Ocular hypotensive effect of fixed-combination brinzolamide/brimonidine adjunctive to a prostaglandin analog: a randomized clinical trial.

PurposeTo determine whether intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering with fixed-combination brinzolamide/brimonidine (BBFC) adjunctive to a prostaglandin analog (PGA) was superior to that of vehicle+PGA in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension who were inadequately controlled with PGA monotherapyMethodsThis 6-week, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, parallel-group trial was conducted at 30 clinical sites in the United States between October 2013 and May 2014. Eligible patients were adults with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and with mean IOP ≥21 and <32 mm Hg, whereas receiving an open-label PGA (latanoprost, bimatoprost, or travoprost). Patients instilled a PGA once-daily in a run-in phase before randomization to masked BBFC or vehicle adjunctive treatment. Masked treatments were instilled 3 times daily for 6 weeks, and patients continued once-daily use of their PGA. The primary efficacy end point was the between-group difference in mean diurnal IOP (average of 0800, 1000, 1500, and 1700 hours time points) at week 6.ResultsAt week 6, mean diurnal IOP with BBFC+PGA was lower than with vehicle+PGA (17.1±0.4 mm Hg vs 20.5±0.4 mm Hg; between-group difference, -3.4±0.5 mm Hg; P<0.0001; 95% confidence interval, -4.5 to -2.4 mm Hg). BBFC+PGA reduced mean diurnal IOP by 5.7 mm Hg (25%) from the baseline IOP achieved with PGA monotherapy.ConclusionsTherapy with BBFC produced an additive IOP-lowering effect compared with a PGA alone or in conjunction with vehicle. BBFC may provide an effective treatment option for patients receiving PGA monotherapy who require additional IOP reduction.

A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of brimonidine and latanoprost in adults with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a three-month, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Many physicians recommend either brimonidine or latanoprost as firstline therapy for chronic open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. However, a search of MEDLINE indicates that there have been few head-to-head comparisons of the 2 monotherapies in a clinical setting. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the clinical efficacy and tolerability of brimonidine 0.2% twice daily with those of latanoprost 0.005% once daily as monotherapy in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS: In this 3-month, multicenter, double-masked, parallel-group, 4-visit study, treatment-naive and previously treated patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and bilateral intraocular pressure (IOP) after washout of between 22 and 34 mm Hg were randomized to receive either brimonidine or latanoprost. Patients who had received previous treatment with either study drug were excluded from the study. The primary outcome measure was response rate, defined as the percentage of patients achieving > or = 20% reduction in IOP from baseline to month 3. Secondary outcome measures were mean IOP reduction from baseline to month 3 and clinical success, defined as the investigator's recommendation that the patient continue using the assigned study medication. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients (55 treatment naive) were enrolled, 66 in the brimonidine group and 61 in the latanoprost group. After 3 months of treatment, 80% of patients in the brimonidine group and 74% of patients in the latanoprost group had achieved > or = 20% reduction in IOP from baseline. The mean reduction in IOP from baseline at month 3 was 6.8 mm Hg with brimonidine and 6.5 mm Hg with latanoprost (27.8% vs 27.0%, respectively). Among treatment-naive patients, a significantly higher percentage of brimonidine-treated patients achieved > or = 20% decrease in IOP compared with latanoprost-treated patients (88% vs 59%, respectively; P = 0.01). In previously treated patients, a higher percentage of the latanoprost group achieved > or = 20% reduction in IOP compared with the brimonidine group (88% vs 74%, respectively); however, the difference was not statistically significant. Significantly more patients in the brimonidine group achieved clinical success at month 3 compared with patients in the latanoprost group (91% vs 74%; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: At peak effect, brimonidine twice daily was as effective as latanoprost once daily in lowering IOP. In treatment-naive patients, latanoprost was associated with a significantly higher rate of nonresponse after 3 months of treatment compared with brimonidine. This suggests that brimonidine may be the more reliable choice for first-line therapy of newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. In previously treated patients, however, latanoprost provided greater mean IOP reduction than did brimonidine. Significantly more patients achieved clinical success with brimonidine monotherapy than with latanoprost monotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of timolol solution once daily vs timolol gel added to latanoprost.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of timolol hemihydrate 0.5% (Betimol, Ciba Vision Ophthalmics, Duluth, Georgia) vs timolol maleate gel-forming solution 0.5% (Timoptic-XE, Merck, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania), both given every morning added to latanoprost 0.005% given every evening. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, crossover comparison was performed in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. After at least a 4-week run-in period with latanoprost 0.005% (Xalatan, Pharmacia & Upjohn, Kalamazoo, Michigan), both eyes from 30 patients (60 eyes) were randomly assigned to one of the two adjunctive therapies, timolol hemihydrate or timolol maleate gel for 6 weeks. At the end of the first period, the study medicine was discontinued for a 2-week washout period. Patients then received the opposite medication for the second 6-week period. This study had an 80% power to exclude a 1-mm Hg difference between groups. RESULTS: The baseline intraocular pressure after 1 month of latanoprost treatment only for all 30 subjects was 20.8 +/- 2.6 mm Hg. After 6 weeks of timolol hemihydrate, the 24-hour trough intraocular pressure was 17.5 +/- 3.4 mm Hg, and for timolol maleate gel, 17.9 +/- 3.5 mm Hg (P = .74). The peak level 2 hours after dosing for timolol hemihydate was 16.4 +/- 2.6 mm Hg, and for timolol maleate gel, 16.8 +/- 3.8 mm Hg (P = .84). No patient was discontinued from the study because of lack of efficacy. No differences were observed between treatments in visual acuity, anterior segment findings, or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily beta-blocker therapy is an effective ocular hypotensive adjunctive treatment 24 hours after dosing when added to latanoprost, for which timolol hemihydrate 0.5% solution and timolol maleate gel 0.5% appear equally effective and safe.

Effects of carteolol and timolol on plasma lipid profiles in older women with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect on serum lipid levels of carteolol hydrochloride 1.0% or timolol maleate 0.5% given twice a day to women age 60 years and older with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHOD: We included 112 patients in this double-masked, randomized, multicenter trial. Fasting clinical laboratory studies were evaluated at baseline and at 12 weeks. Patients were instructed not to change their dietary, alcohol consumption, or exercise habits during the study. RESULTS: For the carteolol group, the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein (TC/HDL) ratio at baseline of 50.1 +/- 1.5 mg/dl and 4.7 +/- 0.2 changed by the 12-week visit to 51.3 +/- 1.9 mg/dl (P = .25) and 4.6 +/- .02 (P = .47), respectively. For the timolol maleate group, the baseline HDL and TC/HDL ratio of 53.6 +/- 2.2 mg/dl and 4.4 +/- 0.2 changed to 50.2 +/- 1.9 mg/dl (P < .001) and 4.7 +/- 0.2 (P = .001), respectively, at the 12-week visit. Carteolol patients showed no significant change from baseline, whereas the HDL (P < .001) and TC/HDL ratio decreased (P = .001) significantly in the timolol maleate group. There also was a significant difference in the change from baseline at 12 weeks between carteolol and timolol maleate groups for the HDL and TC/HDL ratio (P = .01 and .012, respectively). No differences in TC, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), or triglycerides (TG) or in changes from baseline were observed between groups at 12 weeks (P > .05). At 12 weeks, no differences were observed between carteolol and timolol maleate groups in intraocular pressure or safety (P > .05), except that patients given carteolol demonstrated fewer solicited ocular symptoms (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Carteolol appears to be neutral in its effect on serum lipid levels, whereas timolol maleate adversely affects the HDL and TC/HDL ratio in women age 60 years and older with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma.

The efficacy and safety of diclofenac 0.1% versus prednisolone acetate 1% following trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of diclofenac 0.1% versus prednisolone acetate 1% following trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The authors prospectively randomized chronic open-angle glaucoma patients who underwent trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C to receive postoperatively either diclofenac 0.1% or prednisolone acetate 1% 4 times daily, to be tapered as inflammation resolved. RESULTS: In the diclofenac group (n = 14), the preoperative intraocular pressure of 30.4 +/- 13.1 decreased to 12.4 +/- 6.5 mm Hg at 6 months postoperatively. In the prednisolone acetate group (n = 12), the preoperative intraocular pressure decreased from 29.1 +/- 10.4 to 12.8 +/- 4.2 mm Hg at 6 months postoperatively (P = .85). The average number of medicines used 6 months postoperatively was 0.50 +/- 0.8 in the diclofenac group and 0.24 +/- 0.6 in the prednisolone acetate group (P = .36). Adverse events were similar between groups (P = .51). One patient in the diclofenac group underwent reoperation at 1 month due to uncontrolled intraocular pressure. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that following trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C, a similar intraocular pressure result may be expected when either diclofenac or prednisolone acetate is prescribed postoperatively for intraocular inflammation.

Timolol hemihydrate vs timolol maleate to treat ocular hypertension and open-angle glaucoma.

PURPOSE: We compared the therapeutic efficacy and safety of timolol hemihydrate to timolol maleate in patients with ocular hypertension and chronic open-angle glaucoma. METHODS: We conducted this three-month study as a multicentered, masked, parallel group comparison. Both the 0.25% and 0.5% concentrations were evaluated against similar concentrations of timolol maleate. Dosing was twice daily. An open-label, nine-month study followed the masked portion of the protocol, in which all patients received either 0.25% or 0.5% timolol hemihydrate. A total of 371 patients were included in both the 0.25% and 0.5% studies. RESULTS: We found statistically similar intraocular pressures with both the 0.25% (18.3 and 18.6 mm Hg for the hemihydrate and maleate groups, respectively) and 0.5% (19.9 and 19.5 mm Hg for the hemihydrate and maleate groups, respectively) concentrations of timolol hemihydrate and timolol maleate after three months of masked treatment. Likewise, peak intraocular effect at two hours after taking the medication was statistically similar between medicines at both concentrations. Likewise, both ocular and systemic safety were similar between the maleate and hemihydrate preparations at both concentrations. In the nine-month open-label protocol, therapeutic efficacy (19.9 and 19.1 mm Hg for the 0.25% and 0.5% concentrations, respectively) and safety of timolol hemihydrate were similar to effect and safety of the three-month protocol. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that timolol hemihydrate had an ocular hypotensive efficacy and safety profile statistically equivalent to that of timolol maleate for up to three months of therapy. Timolol hemihydrate showed efficacy and safety similar to that observed within the first three months, for up to one year of therapy.