Comparison of allergy prevalence using brinzolamide 1.0% / brimonidine 0.2% fixed combination with and without ß-blocker in glaucoma patients: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Glaucoma treatment often involves multi-drug regimens, which can lead to poor adherence and side effects. Fixed-dose combinations aim to improve adherence and reduce side effects compared to traditional therapies. This study aimed to compare the prevalence and clinical characteristics of ocular allergy in glaucoma patients using brinzolamide 1.0%/brimonidine 0.2% fixed combination (BBFC), with and without concurrent ß-blocker. METHODS: Of these, 176 patients used a ß-blocker concurrently, whereas 96 patients did not. Allergy prevalence, allergy type, and allergy occurrence time were compared between the concurrent and non-concurrent ß-blocker-usage groups. Ocular allergies were classified and evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: Allergy prevalence was 10.23% and 15.63% (p = 0.193), whereas allergy occurrence time was 15.92 ± 13.80 months and 6.26 ± 6.20 months (p = 0.04) in the concurrent and non-concurrent ß-blocker-usage groups, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated that half of the allergies in the concurrent ß-blocker-usage group occurred within 12.5 months, with the BBFC discontinuation rate gradually increasing up to 36 months. Contrarily, half of the allergies in the non-concurrent ß-blocker-usage group occurred within 3.3 months, with a rapid increase in BBFC discontinuation rate the first 6 months. Intergroup differences in allergy types were significant (p = 0.015). Among all patients with allergy, the average allergy occurrence time of blepharoconjunctivitis, papillary conjunctivitis, and follicular conjunctivitis was 12.52, 9.53, and 13.23 months, respectively. Follicular conjunctivitis tended to occur later than papillary conjunctivitis (p = 0.042). In the concurrent ß-blocker-usage group, follicular conjunctivitis was the most prevalent allergy type (61.1%), whereas papillary conjunctivitis was the most common (66.7%) in in the non-concurrent ß-blocker-usage group. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent use of ß-blocker with BBFC decreases allergy prevalence, delays allergy onset, and predominantly results in follicular conjunctivitis, thereby facilitating longer treatment duration. Understanding these characteristics of allergy in BBFC users is useful to manage patients and improve treatment adherence. This study provides insights into the role of ß-blockers in modulating ocular allergy in BBFC-treated glaucoma patients, highlighting implications for clinical practice and patient education.

Topical brimonidine induced acute uveal effusion in a patient with nanophthalmos: a case report.

BACKGROUND: We report a case of uveal effusion in a nanophthalmic eye after topical use of brimonidine. CASE PRESENTATION: A 42-year-old male patient with nanophthalmos experienced sudden blurred vision in the right eye after using topical brimonidine when picking up tennis balls repeatedly 6 weeks after bilateral YAG peripheral iridotomy. Ocular examination showed wide choroidal and exudative retinal detachment in the temporal and inferior region, involving the macula. Acute uveal effusion in the right, bilateral nanophthalmos was diagnosed. Oral and topical corticosteroids, combined with topical nonsteroids and atropine led to a complete resolution of the uveal effusion after one month. CONCLUSION: This case suggested a possible causal relationship between the topical use of brimonidine and acute uveal effusion in patients with nanophthalmos. Topical brimonidine should be used with caution in nanophthalmic eyes.

Efficacy and safety of topical brimonidine in dermatology: A review article.

Brimonidine is a vasoconstrictive agent used to treat several dermatologic disorders. Here, we review the uses of brimonidine in different aspects of dermatology. We searched keywords including rosacea, erythema, topical brimonidine, dermatology, and skin disease in PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar to collect the related published articles. In a review of 15 articles, we found topical brimonidine improved the facial erythema of rosacea. In addition, it reduced the erythema associated with alcohol flushing syndrome, intense pulsed light therapy, and photodynamic therapy. Furthermore, topical brimonidine was used as a hemostatic agent in dermatosurgery procedures such as Mohs surgery and nail surgery to reduce intra-operative and postoperative bleeding. Some side effects such as erythema, flushing, and burning were reported in a few patients. Based on our findings, brimonidine is a beneficial drug that can be used in various dermatologic disorders with negligible side effects.

The benefit of scratch patch testing to demonstrate ocular contact allergy to brimonidine tartrate.

INTRODUCTION: Ocular allergies to brimonidine are frequent in patients treated for glaucoma. There is variability in reporting due to the lack of diagnostic criteria and the absence of cutaneous testing. Many false-negative patch tests (PT) have been described. Alternative methods, such as strip and scratch PT, have been used without a standardized method. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to identify the best method of cutaneous testing and brimonidine concentration for patch testing. The secondary objective is to identify clinical signs and symptoms suggestive of ocular allergy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patient files suspected of brimonidine ocular allergy was performed. Patch testing method, brimonidine concentration and clinical symptoms were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 36 patients identified, half tested positive for brimonidine for at least one of the testing methods. The scratch PT demonstrated 17 positive reactions (94% detection rate). Three patients reacted with strip PT. No positive results were found with standard PT. The 5% brimonidine concentration demonstrated the highest sensitivity. The absence of eyelid pruritus was associated with negative testing. CONCLUSION: In the investigation of ocular allergy to brimonidine, scratch PT proved to be an essential tool. Brimonidine 5% pet. appeared as the most sensitive concentration for scratch PT.

Preliminary evaluation of the efficacy and safety of brimonidine for general anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: To determine the hypnotic and analgesic effects of brimonidine, and evaluate its efficacy and safety for general anesthesia. Potentiation of pentobarbital sleeping time following brimonidine administration was observed in mice, as was the analgesic activity of brimonidine. METHODS: The median effective dose (ED50) and lethal dose (LD50) of intraperitoneally injected brimonidine were determined in hypnotized mice. In addition, the LD50 of intravenously injected brimonidine, and ED50 of intravenously, intramuscularly, and intrarectally injected brimonidine in hypnotized rabbits were determined. Finally, the synergistic anesthetic effect of brimonidine and chloral hydrate was evaluated in rabbits. RESULTS: Intraperitoneal injection of 10 mg/kg brimonidine enhanced the hypnotic effect of a threshold dose of pentobarbital. Intraperitoneally injected brimonidine produced dose-related analgesic effects in mice. The ED50 of intraperitoneally administered brimonidine in hypnotized mice was 75.7 mg/kg and the LD50 was 379 mg/kg. ED50 values of intravenous, intramuscular, and intrarectal brimonidine for hypnosis in rabbits were 5.2 mg/kg, 8.8 mg/kg, and 8.7 mg/kg, respectively; the LD50 of intravenous brimonidine was 146 mg/kg. Combined intravenous administration of 0.6 mg/kg brimonidine and 0.03 g/kg chloral hydrate had a synergistic anesthetic effect. CONCLUSIONS: Brimonidine elicited hypnotic and analgesic effects after systemic administration and exhibited safety. Moreover, brimonidine enhanced the effects of other types of narcotics when combined.

Adverse effects of brimonidine eye drop in children: A case series.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Brimonidine is increasingly used in the treatment of intraocular hypertension. CASE SUMMARY: We report on five paediatric patients suffering from brimonidine eye drop intoxication. The most frequent signs of the intoxication were a lowered level of consciousness and hypotonia. Other complications were apnea, bradycardia, hypotension and seizure. One of the patients needed cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Apnea in one of the cases was resistant to naloxone. Pupils were unremarkable in two cases. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Brimonidine is potentially lethal for young infants. The absence of miosis and absence of response to naloxone is not a reason to rule out brimonidine poisoning.

Brimonidine-associated uveitis - a descriptive case series.

BACKGROUND: Anterior uveitis secondary to topical brimonidine administration is rare and not well-defined. In glaucoma patients using brimonidine, one must consider this phenomenon to avoid mis-diagnosis and over-treatment with topical steroids which in turn may increase intraocular pressure (IOP). This is the largest case series including the longest patient follow-up in the current literature. METHODS: Sixteen patients (26 eyes) with consultant diagnosed brimonidine-associated anterior uveitis in a tertiary referral glaucoma clinic presenting between 2015 and 2019 were included in this retrospective case series. Clinical records were taken for descriptive analysis. Main outcome measures were the key clinical features, and disease course (therapy, IOP control, patient outcome). RESULTS: Key features were conjunctival ciliary injection and mutton fat keratic precipitation in all eyes. The findings were bilateral in 10 patients. Time between initiation of brimonidine treatment and presentation was 1 week to 49 months. Glaucoma sub-types were mostly pseudo-exfoliative and primary open angle glaucoma. Brimonidine treatment was stopped immediately. Additionally, topical corticosteroids were prescribed in 18 eyes and tapered down during the following 4 weeks. Thirteen eyes did not need surgical or laser treatment (median follow-up time 15 months). No patient showed recurrence of inflammation after cessation of brimonidine. CONCLUSIONS: This type of anterior uveitis is an uncommon but important manifestation which should always be considered in glaucoma patients on brimonidine treatment. Although treatable at its root cause, problems may persist, especially with respect to IOP control. The latter may necessitate glaucoma surgery after the resolved episode of the uveitis.

Preservative-free versus preserved brimonidine %0.15 preparations in the treatment of glaucoma and ocular hypertension: short term evaluation of efficacy, safety, and potential advantages.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy, safety, and potential advantages of the preservative-free versus preserved brimonidine %0.15 preparations in patients with primer open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT).Methods: Forty-two eyes of the 21 treatment-naive patients with POAG or OHT were enrolled in this study. Eyes were randomly assigned to receive brimonidine-purite 0.15% or preservative-free brimonidine 0.15% two times daily. Efficacy of the two eye drops was assessed by measuring the intraocular pressure (IOP) at 9-10 am at baseline and week 4. Safety and potential advantages of the drops were evaluated at weeks 4 in terms of ocular symptoms and tear parameters. Ocular symptom values of the patients were evaluated with a scale of 0-4 (0 = no discomfort and 4 = severe discomfort).Results: Both of the brimonidine tartrate formulations resulted in statistically similar IOP reduction (preserved formulation; -5.2 mmHg [22.9% reduction] preservative-free formulation; -5.7 mmHg [24.1% reduction], p = 0.37). It was found that brimonidine tartrate formulations with and without topical preservatives did not produce a statistically significant difference in pain, stinging, and blurred vision at the upon instillation (p > 0.05). However, the burning sensation was significantly higher in the preservative-free formulation at the first instillation compared to the preserved formulation (p = 0.01). Also, there was no statistically significant difference between the two formulations in terms of symptoms (itching, burning, tearing, stinging, and photophobia) and tear parameters during the day (p > 0.05).Conclusions: Although topical preservative-free brimonidine tartrate treated eyes had a more burning sensation at the first drop, the two formulations were similar in terms of ocular tolerability in the short term period. Also, both formulations were found to reduce IOP at a similar rate.

Effect of Ultra-Small Chitosan Nanoparticles Doped with Brimonidine on the Ultra-Structure of the Trabecular Meshwork of Glaucoma Patients.

Brimonidine, an anti-glaucoma medicine, acts as an adrenergic agonist which decreases the synthesis of aqueous humour and increases the amount of drainage through Schlemm's canal and trabecular meshwork, but shows dose-dependent (0.2% solution thrice daily) toxicity. To reduce the side effects and improve the efficacy, brimonidine was nanoencapsulated on ultra-small-sized chitosan nanoparticles (nanobrimonidine) (28 ± 4 nm) with 39% encapsulation efficiency, monodispersity, freeze-thawing capability, storage stability, and 2% drug loading capacity. This nanocomplex showed burst, half, and complete release at 0.5, 45, and 100 h, respectively. Nanobrimonidine did not show any in vitro toxicity and was taken up by caveolae-mediated endocytosis. The nanobrimonidine-treated trabeculectomy tissue of glaucoma patients showed better dilation of the trabecular meshwork under the electron microscope. This is direct evidence for better bioavailability of nanobrimonidine after topical administration. Thus, the developed nanobrimonidine has the potential to improve the efficacy, reduce dosage and frequency, and improve delivery to the anterior chamber of the eye.

Treatment of Rosacea With Concomitant Use of Topical Ivermectin 1% Cream and Brimonidine 0.33% Gel: A Randomized, Vehicle-controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: There is currently a lack of data on the simultaneous treatment of different features of rosacea. Individually, ivermectin 1% (IVM) cream and brimonidine 0.33% (BR) gel have demonstrated efficacy on inflammatory lesions and persistent erythema, respectively. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, patient satisfaction, and optimal timing of administration of IVM associated with BR (IVM+BR) versus their vehicles in rosacea (investigator global assessment [IGA] ≥3). METHODS: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind study including subjects with rosacea characterized by moderate to severe persistent erythema and inflammatory lesions. The active treatment group included the IVM+BR/12 weeks subgroup (once-daily BR and once-daily IVM for 12 weeks), and the IVM+BR/8 weeks subgroup (once-daily BR vehicle for 4 weeks followed by once-daily BR for the remaining 8 weeks and once-daily IVM for 12 weeks). The vehicle group received once-daily BR vehicle and once-daily IVM vehicle for 12 weeks. RESULTS: The association showed superior efficacy (IGA success [clear/almost clear]) for erythema and inflammatory lesions in the total active group (combined active subgroups) compared to vehicle (55.8% vs. 36.8%, P=0.007) at week 12. The success rate increased from 32.7% to 61.2% at hour 0 and hour 3, respectively, in the IVM+BR/12 weeks subgroup, and from 28.3% to 50% in the IVM+BR/8 weeks subgroup. Reductions in erythema and inflammatory lesion counts confirmed the additive effect of BR to IVM treatment. Subjects reported greater improvement in the active subgroups than in the vehicle group, and similar rates for facial appearance satisfaction after the first 4 weeks of treatment in both active subgroups. All groups showed similar tolerability profiles. CONCLUSION: Concomitant administration of IVM cream with BR gel demonstrated good efficacy and safety, endorsing the comprehensive approach to this complex disease. Early introduction of BR, along with a complete daily skin care regimen may accelerate treatment success without impairing tolerability.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(9):909-916.

Paradoxical Erythema Reaction of Long-term Topical Brimonidine Gel for the Treatment of Facial Erythema of Rosacea.

In 2013 brimonidine tartrate gel 0.33% (Mirvaso Gel, Galderma Laboratories, LP, Fort Worth, TX) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of facial erythema of rosacea. It is the first and only drug on the market to address the hallmark redness of this chronic, inflammatory disease. Commonly reported adverse events include erythema/flushing worse than at baseline, most often occurring with the first application. We report a unique case of facial erythema of rosacea that responded to brimonidine gel with effective blanching for two years until the patient developed a paradoxical erythema reaction. This is an adverse reaction physicians should be aware of with continued prescription of brimonidine gel for their rosacea patients.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(6):763-765.

Brimonidine gel 0.33% rapidly improves patient-reported outcomes by controlling facial erythema of rosacea: a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Facial redness contributes to impaired psychosocial functioning in rosacea patients and the only approved treatment for erythema is topical brimonidine gel 0.33%. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes, as well as efficacy and safety, in subjects with self-perceived severe erythema treated with brimonidine gel 0.33% compared to vehicle. METHODS: An 8-day multicenter, randomized study comparing once-daily brimonidine gel 0.33% with vehicle gel using a facial redness questionnaire, subject satisfaction questionnaire and a patient diary of facial redness control to assess patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 92 included subjects with self-perceived severe erythema, very few were satisfied with their appearance at baseline (4.2% brimonidine group, 0 vehicle group). On Day 8, significantly more brimonidine group subjects were satisfied with their facial appearance compared to vehicle group (36.9% vs. 21.5%; P < 0.05), with the overall treatment effect (69.6% vs. 40.4%; P < 0.01), and with the improvement in their facial redness (67.4% vs. 33.3%; P < 0.001). More brimonidine group subjects were able to control their facial redness daily (e.g. 83.0% vs. 38.9% on Day 1). On Day 8, significantly more brimonidine group subjects than vehicle group had at least a one-grade improvement from baseline in the Clinician Erythema Assessment score (71.7% vs. 35.7%; P = 0.0011) and Patient Self-Assessment score (76.1% vs. 47.6%; P = 0.004). More subjects in the brimonidine group (29.2%) reported treatment-related adverse events than in the vehicle group (15.9%) but most were mild and transient. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily brimonidine gel 0.33% allowed patients to rapidly control their facial redness and significantly improved patient-reported outcomes in the treatment of persistent facial erythema of rosacea.

Dermatitis medicamentosa: severe rebound erythema secondary to topical brimonidine in rosacea.

BACKGROUND: Rebound erythema secondary to use of topical brimonidine in the setting of rosacea is an important, possibly significantly distressing potential side effect that may be under-reported; there is little photo-documentation in the literature to date. This article documents such a case. OBSERVATIONS: A 28-year-old woman (Fitzpatrick II) with a long-standing history of untreated rosacea presented for initiation of treatment of what was noted to be primarily erythematotelangiectatic rosacea and was offered Mirvaso for daily use. Initial improvement was followed by progressive worsening of baseline erythema several hours following treatment, only improved with subsequent applications of additional Mirvaso. The patient's symptoms were improved upon discontinuing use of Mirvaso. CONCLUSIONS: There are few cases documented of rebound erythema secondary to use of Mirvaso to date. Further reporting might prompt further long term investigation for this topical medication for further delineation of its role in treatment of rosacea. What is proposed is a phenomenon similar to that of rhinitis medicamentosa with upregulation of alph-adrenergic receptors, suggesting the name "dermatitis medicamentosa" for this phenomenon.

A Comparative Study on Efficacy of Intraocular Pressure Lowering of Two Fixed-Dose Antiglaucoma Drug Combination Brinzolamide-Brimonidine Versus Latanoprost-Timolol in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of Brinzolamide-Brimonidine (BB) (1%+0.2%) with the gold standard Latanoprost-Timolol (LT) (0.005%+0.5%) in treating primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT). Methods: A 1-year prospective study, spanning from May 2022 to May 2023, conducted at a tertiary eye-care hospital. Participants, aged 40-60, with a baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) >21 mm Hg, requiring a >30% reduction, were enrolled. Group A (n = 100) received BB, and Group B (n = 100) received LT. Outcomes were assessed at 1 month (IOP difference from baseline), 3 and 6 months (mean diurnal variations). Results: The mean age at presentation was 55.5 ± 4.5 years in Group A and 54.7 ± 4.2 years in Group B. At 1 month, Group A exhibited a mean IOP of 18.7 mm Hg, while Group B had 17.6 mm Hg, with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.53). No significant diurnal variation was observed in either group (P = 0.07). Target pressure was achieved in 88% of patients in Group A and slightly higher at 92% in Group B. Moreover, no serious side effects were reported, and compliance was higher in Group B (98%) compared to Group A (96%). Conclusion: Although LT showed slightly better and sustained IOP reduction, the difference was not statistically significant. Both BB and LT demonstrated comparable outcomes for managing POAG and OHT.