A global ocular tolerability score was determined using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) on which 0 meant no symptoms and 100 meant the worst possible discomfort. This evaluation was to be performed before any ophthalmic assessment at each scheduled visit. Specific ocular symptoms measured with the VAS included: foreign body sensation, burning/stinging, itching, pain, sticky feeling, blurred vision, photophobia. The patients evaluated their symptoms using the VAS giving the value they were feeling from none to an extreme value. The VAS scale was a straight horizontal line of fixed length (100 mm). The ends were defined as extreme limits of the parameter.

Tear film osmolarity as a marker of tear film solute content was performed with a TearLab Osmolarity System. The concentration of the tears was assessed in both eyes before the instillation of any dilating or anaesthetic drops. The tear fluid was collected onto the bottom tip of the test card by passive capillary action. After a successful tear collection, the Pen was docked into the Reader, which showed the quantitative tear film osmolarity result in mOsm/L on the liquid crystal display. Normal Patients: 275-316 mOsms/L (mean 302 mOsms/L), Dry Eye Disease Patients: > 316 mOsms/L. The higher the score the worst the outcome.

Best corrected visual acuity (BCDVA) was determined by careful refraction according to the standard protocol for refraction. Chart 1 was used for testing the VA of the right eye; Chart 2 for the left eye; and Chart R for refraction only. Retroilluminated standard Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts were used. They had 5 Sloan letters on each line of equal difficulty, and there was a geometric progression in letter size from line to line. VAS awarded one point for every letter correctly guessed. A distance of 4 meters was required between the subject's eyes and the VA chart. When a subject cannot read at least 20 letters on the chart at 4 meters, the subject was tested at 1 meter. If 20 or more letters were read at 4 meters, the VAS for that eye was recorded as the number of letters correct at 4 meters plus 30. Otherwise, the VAS was the number of letters read correctly at 1 meter plus the number read at 4 meters. The higher the score the better the outcome.

TFBUT was measured by determining the time to tear break-up. The TFBUT test was performed after instillation of 5 μl of 2% preservative-free sodium fluorescein solution into the inferior conjunctival cul-de-sac of each eye. With the aid of a slit lamp at 10X magnification using cobalt blue illumination, the examiner monitored the integrity of the tear film, noting the time it took to form lacunae (clear spaces in the tear film) from the time that the eye was opened after the last blink. This measurement was performed within 10 seconds maximum. The TFBUT was measured twice during the first minute after the instillation of the fluorescein. If the 2 readings differed by more than 2 seconds, a third reading was taken. The TFBUT value was the average of the 2 or 3 measurements. Generally, a TFBUT value of 10-35 seconds was considered normal. A value of less than 10 seconds was usually suspicious and may indicate tear film instability. The higher the value, the better the outcome.

The Slit Lamp Examination was used to examine the structures of the eye (eyelids, lashes, conjunctiva, cornea, lens, iris and anterior chamber) according to different scales: Eyelid - Meibomian glands (from 0-none to 3-severe), Eyelid - Erythema (from 0-none to 4-very severe), Eyelid - Oedema (from 0-none to 4-very severe), Lashes (0-normal 1-abnormal), Conjunctiva - Erythema (from 0-none to 3-severe), Conjunctiva - Oedema (from 0-none to 4-very severe), Lens (to 0-no opacification to 3-severe opacification), Iris (0-normal 1-abnormal), Anterior chamber inflammation (from 0-none to 3-severe), Cornea transparency (from 0-completely transparent to 4-complete cornea opacity), Cornea neovascularization (0-absence of vascularization to 4- neovascularization between 270° and 360°). The higher the score the worse the outcome. There was not a total score.

The corneal fluorescein staining was graded by using the Oxford scheme to assess cornea and conjunctiva epithelium damage. The Oxford grading scale divides corneal staining into six groups according to severity from 0 (absent) to 5 (severe). The examiner compared the overall appearance of the patient's corneal staining with a reference figure, simulating the pattern of staining encountered in dry eye disease. No attempt was made to count the dots or to assess the position or confluence of the dots. The examiner selected the appropriate grade that best represented the state of corneal staining. The grading system recommended by NEI divides the cornea into five zones (central, superior, temporal, nasal, and inferior) and for each zone, the severity of corneal fluorescein staining is graded on a scale from 0 to 3 based on reference figures. Therefore, the maximum score (worst outcome) was 15, the minimum (best outcome) was 0.

The Schirmer test Type I (without anaesthesia) was performed to measure aqueous tear secretion prior to the instillation of any dilating or anaesthetic eye drops. The rounded bent end of a sterile strip was inserted into the lower conjunctival sac over the temporal one-third of the lower eyelid margin. After 5 minutes had elapsed, the Schimer's test strip was removed and the length of the tear absorption on the strip was measured (millimeters/5 minutes). The longer the wetted length, the healthier the status of the eye.

The IOP (intraocular pressure) of the eye was determined by the balance between the amount of aqueous humor that the eye marked and ease with which it leaved the eye. IOP was performed using Goldmann applanation tonometry after the instillation of a topical anaesthetic. The Goldmann applanation tonometer measured the force necessary to flatten a corneal area of 3.06 mm diameter. At this diameter, the resistance of the cornea to flattening was counterbalanced by the capillary attraction of the tear film meniscus for the tonometer head. The IOP (in mm Hg) equals the flattening force (in grams) multiplied by 10. IOP was measured in both eyes after completion of all SLEs to avoid potential interference with the other evaluations. Both eyes were tested. Normal eye pressure was between 10 to 21 mmHg. High ocular pressure was greater than 21 mmHg.

Sodium hyaluronate 0.13% eye drops. The comparator, as well as the test investigational device, was instilled q.i.d.(four times a day), one drop into each eye for 28±4 days. After the end of the treatment period, all the subjects used 0.13%Sodium hyaluronate eye drops q.i.d. for the following 7-9 days.

Before the start of the treatment (run-in period of 7 days), the subjects were allowed to use NaCl 0.9% ocular solution q.i.d.

Sodium Hyaluronate: Sodium hyaluronate 0.13% eye drops

Total of all reporting groups

All 56 randomised subjects were included in the safety analysis set. Fifty-five (55) out of 56 safety set subjects were included in the full analysis set (FAS). The per protocol set included 51 subjects.

All 56 randomised subjects were included in the safety analysis set. Fifty-five (55) out of 56 safety set subjects were included in the full analysis set (FAS). The per protocol set included 51 subjects.

All 56 randomised subjects were included in the safety analysis set. Fifty-five (55) out of 56 safety set subjects were included in the full analysis set (FAS). The per protocol set included 51 subjects.

Occurrence of Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), including adverse device effects (ADEs) assessed throughout the study after the first IMD administration.

The Safety Population (SAF) included all subjects who received at least one dose of the IMDs (Lubricin or Sodium Hyaluronate-OcuYal®).

A global ocular tolerability score was determined using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) on which 0 meant no symptoms and 100 meant the worst possible discomfort. This evaluation was to be performed before any ophthalmic assessment at each scheduled visit. Specific ocular symptoms measured with the VAS included: foreign body sensation, burning/stinging, itching, pain, sticky feeling, blurred vision, photophobia. The patients evaluated their symptoms using the VAS giving the value they were feeling from none to an extreme value. The VAS scale was a straight horizontal line of fixed length (100 mm). The ends were defined as extreme limits of the parameter.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

Tear film osmolarity as a marker of tear film solute content was performed with a TearLab Osmolarity System. The concentration of the tears was assessed in both eyes before the instillation of any dilating or anaesthetic drops. The tear fluid was collected onto the bottom tip of the test card by passive capillary action. After a successful tear collection, the Pen was docked into the Reader, which showed the quantitative tear film osmolarity result in mOsm/L on the liquid crystal display. Normal Patients: 275-316 mOsms/L (mean 302 mOsms/L), Dry Eye Disease Patients: > 316 mOsms/L. The higher the score the worst the outcome.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

Best corrected visual acuity (BCDVA) was determined by careful refraction according to the standard protocol for refraction. Chart 1 was used for testing the VA of the right eye; Chart 2 for the left eye; and Chart R for refraction only. Retroilluminated standard Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts were used. They had 5 Sloan letters on each line of equal difficulty, and there was a geometric progression in letter size from line to line. VAS awarded one point for every letter correctly guessed. A distance of 4 meters was required between the subject's eyes and the VA chart. When a subject cannot read at least 20 letters on the chart at 4 meters, the subject was tested at 1 meter. If 20 or more letters were read at 4 meters, the VAS for that eye was recorded as the number of letters correct at 4 meters plus 30. Otherwise, the VAS was the number of letters read correctly at 1 meter plus the number read at 4 meters. The higher the score the better the outcome.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

TFBUT was measured by determining the time to tear break-up. The TFBUT test was performed after instillation of 5 μl of 2% preservative-free sodium fluorescein solution into the inferior conjunctival cul-de-sac of each eye. With the aid of a slit lamp at 10X magnification using cobalt blue illumination, the examiner monitored the integrity of the tear film, noting the time it took to form lacunae (clear spaces in the tear film) from the time that the eye was opened after the last blink. This measurement was performed within 10 seconds maximum. The TFBUT was measured twice during the first minute after the instillation of the fluorescein. If the 2 readings differed by more than 2 seconds, a third reading was taken. The TFBUT value was the average of the 2 or 3 measurements. Generally, a TFBUT value of 10-35 seconds was considered normal. A value of less than 10 seconds was usually suspicious and may indicate tear film instability. The higher the value, the better the outcome.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

The Slit Lamp Examination was used to examine the structures of the eye (eyelids, lashes, conjunctiva, cornea, lens, iris and anterior chamber) according to different scales: Eyelid - Meibomian glands (from 0-none to 3-severe), Eyelid - Erythema (from 0-none to 4-very severe), Eyelid - Oedema (from 0-none to 4-very severe), Lashes (0-normal 1-abnormal), Conjunctiva - Erythema (from 0-none to 3-severe), Conjunctiva - Oedema (from 0-none to 4-very severe), Lens (to 0-no opacification to 3-severe opacification), Iris (0-normal 1-abnormal), Anterior chamber inflammation (from 0-none to 3-severe), Cornea transparency (from 0-completely transparent to 4-complete cornea opacity), Cornea neovascularization (0-absence of vascularization to 4- neovascularization between 270° and 360°). The higher the score the worse the outcome. There was not a total score.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

The corneal fluorescein staining was graded by using the Oxford scheme to assess cornea and conjunctiva epithelium damage. The Oxford grading scale divides corneal staining into six groups according to severity from 0 (absent) to 5 (severe). The examiner compared the overall appearance of the patient's corneal staining with a reference figure, simulating the pattern of staining encountered in dry eye disease. No attempt was made to count the dots or to assess the position or confluence of the dots. The examiner selected the appropriate grade that best represented the state of corneal staining. The grading system recommended by NEI divides the cornea into five zones (central, superior, temporal, nasal, and inferior) and for each zone, the severity of corneal fluorescein staining is graded on a scale from 0 to 3 based on reference figures. Therefore, the maximum score (worst outcome) was 15, the minimum (best outcome) was 0.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

The Schirmer test Type I (without anaesthesia) was performed to measure aqueous tear secretion prior to the instillation of any dilating or anaesthetic eye drops. The rounded bent end of a sterile strip was inserted into the lower conjunctival sac over the temporal one-third of the lower eyelid margin. After 5 minutes had elapsed, the Schimer's test strip was removed and the length of the tear absorption on the strip was measured (millimeters/5 minutes). The longer the wetted length, the healthier the status of the eye.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

The IOP (intraocular pressure) of the eye was determined by the balance between the amount of aqueous humor that the eye marked and ease with which it leaved the eye. IOP was performed using Goldmann applanation tonometry after the instillation of a topical anaesthetic. The Goldmann applanation tonometer measured the force necessary to flatten a corneal area of 3.06 mm diameter. At this diameter, the resistance of the cornea to flattening was counterbalanced by the capillary attraction of the tear film meniscus for the tonometer head. The IOP (in mm Hg) equals the flattening force (in grams) multiplied by 10. IOP was measured in both eyes after completion of all SLEs to avoid potential interference with the other evaluations. Both eyes were tested. Normal eye pressure was between 10 to 21 mmHg. High ocular pressure was greater than 21 mmHg.

The Per Protocol set (PP) population included all enrolled subjects who fulfilled the investigation protocol requirements in terms of IMD intake (Lubricin or OcuYal®) during the treatment phase and collection of primary efficacy data and with no major deviations that could affect the results. This analysis set was used for the efficacy analysis.

Sodium hyaluronate 0.13% eye drops. The comparator, as well as the test investigational device, was instilled i.d.(four times a day), one drop into each eye for 28±4 days. After the end of the treatment period, all the subjects used 0.13%Sodium hyaluronate eye drops q.i.d. for the following 7-9 days.

Before the start of the treatment (run-in period of 7 days), the subjects were allowed to use NaCl 0.9% ocular solution q.i.d.

Sodium Hyaluronate: Sodium hyaluronate 0.13% eye drops

Burning/Stinging in Study eye was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, which evaluates changes from baseline across all time points in a single analysis. This method provides one overall value for comparison, as it incorporates all time points into a unified analysis. Consequently, the reported value represents the global outcome across time points, consistent with the repeated measures ANOVA methodology.

The analysis of variance included as sources of variability treatment, site and baseline tolerability score.

Itching in Study eye was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, which evaluates changes from baseline across all time points in a single analysis. This method provides one overall value for comparison, as it incorporates all time points into a unified analysis. Consequently, the reported value represents the global outcome across time points, consistent with the repeated measures ANOVA methodology.

The analysis of variance included as sources of variability treatment, site and baseline tolerability score.

Pain in Study eye was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, which evaluates changes from baseline across all time points in a single analysis. This method provides one overall value for comparison, as it incorporates all time points into a unified analysis. Consequently, the reported value represents the global outcome across time points, consistent with the repeated measures ANOVA methodology.

The analysis of variance included as sources of variability treatment, site and baseline tolerability score.

Sticky feeling in Study eye was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, which evaluates changes from baseline across all time points in a single analysis. This method provides one overall value for comparison, as it incorporates all time points into a unified analysis. Consequently, the reported value represents the global outcome across time points, consistent with the repeated measures ANOVA methodology.

The analysis of variance included as sources of variability treatment, site and baseline tolerability score.

Blurred vision in Study eye was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, which evaluates changes from baseline across all time points in a single analysis. This method provides one overall value for comparison, as it incorporates all time points into a unified analysis. Consequently, the reported value represents the global outcome across time points, consistent with the repeated measures ANOVA methodology.

The analysis of variance included as sources of variability treatment, site and baseline tolerability score.

Photophobia in Study eye was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, which evaluates changes from baseline across all time points in a single analysis. This method provides one overall value for comparison, as it incorporates all time points into a unified analysis. Consequently, the reported value represents the global outcome across time points, consistent with the repeated measures ANOVA methodology.

The analysis of variance included as sources of variability treatment, site and baseline tolerability score.

Total ocular tolerability score in Study eye was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, which evaluates changes from baseline across all time points in a single analysis. This method provides one overall value for comparison, as it incorporates all time points into a unified analysis. Consequently, the reported value represents the global outcome across time points, consistent with the repeated measures ANOVA methodology.

The analysis of variance included as sources of variability treatment, site and baseline tolerability score.