In some previous studies, the induction therapy that is given for the initial 28 days usually involved a higher dose of interferon alfa-2a starting with 6.0 MIU, as first suggested by Kötter et al.3,4 The dose of interferon alfa-2a was then gradually tapered to 3.0 MIU if there was improvement. The main difference of our strategy is the approach of starting at a lower dose, with increases in cases that require it because of relapses of intraocular inflammation. In this way the patient avoids a higher dose, which would be expected to have more adverse effects. Indeed, we were able to control the inflammation with a 3.0-MIU maintenance dose in 41% of cases, all of which were refractory to previous treatment with conventional immunosuppressive agents. In their initial report, Kötter et al3 observed an overall response of ocular manifestations of 92% with their previously described protocol. The rate of control intraocular inflammation with quiescence was determined as 95% in our series, which is similar to that described by the other authors. Ocular relapses occurred in 18% of patients, and the mean number of relapses in the responders was 0.4 (range, 0-15). In our study population, 59% of patients had relapses of uveitis that required an increase in the dose of interferon alfa-2a. We calculated the relapse rate in patient-years and concluded that the relapse rate declined from 3.52 per patient-year before to 0.75 per patient-year after initiating interferon alfa-2a therapy. In addition, by using lower doses of interferon alfa-2a, the adverse effects were fewer than those reported by Kötter et al,3 whoreported leukopenia in 40%, depression in 8%, thyroiditis in 4%, and occurrence of autoantibodies in 22% of their patients. Again similar to our findings, in their latest publication, Kötter et al4 reported a 94% partial or complete response of uveitis with the use of interferon alfa-2a therapy.