usual care and 20 received usual care only. In Part II, 81 participants received abatacept plus usual care and 662 received usual care only — making a total of 783 participants across both parts. The trial tracked participants for roughly 14 months and measured several things: whethe...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT03828019 · results posted 16 May 2025

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03828019) enrolled 227 people with uveitis (inflammation inside the eye) — 114 in a group receiving adalimumab (a type of injection-based medicine) and 113 in a group receiving conventional immunosuppression (standard medicines that reduce the immune system's activity). The trial was primarily measuring how many participants in each group were able to reduce their steroid (corticosteroid) dose to a low level — 7.5 mg per day or less — while also having their eye inflammation become inactive, across the first six months. It...

  View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03816397 · results posted 26 March 2025

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03816397) involved 87 people with a condition involving eye inflammation (ocular inflammation) linked to joint disease. Participants were split into two groups: 43 people continued taking a medicine called adalimumab, and 44 people stopped taking it. The trial was measuring how long it took before signs of eye or joint inflammation came back — called "treatment failure" — after being assigned to one of these two approaches. The reported data shows that for the group who stopped adalimumab, the median time to treatment fai...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03811366 · results posted 22 November 2024

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03811366) enrolled 12 participants, all of whom completed the study — none dropped out. All participants received corticosteroid monotherapy (treatment with steroids only, without other medicines). The trial was measuring the health of the retina (the light-sensitive layer at the back of the eye) using a test called an electroretinogram (ERG), which records the electrical signals the retina produces in response to light. These measurements were taken at 12 months and again at 24 months. The trial also tracked other signs o...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03634475 · results posted 9 October 2024

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03634475) enrolled 12 participants, all of whom completed the study with none dropping out. The trial involved a single injection of a treatment called PP-001 directly into the eye (known as an intravitreal injection) and was designed to test it in people with chronic, non-infectious uveitis — a condition involving ongoing inflammation inside the eye. The trial used increasing doses across participants to look at how the treatment was tolerated. The reported data shows that the primary outcome being measured was the numbe...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT04088409 · results posted 13 August 2024

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04088409) looked at two medicines — baricitinib and adalimumab — in children and young people with a condition causing inflammation inside the eye (uveitis). In the first part of the trial (Part A), 25 participants were assigned to baricitinib and 5 to adalimumab. Of those, 24 and 5 respectively received at least one dose. The trial was primarily measuring how many participants showed a meaningful reduction in eye inflammation by week 24, using a recognised grading system called the SUN criteria, which looks at the level o...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03711929 · results posted 4 December 2023

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03711929) enrolled 145 participants across three groups during its first, double-masked phase: 57 received DE-109 injectable solution (the test treatment), 59 received a sham (dummy) procedure as a control, and 29 received DE-109 in a third "dummy arm." The trial was measuring eye inflammation — specifically a cloudiness inside the eye called "vitreous haze" — in people with a condition called uveitis (inflammation at the back of the eye). The main question the trial asked was: what proportion of treated eyes reached a vit...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT04222712 · results posted 5 October 2023

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04222712) enrolled 16 people in total, split into two groups of 8 — one group received a lower dose of a treatment called TRS01, and the other received a higher dose. All 16 participants completed the study with no one dropping out. The trial was measuring adverse events, meaning any unwanted or unexpected health experiences that occurred during the study, both in the eyes and throughout the body more broadly. The reported data shows that in the low dose group, 2 out of 8 participants experienced adverse events during the...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT02623426 · results posted 10 July 2023

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02623426) enrolled 194 people across three groups. Each group received a different treatment injected into the eye for a condition affecting the retina: 65 people received a dexamethasone pellet (Ozurdex), 65 received methotrexate, and 64 received ranibizumab (Lucentis). The trial was measuring changes in the thickness of a specific layer at the centre of the retina — called the central subfield — using eye-scanning technology, comparing thickness at the start of the trial to thickness at 12 weeks. Most participants comple...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03660618 · results posted 10 May 2023

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled just one participant, listed under the group "Clinic Subjects." The trial was focused on imaging blood flow in body tissue, which the study described as an important area of interest in clinical settings. The reported data shows that the one participant both started and completed the study, with no participants recorded as dropping out. However, for the primary outcome measure — imaging blood flow in tissue — no numerical results or measurements were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov. This means it is not possible to d...

  View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT02406209 · results posted 27 March 2023

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02406209) enrolled 45 people across three groups to compare different eye drop treatments for eye inflammation. The three groups were: NS2 eye drops (0.5%) alone (15 people); NS2 (0.5%) combined with Pred Forte® (0.1%) eye drops (16 people); and Pred Forte® (1%) eye drops alone (14 people). Roughly half of the participants in each group completed the study — 7, 7, and 6 people respectively — while the remainder did not finish. The main thing the trial measured was a score called the "anterior chamber cell grade" — a scale...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT04976777 · results posted 28 February 2023

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04976777) involved 54 people in total. Participants were split into two groups: 36 people received an updated version of a dexamethasone eye implant delivery system (called the Updated DEX PS DDS 0.7 mg), and 18 people received the already-approved version of the same delivery system (Approved DEX PS DDS 0.7 mg). The trial was primarily measuring how many participants in each group experienced at least one unwanted medical event (called an adverse event) during the study period. Nearly all participants finished the study —...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT04200833 · results posted 5 May 2022

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04200833) enrolled 10 participants, all in a single group, and all 10 completed the study with no dropouts. The trial was looking at golimumab (an injection-based medicine) as a treatment for uveitis — a type of eye inflammation. The main thing researchers were measuring was how many participants' eye inflammation reached a "complete response," meaning the inflammation in the front of the eye fully settled down to the lowest possible level. They also tracked vision, eye discomfort, and whether participants were able to red...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT03584724 · results posted 28 March 2022

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at a product called Norflo Oro compared to a placebo (a dummy treatment with no active ingredient) in people with a specific type of eye inflammation called HLA-B27 uveitis. A total of 49 people were enrolled — 25 in the Norflo Oro group and 24 in the placebo group. Of those, 18 in the Norflo Oro group and 23 in the placebo group completed the full 12-month study. The main thing the trial was measuring was whether the number of uveitis flare-ups (episodes where the eye inflammation returned) changed over the 12 months o...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03207815 · results posted 21 January 2022

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03207815) enrolled 74 people with active non-infectious uveitis (inflammation inside the eye not caused by infection) — 38 received filgotinib, an investigational oral medicine, and 36 received a placebo (a dummy pill with no active ingredient). The trial ran for up to 52 weeks and was primarily measuring how many participants in each group experienced what the researchers called "treatment failure" by week 24 — meaning their eye inflammation got worse or did not improve enough according to set criteria, such as new areas...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT03656692 · results posted 3 August 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at a single treatment group of people receiving Acthar Gel, a medication being studied for use in uveitis — a condition involving inflammation inside the eye. Five people started the trial, two completed it, and three did not finish. The trial was measuring three main things related to eye inflammation: the degree of haziness in vision (using the Nussenblatt Grading Scale), the amount of protein floating in the fluid at the front of the eye (using the Laser Flare Scale), and the number of cells floating in that same flu...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT03097315 · results posted 15 June 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03097315) enrolled 38 adults who received a 4 mg injection of a medicine called CLS-TA delivered into a specific layer at the back of the eye (the suprachoroidal space). The trial was studying a condition called uveitis — inflammation inside the eye — and was measuring things like unwanted medical events (adverse events), eye pressure, and several signs of eye inflammation at different points in time. The reported data shows that 27 out of 38 participants experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (an unwan...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT02952001 · results posted 7 May 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02952001) was an extension study that followed on from an earlier trial involving people with uveitis — an inflammatory condition affecting the eye. A total of 28 people continued in the group that had received a 4 mg injection of CLS-TA (delivered into a specific layer at the back of the eye called the suprachoroidal space), while 5 people continued in the group that had received a sham (dummy) procedure. The study was measuring how long it took before participants needed additional treatment for their uveitis, as well as...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT02595398 · results posted 28 April 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 160 people in total — 96 received an injection of a drug called CLS-TA delivered into a specific layer at the back of the eye (called a suprachoroidal injection), while 64 underwent a sham (fake) procedure as a comparison group. The trial was primarily measuring how many participants had a meaningful improvement in their vision — specifically, reading at least 15 more letters on an eye chart — after 24 weeks. The reported data shows that in the injection group, 45 out of 96 participants reached that 15-letter improve...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT02911116 · results posted 26 March 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled eight people in total, split into two groups. Five participants received the treatment by injection under the skin only (Cohort 1), and three received it first through a drip into a vein and then by injection under the skin (Cohort 2). The trial was looking at a condition involving inflammation inside the eye (uveitis), and the main thing it set out to measure was how many people in each group showed a "treatment response" by Week 16 — meaning their eye inflammation had settled down according to specific criteria for...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT01789320 · results posted 21 February 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 11 participants, all of whom received an eye injection of a corticosteroid medication called triamcinolone acetonide (brand name Triesence®). Nine participants completed the study, while two did not finish. The trial was measuring changes in eye pressure, vision sharpness, retinal thickness, and the degree of cloudiness inside the eye (called vitreous haze) over a period of up to 26 weeks. The reported data shows that eye pressure (the fluid pressure inside the eye, measured in millimetres of mercury) changed by an a...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT02255032 · results posted 8 February 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02255032) enrolled 22 people in total — 17 received a higher dose (4 mg) of a treatment called CLS-TA, and 5 received a lower dose (0.8 mg). All 22 participants completed the trial with no drop-outs. The trial was looking at swelling at the back of the eye (a condition called macular oedema) in people with uveitis, an inflammatory eye condition. Specifically, it measured the thickness of a central area at the back of the eye — called the central subfield — using a scanning technology that produces detailed images of the ey...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT03580343 · results posted 1 February 2021

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 5 participants, all of whom were in a single group receiving a treatment called tofacitinib. Four of the five participants completed the study, while one did not finish. The trial was measuring a combined ("composite") outcome called "treatment failure," which was defined as any one of the following occurring: new areas of eye inflammation appearing compared to the start of the trial, a significant worsening of inflammation inside the eye (measured by the amount of cells visible in specific parts of the eye), or a mea...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT03020992 · results posted 31 December 2020

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03020992) enrolled 89 people, all of whom received the medicine certolizumab pegol. All participants had active axial spondyloarthritis (a type of inflammatory spinal condition) and a history of anterior uveitis — a painful inflammation at the front of the eye. Eighty-three of the 89 participants completed the study. The trial was mainly measuring how often eye flare-ups (new episodes of anterior uveitis requiring treatment from an eye specialist) occurred during the treatment period. The reported data shows that, looking...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT02746991 · results posted 7 July 2020

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02746991) enrolled 153 people in total — 52 received a sham (dummy) injection and 101 received a fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal (FAI) insert, which is a small implant placed in the eye. The trial was measuring how often a condition called uveitis (inflammation inside the eye) came back in the treated eye, first over a 6-month period and then over a longer 36-month (3-year) period. Not everyone completed the study — 24 out of 52 in the sham group and 67 out of 101 in the FAI insert group finished. The reported data sh...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗

• NCT02756650 · results posted 11 June 2020

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 8 participants, all of whom received a treatment called ACZ885N (also known as canakinumab). The trial was exploring its use in people with Neuro-Behçet's Disease — a rare condition where Behçet's Disease affects the nervous system. Six of the eight participants completed the trial, and two did not. The trial was described as an exploratory study, meaning it was not designed to draw firm statistical conclusions — it was intended to gather early information rather than definitively test whether the treatment works. Th...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

• NCT02748512 · results posted 1 May 2020

  According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 26 people in total — 14 assigned to use a newer device called the Mk II Inserter and 12 assigned to use an older version called the Mk I Inserter. One person from each group did not complete the trial. The study was looking at a small implant placed into the eye (called a fluocinolone acetonide insert, or FAI insert) and comparing how easy it was for doctors to use each version of the inserter device, as well as tracking certain eye-related events over 12 months. The reported data shows that for the primary measureme...

  Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

See all 74 reported results for Uveitis

These are the results as reported to the registry, not medical advice. Verify independently with the trial site and discuss what they mean for you with your doctor.

What is coming

AI generated pipeline summary. Written by an AI model from the official source data and checked on a sample basis. It can contain mistakes, so confirm anything important against the original source. How we use AI

According to NIH funding data, a moderate amount of public research funding is currently directed toward uveitis, which suggests the condition has attracted meaningful scientific attention from one of the world's largest medical research bodies. However, the direction of that funding is falling year on year, which may indicate that research priorities are shifting away from uveitis over time. Pati...

See the full Uveitis page

Not medical advice. Voxsanity republishes public government health data in plain English. These figures describe research and registry activity, not the suitability of any treatment for any person. Trial status can change; always verify current status directly with the trial site and confirm Australian availability with your doctor.