Efficacy and safety of the fixed combinations latanoprost/timolol versus dorzolamide/timolol in patients with elevated intraocular pressure

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of the fixed combination of latanoprost and timolol with those of the fixed combination of dorzolamide and timolol in patients with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). DESIGN: Three-month, randomized, parallel group, evaluator-masked, multicenter study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension with elevated IOP insufficiently responsive to monotherapy; 253 randomized: 125 to receive a fixed combination of latanoprost 0.005% and timolol 0.5% once daily, and 128 to receive a fixed combination of dorzolamide 2% and timolol 0.5% twice daily. METHODS: Visits were at screening (current ocular hypotensive therapy was discontinued), 2 weeks (if needed for an IOP-safety check), baseline (randomization), and after 1 and 3 months of therapy. Intraocular pressure was measured in triplicate at 8 am, 12 pm, and 4 pm at each study visit, and diurnal IOP was calculated as the mean value of these recordings. Adverse events were recorded at each visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The difference between treatment groups in the change in mean diurnal IOP from baseline to month 3. RESULTS: Mean diurnal IOP levels were similar at baseline. Mean (+/- standard error of the mean) reductions in diurnal IOP from baseline to month 3 were 9.4+/-0.27 mmHg in the latanoprost/timolol fixed-combination group, versus 8.4+/-0.26 mmHg in patients receiving the dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination. The mean difference in diurnal IOP reduction between treatments was 1.00 mmHg (95% confidence interval, 0.31-1.69; P = 0.005) in favor of the latanoprost/timolol fixed combination. Both treatments generally were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The fixed combination of latanoprost and timolol was slightly more effective than that of dorzolamide and timolol in reducing mean diurnal IOP, and both treatments were generally well tolerated.     

12-week study comparing the fixed combination of brimonidine and timolol with concomitant use of the individual components in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fixed-combination brimonidine tartrate 0.2%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution dosed BID and demonstrate non-inferiority to concomitant use of brimonidine tartrate 0.2% BID and timolol 0.5% BID in glaucoma and ocular hypertension patients with intraocular pressure (IOP) uncontrolled on monotherapy. METHODS: Randomized, multicenter, double-masked, parallel-group study involving 371 patients with inadequate IOP control (IOP from 22 to 34 mmHg) after > or =3 weeks of run-in on any monotherapy. Patients were treated with fixed-combination brimonidine/timolol BID (fixed-combination group, n = 188) or concomitant brimonidine BID and timolol BID (concomitant group, n = 183). IOP was assessed pre-dose and 2 hours after morning dosing at weeks 2, 6, and 12. RESULTS: A total of 355 patients (96%) completed the study. Patient demographics, run-in monotherapy, and baseline mean IOP on monotherapy were comparable between treatment groups. During follow-up, the mean reduction from baseline IOP was significant (p < 0.001) at all time points and ranged from 4.4 to 5.3 mmHg in each group. Brimonidine/timolol fixed combination was as effective as concomitant therapy with respect to mean IOP and mean change from baseline IOP at all time points and visits. Between-group differences were < or =0.35 mmHg for mean IOP and < or 0.30 mmHg for mean change from baseline IOP; none were significant. No unexpected side effects were associated with the fixed combination. Both treatments were well tolerated with no difference in adverse events between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Brimonidine/timolol fixed-combination therapy is as safe and effective as concomitant treatment with the individual components. Its simplified dosing regimen has the potential to improve compliance.     

A comparison of the effects on intraocular pressure of latanoprost 0.005% and the fixed combination of dorzolamide 2% and timolol 0.5% in patients with open-angle glaucoma

PURPOSE: To compare the effects on intraocular pressure (IOP) of latanoprost 0.005% and the fixed combination of dorzolamide 2% and timolol 0.5%. METHODS: Overall, 226 patients whose IOP was insufficiently controlled by timolol alone were randomized to receive either latanoprost once daily or the fixed combination of dorzolamide plus timolol twice daily. Intraocular pressure was measured at 10:00 am and 5:00 pm at baseline and after 3 months of treatment. RESULTS: Mean IOP was reduced from baseline in both groups (p < 0.001), with a mean +/- SEM reduction of - 4.3 +/- 0.3 mmHg (19%) for the latanoprost treatment group and - 4.0 +/- 0.3 mmHg (17%) for the dorzolamide plus timolol treatment group. The two therapies were similarly effective in lowering IOP levels (mean difference in reduction: - 0.4 +/- 0.4; 95% confidence interval: - 1.1, 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Monotherapy with latanoprost once daily was as effective in reducing mean IOP as the fixed combination of dorzolamide plus timolol twice daily in patients with IOP insufficiently controlled by timolol alone.     

Three-month evaluation of dorzolamide hydrochloride/timolol maleate fixed-combination eye drops versus the separate use of both drugs

Purpose

To investigate the ocular hypotensive effect and safety of dorzolamide hydrochloride 1?%/timolol maleate 0.5?% fixed-combination eye drops.

Methods

The study cohort comprised 34 patients with either primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension who were being concomitantly treated with dorzolamide hydrochloride 1?% eye drops and timolol maleate 0.5?% eye drops. The dorzolamide hydrochloride 1?% and timolol maleate 0.5?% eye drops were replaced with dorzolamide hydrochloride 1?%/timolol maleate 0.5?% fixed-combination eye drops without any washout period. The intraocular pressure (IOP) was evaluated both before and 1 and 3?months after the treatment change. The patients were asked to complete a questionnaire on adherence to the treatment protocol 1?month after the change in treatment.

Results

The IOP was 15.5?±?2.7?mmHg at the time of treatment change, 15.2?±?2.7?mmHg at 1 month post-change, and 15.5?±?2.9?mmHg at 3?months post-change, which is consistent with that before the treatment change (p?=?0.286). Based on the completed questionnaire, following the treatment change, 50?% of patients felt a stinging sensation following administration of the eye drops and 11.8?% experienced blurred vision. In no case were the eye drops discontinued due to adverse reactions or insufficient IOP decrease.

Conclusion

The replacement of concomitant treatment with dorzolamide hydrochloride 1?% and timolol maleate 0.5?% eye drops with dorzolamide hydrochloride 1?%/timolol maleate 0.5?% fixed-combination eye drops improved protocol adherence and preserved the IOP.     

Dorzolamide/timolol combination versus concomitant administration of brimonidine and timolol: six-month comparison of efficacy and tolerability

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of the 2% dorzolamide/0.5% timolol combination ophthalmic solution twice daily to the concomitant administration of 0.2% brimonidine ophthalmic solution twice daily and 0.5% timolol ophthalmic solution twice daily. DESIGN: Randomized, multicenter, observer-masked, parallel-group study. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred ninety-three patients with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma participated. INTERVENTION: After an open-label 3-week 0.5% timolol run-in period, patients with an hour 2 intraocular pressure (IOP) of > or = 22 mmHg were randomly assigned to receive either the dorzolamide/timolol combination twice daily or the concomitant use of brimonidine twice daily and timolol twice daily (brimonidine + timolol) for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The IOP-lowering effects at hour 0 and hour 2 were collected at 1, 3, and 6 months. We hypothesized that both treatment regimens would have comparable hour 2 IOP-lowering effects at month 3. The treatments were considered comparable if the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the treatment difference was within +/- 1.5 mmHg. Tolerability data were also collected at 1, 3, and 6 months. RESULTS: The primary efficacy analysis was based on the modified intent-to-treat population. At month 3, hour 2, the dorzolamide/timolol group had an adjusted mean (standard error) change in IOP of -5.04 (0.30) mmHg versus -5.41 (0.30) mmHg in the brimonidine + timolol group, with a treatment difference of 0.36 (0.40) mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI] of -0.42-1.14 mmHg). At month 3, hour 0, the dorzolamide/timolol group had a change in IOP of -3.66 (0.29) mmHg versus -4.15 (0.28) mmHg in the brimonidine + timolol group, with a treatment difference of 0.49 (0.39) mmHg (95% CI of -0.27-1.25 mmHg). Likewise, at all other observed time points, the 95% confidence interval of the treatment difference was within +/- 1.5 mmHg. Ninety-three patients (64%) in the dorzolamide/timolol group and 88 patients (60%) in the brimonidine + timolol group had adverse experiences that were deemed drug related by the investigator, for which 7 patients (5%) in the dorzolamide/timolol group and 8 patients (5%) in the brimonidine + timolol group were discontinued from the study. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of the dorzolamide/timolol combination and the concomitant administration of brimonidine and timolol were comparable. The incidence of drug-related adverse experiences and the incidence of discontinuations caused by drug-related adverse experiences were similar between groups.     

Latanoprost versus combined timolol and dorzolamide

We reviewed available data comparing latanoprost and combined timolol and dorzolamide and the additive effect of latanoprost in patients receiving timolol and dorzolamide in combination using a literature search through the electronic Medline database and presentations from proceedings of recent glaucoma meetings. Several studies have shown that the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of latanoprost once a day is equivalent to timolol 0.5% twice a day and concomitant or combined dorzolamide 2% twice a day. Adding latanoprost to timolol and dorzolamide leads to a further 16% reduction of IOP. We conclude that the effect on IOP reduction of latanoprost is similar to combined timolol and dorzolamide, and the additive effect of latanoprost to a combination of timolol and dorzolamide is clinically relevant. In most cases, the overall safety profile of latanoprost is better than combined timolol and dorzolamide.     

Unoprostone as adjunctive therapy to timolol: a double masked randomised study versus brimonidine and dorzolamide

AIMS: To compare the safety and efficacy of unoprostone, brimonidine, and dorzolamide as adjunctive therapy to timolol in patients with primary open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS: This was a randomised, double masked, parallel group, multicentre (14) study. After using timolol maleate 0.5% monotherapy twice a day for 2 weeks, patients (n = 146) with an early morning intraocular pressure (IOP) between 22 and 28 mm Hg, inclusively, received unoprostone isopropyl 0.15% (n = 50), brimonidine tartrate 0.2% (n = 48), or dorzolamide hydrochloride 2.0% (n = 48) twice daily as adjunctive therapy to timolol maleate 0.5% for another 12 weeks. Safety was based on comprehensive ophthalmic examinations, adverse events, and vital signs. Efficacy was based on mean change from baseline in the 8 hour diurnal IOP at week 12. Baseline was defined as values obtained after 2 weeks of timolol monotherapy. RESULTS: Each drug was safe and well tolerated. Burning/stinging was the most common treatment emergent adverse event. No clinically relevant changes from baseline were observed for any ophthalmic examination or vital signs. At week 12, each adjunctive therapy produced statistically significant (p<0.001) reductions from timolol treated baseline in the mean 8 hour diurnal IOP (-2.7 mm Hg, unoprostone; -2.8 mm Hg, brimonidine; -3.1 mm Hg, dorzolamide). The extent of IOP reduction did not differ significantly between unoprostone and either brimonidine (p = 0.154) or dorzolamide (p = 0.101). CONCLUSION: Unoprostone was safe and well tolerated and provided a clinically and statistically significant additional reduction in IOP when added to stable monotherapy with timolol. Furthermore, unoprostone was not significantly different from brimonidine and dorzolamide as adjunctive therapy to timolol.     

Comparison of the ocular hypotensive effect of brimonidine, dorzolamide, latanoprost, or artificial tears added to timolol in glaucomatous monkey eyes

PURPOSE: To investigate the additive ocular hypotensive effect of brimonidine, dorzolamide, latanoprost, or artificial tears to timolol in monkey eyes with laser-induced unilateral glaucoma. METHODS: Eight monkeys were used and each animal received all four combinations of drugs in a randomized fashion during the study. The washout period between each combination was at least 2 weeks. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured at 8:30 AM, 11:00 AM, 1:00 PM, and 3:30 PM on day 1 (untreated baseline), day 2 (timolol treatment alone), and days 3 through 5 (combination therapy with two drugs). One drop of 0.5% timolol was topically applied at 3:45 PM on day 1 and at 8:45 AM and 3:45 PM on days 2 through 5. One drop of 0.2% brimonidine or 2% dorzolamide or artificial tears was added on day 2 at 4:00 PM and at 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM on days 3 through 5, or latanoprost was added at 9:00 AM on days 3 through 5. RESULTS: Compared with timolol alone, the maximal additive reduction in IOP which occurred on day 5 was 4.8 +/- 0.8 mm Hg (mean +/- standard error of the mean) with timolol plus brimonidine, 5.6 +/- 1.0 mm Hg with timolol plus dorzolamide, 4.3 +/- 1.0 mm Hg with timolol plus latanoprost, and 2.0 +/- 0.5 mm Hg with timolol plus artificial tears (P < 0.01). At all measurements, timolol plus brimonidine, timolol plus dorzolamide, and timolol plus latanoprost caused greater (P < 0.05) IOP reductions than did timolol plus artificial tears. The additive IOP-lowering effect was similar (P > 0.60) when comparing timolol plus brimonidine and timolol plus dorzolamide, timolol plus brimonidine and timolol plus latanoprost, timolol plus dorzolamide and timolol plus latanoprost at all measurements, but timolol plus dorzolamide caused a greater (P < 0.05) reduction of IOP than did timolol plus latanoprost at 0 hours on day 5. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of brimonidine, dorzolamide, or latanoprost to timolol caused similar additional reductions of IOP in glaucomatous monkey eyes.     

A 3-month randomized controlled trial of bimatoprost (LUMIGAN) versus combined timolol and dorzolamide (Cosopt) in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of topical bimatoprost (LUMIGAN; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) once daily with that of topical combined timolol and dorzolamide (Cosopt; Merck and Co, Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ) twice daily. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-masked, multicenter clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seventy-seven patients with a diagnosis of glaucoma or ocular hypertension and inadequate control of intraocular pressure (IOP) after at least 2 weeks of topical timolol maleate 0.5% monotherapy. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive bimatoprost 0.03% once daily (n = 90) or combined timolol 0.5% and dorzolamide 2% twice daily (n = 87) over a 3-month period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intraocular pressure, the primary end point, was measured at 8 AM and 10 AM at baseline, week 1, and months 1, 2, and 3, and also at 4 PM and 8 PM at baseline and month 3. RESULTS: Bimatoprost provided significantly greater IOP lowering compared with combined timolol and dorzolamide. At the 8 AM measurements, bimatoprost lowered mean IOP 6.8 mmHg to 7.6 mmHg from baseline, whereas combined timolol and dorzolamide lowered mean IOP 4.4 to 5.0 mmHg from baseline (P<0.001). At the last follow-up, patients had better diurnal IOP control with bimatoprost than combined timolol and dorzolamide. At 8 AM at the 3-month visit, the percentages of patients achieving IOPs of 相似文献   

Comparison of latanoprost monotherapy and combined therapy of 0.5% timolol and 1% dorzolamide in chronic primary angle-closure glaucoma (CACG) in Japanese patients.

To compare the efficacy, adverse effects, and patient compliance of latanoprost monotherapy with unfixed combination therapy with 0.5% timolol maleate and 1% dorzolamide in the treatment of chronic primary angle-closure glaucoma (CACG), 36 Japanese patients with CACG following laser iridotomy (LPI) were treated for 12 weeks with instillation of latanoprost alone or with unfixed combination therapy of 0.5% timolol maleate and 1% dorzolamide hydrochloride. After 12 weeks of treatment, latanoprost reduced intraocular pressure (IOP) from 22.2 +/- 2.0 mmHg to 14.8 +/- 1.9 mmHg (33% reduction); timolol maleate and dorzolamide hydrochloride also reduced IOP from 22.5 +/- 2.2 mmHg to 17.1 +/- 2.7 mmHg (24% reduction). Latanoprost monotherapy significantly lowered IOP compared with unfixed combination therapy of 0.5% timolol maleate and 1% dorzolamide hydrochloride. Furthermore, a systemic adverse effect of bradycardia was not observed in the latanoprost monotherapy group. Concerning compliance, no significant difference was observed between the two groups. Thus, latanoprost monotherapy is more effective than unfixed combination therapy with 0.5% timolol maleate and 1% dorzolamide in the treatment of CACG following relief of pupillary block in Japanese patients.     

Circadian intraocular pressure control with dorzolamide versus timolol maleate add-on treatments in primary open-angle glaucoma patients using latanoprost

PURPOSE: To compare the 24-hour efficacy of dorzolamide and timolol maleate administered twice daily to primary open-angle glaucoma patients whose intraocular pressure (IOP) could not be adequately controlled with latanoprost monotherapy. METHODS: In this double-blind prospective crossover clinical comparison trial, 36 primary open-angle glaucoma patients with uncontrolled IOP despite treatment with latanoprost applied once daily were administered timolol and dorzolamide twice daily. The treatment sequence was randomized. All patients underwent measurements for four 24-hour tonometric curves: at baseline and after each 4-week period of treatment. The IOP measurements were taken at 06:00, 09:00, 12:00, 15:00, 18:00, 21:00, 24:00 and 03:00 h. The between-group differences were tested for significance by means of parametric analysis of variance at each time point and circadian curve. The peak values within circadian curve were defined. The mean of the exact amount and percentage of additional IOP reductions from baseline were evaluated and success rates (a minimum of 10% reduction) were determined for both drug regimens. RESULTS: The mean peak/circadian curve IOPs were 23.4 +/- 2.2/21.8 +/- 2.2 mm Hg at dorzolamide baseline, 23.3 +/- 2.2/21.7 +/- 2.1 mm Hg at timolol baseline, and reduced to 20.2 +/- 1.7/18.7 +/- 1.7 mm Hg and 20.7 +/- 2.4/19.4 +/- 1.6 mm Hg, respectively. When added to latanoprost, both dorzolamide and timolol lowered IOP at circadian curve significantly (p < 0.05). Dorzolamide reduced baseline IOP values at each time point. Timolol also significantly reduced baseline IOP values at all time points except at 03:00. The mean of the exact amount and percentage of reduction in IOP at circadian curve and 5 out of 8 time points were significantly greater with dorzolamide add-on treatment (p < 0.05). The successful reduction rates were 86% for the dorzolamide group and 61% for the timolol group (p = 0.016; chi(2) test). CONCLUSION: Both of the combinations are effective in lowering IOP, the exact amount and percentage of reduction is greater with the latanoprost + dorzolamide regimen, especially at night-time.     

Efficacy and tolerability of the dorzolamide 2%/timolol 0.5% combination (COSOPT) versus 0.005% (XALATAN) in the treatment of ocular hypertension or glaucoma: results from two randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of the fixed dorzolamide 2%/timolol 0.5% combination (COSOPT) versus latanoprost 0.005% (XALATAN). METHODS: Two 3-month, parallel group, randomized, observer-masked and patient-masked, multicentre, clinical trials were performed in patients with ocular hypertension or open-angle glaucoma. Study 1 (n=256) was conducted in the United States and Study 2 (n=288) was conducted in Europe/Israel. Patients could be included whether or not they were currently taking ocular hypotensive therapy, and regardless of the effectiveness of any previous therapy. Patients were washed out from their usual ocular hypotensive medications and then those with a baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) >/= 24 mmHg were randomized to either the dorzolamide/timolol combination eye drops twice daily or latanoprost eye drops once daily in both eyes. Efficacy was assessed by daytime diurnal IOP (the mean of measurements made at 0800, 1000, 1400 and 1600 h). RESULTS: At baseline, the mean daytime diurnal IOP was 26.1 mmHg in the dorzolamide/timolol combination group versus 25.6 mmHg in the latanoprost group in Study 1, and 25.3 mmHg in the dorzolamide/timolol combination group versus 24.7 mmHg in the latanoprost group in Study 2. After 3 months, the mean daytime diurnal IOP was 18.9 mmHg for the dorzolamide/timolol combination versus 18.4 mmHg for latanoprost in Study 1, and 17.4 mmHg for the dorzolamide/timolol combination versus 17.5 for latanoprost in Study 2. The difference between treatments in mean IOP change at 3 months was -0.04 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.85, 0.77] in Study 1, and -0.57 mmHg (95% CI -1.31, 0.16) in Study 2. The probability that the true difference lay between -1.5 and 1.5 mmHg, the predefined bounds for equivalence, was >0.950 in both studies. Both treatments were well tolerated over 3 months, although ocular stinging occurred more frequently with the dorzolamide/timolol combination. CONCLUSIONS: The dorzolamide/timolol combination and latanoprost were equally effective at lowering IOP.     

Timolol 0.5%/dorzolamide 2% fixed combination versus timolol 0.5%/pilocarpine 2% fixed combination in primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertensive patients

PURPOSE: To establish the efficacy and safety of timolol maleate/dorzolamide fixed combination (TDFC) versus timolol maleate/pilocarpine fixed combination (TPFC), each given twice daily, in primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertensive patients. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentred, double-masked trial, 37 patients were treated twice daily with timolol for 4 weeks. They were then randomized to one of the treatment medications for 6 weeks, after which they were treated with timolol again for 2 weeks before being placed on the opposite treatment medication for 6 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 36 patients completed the trial. Their mean baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) was 22.3 +/- 3.7 mmHg. Following 6 weeks of treatment, the mean trough (08.00 hours) IOP was 18.0 +/- 2.2 mmHg for TDFC and 17.4 +/- 2.0 mmHg for TPFC (p = 0.22). The mean diurnal curve IOP was 18.1 +/- 2.2 mmHg for TDFC and 16.7 +/- 1.9 mmHg for TPFC (p = 0.0007). At the remaining time-points (10.00, 18.00 and 20.00 hours), TPFC IOPs were statistically lower than TDFC IOPs (p < 0.03). There were statistically more unsolicited reports of vision change and ocular pain associated with TPFC (p = 0.04). Six patients were discontinued early from TPFC therapy (17%) versus two from TDFC (6%) (p = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that TPFC can provide at least a similar efficacious reduction in IOP as TDFC in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.     

Efficacy and side effects of latanoprost monotherapy compared to adding dorzolamide to timolol in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension--a three-month randomised study. Spanish Latanoprost Study Group

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of latanoprost monotherapy or dorzolamide and timolol in glaucoma patients inadequately controlled on adrenergic beta-receptor antagonist therapy. METHODS: A total of 164 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma, capsular glaucoma or ocular hypertension were included in a three-month, open-label, randomised multicentre study. Patients with open-angle glaucoma were required to have IOP at least 22 mmHg and patients with ocular hypertension were required to have IOP at least 27 mmHg, on treatment with one or two ocular hypotensive drugs of which at least one had to be a beta-blocker. All patients were treated with timolol, 5 mg/ml twice daily, for a 2-4 week run-in period. They were then randomised to latanoprost, 50 microg/ml once daily, or timolol 5 mg/ml plus dorzolamide, 20 mg/ml twice daily. The difference in mean diurnal IOP change from baseline to month 3 was compared in the two groups. RESULTS: When patients were switched to latanoprost, mean diurnal IOP was reduced by 5.2 mmHg (23%) compared to 4.0 mmHg (17%) in the group in which dorzolamide was added to timolol. The difference of 1.2 mmHg was statistically significant (p = 0.005). The majority of adverse events during both treatments were judged as mild. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that a switch to latanoprost monotherapy is an alternative to combined treatment with timolol and dorzolamide in patients inadequately controlled on a topical adrenergic beta-receptor antagonist alone.     

The efficacy and ocular discomfort of substituting brinzolamide for dorzolamide in combination therapy with latanoprost, timolol, and dorzolamide.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was evaluate the efficacy and ocular discomfort of substituting brinzolamide for dorzolamide in patients with glaucoma treated by latanoprost, timolol, and dorzolamide. METHODS: An 8-week, prospective, randomized, open-label, comparative study was performed in 58 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma treated by latanoprost, timolol, and dorzolamide. These patients were randomly enrolled into two groups: (1) dorzolamide three times daily was substituted with brinzolamide twice-daily (substituting group); and (2) dorzolamide three times daily was continued (control group). Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured at baseline, 4, and 8 weeks after the enrollment. Subjective ocular discomfort (irritation and blurred vision) at the time of the instillation of the patient was noted with interview. RESULTS: The IOPs at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks after the enrollment were 17.7 +/- 2.7 mmHg, 17.5 +/- 2.6 mmHg, and 17.4 +/- 2.9 mmHg in the substituting group, and 18.0 +/- 2.5 mmHg, 17.8 +/- 2.5 mmHg, and 17.9 +/- 2.6 mmHg in the control group, respectively. There were no significant differences in IOP changes between the two groups (P = 0.74). In the substituting group, ocular irritation was decreased significantly (P = 0.0014) from 63% to 20%. The slight increase of blurred vision from 27% to 37% that occurred in the substituting group was not significant (P = 0.58). In the control group, neither ocular irritation (P = 0.58, from 68% to 57%) nor blurred vision (P = 0.99, from 25% to 21%) was changed. CONCLUSIONS: Substituting brinzolamide for dorzolamide maintained stable IOP with improvement in ocular comfort in patients with glaucoma.     

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of dorzolamide 2% when added to brimonidine 0.2% or timolol maleate 0.5% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the ocular hypotensive efficacy and safety of dorzolamide when added to brimonidine or timolol in patients with uncontrolled primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a 1-year prospective open-label clinical trial of 48 consecutive POAG patients with inadequate intraocular pressure (IOP) control while using brimonidine 0.2% (23 patients) and timolol 0.5% (25 patients), 2 times daily. Patients were assigned to receive dorzolamide 2% as adjunctive therapy, added 3 times daily to brimonidine or timolol. IOP was measured on week 2, and months 3, 6, 9, and 12. RESULTS: A significant reduction in IOP from the baseline was observed after dorzolamide use in both groups at visits during that year (P < 0.001). Overall, mean IOP reduction was 5.6 +/- 1.9 mmHg with the brimonidine-dorzolamide combination, and 6.8 +/- 1.7 mmHg with timolol-dorzolamide after 1 year of treatment; the difference was significant (P = 0.029). No statistical differences existed between the groups for adverse events (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The addition of dorzolamide to brimonidine or timolol has significant IOP-lowering efficacy during 1 year in patients with POAG whose IOPs were inadequately controlled with brimonidine or timolol alone. The IOP-lowering effect of the timolol-dorzolamide combination at 1 year was more pronounced than brimonidine-dorzolamide. Both combinations were well-tolerated by the patients.     

Efficacy of the dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination versus latanoprost in the treatment of ocular hypertension or glaucoma: combined analysis of pooled data from two large randomized observer and patient-masked studies.

In previous analyses of primary efficacy data from two randomized clinical trials, standard dosing regimens of the dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination (COSOPT) and latanoprost (XALATAN) were shown to have equivalent efficacy with regard to reduction in mean daytime diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP). We performed additional post hoc analyses of pooled data from these studies to compare further the efficacy of the two treatments. The studies used identical 3-month, parallel group, randomized, observer-masked and patient-masked, multicenter designs. Patients with a baseline IOP > or = 24 mm Hg were randomized to either the 2% dorzolamide/0.5% timolol combination eye drops twice daily (n = 273) or 0.005% latanoprost eye drops once daily (n = 271). The IOP measurements were made at 8 AM, 10 AM, 2 PM, and 4 PM at the baseline visit and then on each of the 3 monthly assessment days. The following measures were analyzed on a post hoc basis: 1) percentages of patients meeting target levels of IOP reduction; 2) mean IOP reduction in those patients with high IOP (> or =30 mmHg) at baseline; 3) mean IOP at each of the assessment time points during a day. A total of 259 patients in the dorzolamide/timolol group and 268 patients in the latanoprost group were included in the efficacy analysis. At 3 months, both treatments showed similar efficacy with regard to the percentages of patients who achieved target levels of IOP reduction (e.g., 40% IOP reduction in 15% of dorzolamide/timolol combination patients and 13% of latanoprost patients), mean IOP reduction in those patients with high IOP at baseline (dorzolamide/ timolol combination, 12.5 mmHg, latanoprost, 12.6 mmHg), and mean IOP at each time point during the day. By the measures used in this analysis, the dorzolamide/timolol combination and latanoprost were equally effective at lowering IOP in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma.     

Effect of latanoprost/timolol and dorzolamide/tiomolol on intraocular pressure after phacoemulsification surgery

AIM: To evalaute the effect of fixed-combination latanoprost 0.005%/timolol maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide hydrochloride 2%/timolol maleate 0.5% on postoperative intraocular pressure after phacoemulsification cataract surgery. METHODS: This study is a prospective, randomized, double-masked and placebo-controlled. The study included 90 eyes of 90 patients which were scheduled to have phacoemulsification surgery. Patients were randomly assigned preoperatively to 1 of 3 groups (30 eyes of 30 patients). Two hour before surgery, the patients received one drop latanoprost/timolol (group 1), dorzolamide/timolol (group 2) and placebo (group 3, control group). The IOPs were measured at preoperative and postoperative 4, 8, and 24 hours. RESULTS: The preoperative mean intraocular pressure was not statistically significant between both drug groups and control group. In group 1 and 2, the postoperative mean IOP [group1: (14.03±3.15)mmHg and group 2: (14.16±4.43)mmHg] at 24 hours were significantly lower than the control group [(16.93±3.70)mmHg, (P<0.05)]. In addition, the postoperative mean IOP of group 1 [(14.90±3.69)mmHg] at 8 hours was significantly lower than the control group [(17.70±3.89)mmHg, (P<0.05)], but there was no significant difference between group 2 [(16.16±5.23)mmHg] and control group at 8 hours (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: When compared with placebo, the use of preoperative fixed combination of latanoprost/ timolol and dorzolamide/timolol is an effective method for preventing intraocular pressure elevation in 24 hours after phacoemulsification surgery, but did not completely prevent IOP spikes.     

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of the fixed combination of dorzolamide/timolol and the concomitant administration of dorzolamide and timolol: a clinical equivalence study

AIMS—To compare the tolerability and efficacy of a fixed combination solution of dorzolamide/timolol (Cosopt), administered twice daily with the concomitant administration of its components, dorzolamide (Trusopt) twice daily and timolol (Timoptic) twice daily.
METHODS—After a 2 week timolol run in, patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomised (1:1) to receive treatment with either the dorzolamide/timolol combination solution twice daily (combination) or the dorzolamide solution twice daily plus timolol maleate solution twice daily (concomitant) for 3 months.
RESULTS—299 patients were entered and 290 patients completed the study. Compared with the timolol baseline, additional IOP lowering of 16% was observed at trough (hour 0) and 22% at peak (hour 2) at month 3 in both the concomitant and combination groups. The IOP lowering effects of the two treatment groups were clinically and statistically equivalent as demonstrated by the extremely small point differences (concomitant − combination) observed in this study−0.01 mm Hg at trough and 0.08 mm Hg at peak. The safety variables of the concomitant and combination groups were very similar. Both combination and concomitant therapy were well tolerated and few patients discontinued due to adverse effects.
CONCLUSIONS—The dorzolamide/timolol combination solution administered twice daily is equivalent in efficacy and has a similar safety profile to the concomitant administration of the components administered twice daily.

Keywords: dorzolamide; timolol; intraocular pressure; glaucoma; ocular hypertension     

Efficacy and safety of timolol maleate/latanoprost fixed combination versus timolol maleate and brimonidine given twice daily

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the timolol maleate/latanoprost fixed combination (TLFC) given once each evening versus brimonidine and timolol solution given twice daily as concomitant therapy in primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension patients. METHODS: Qualified subjects were begun on timolol alone twice daily for 1 month and then randomized to either TLFC or brimonidine and timolol concomitant therapy for 6 weeks. Patients were then switched to the other treatment regimen. Intraocular pressures (IOPs) were measured every 2 hours between 08 : 00 and 20 : 00 hours at baseline and at the end of periods 1 and 2. RESULTS: This study found that in 32 subjects the IOP diurnal curve on timolol alone (20.9 +/- 2.8 mmHg) decreased to 17.9 +/- 3.2 mmHg when patients were treated with TLFC and to 19.0 +/- 2.4 mmHg when patients were treated with brimonidine and timolol (p = 0.02). Intraocular pressures at individual time-points were statistically similar between the groups at the 08 : 00 trough and 2 and 4 hours after dosing. However, beyond 4 hours after dosing, TLFC-treated subjects demonstrated a trend towards lower IOPs at each 2-hour time-point that was not statistically significant after a Bonferroni correction (p 相似文献