A six-month randomized clinical trial comparing the intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy of bimatoprost and latanoprost in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of topical bimatoprost 0.03% with latanoprost 0.005%. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, investigator-masked clinical trial. METHODS: After washout of glaucoma medications, ocular hypertension or glaucoma patients were randomly assigned to once-daily bimatoprost 0.03% (n = 133) or latanoprost 0.005% (n = 136) for 6 months. The primary outcome measure was mean change from baseline IOP (8 AM, 12 PM, 4 PM). Secondary measures included mean IOP, ophthalmologic examination, adverse events, and the percentage of patients reaching specific target IOPs. RESULTS: Mean change from baseline IOP was significantly greater for bimatoprost patients than for latanoprost patients at all measurements on each study visit; 1.5 mm Hg greater at 8 AM (P <.001), 2.2 mm Hg greater at 12 PM (P <.001), and 1.2 mm Hg greater at 4 PM (P =.004) at month 6. At the end of the study, the percentage of patients achieving a > or = 20% IOP decrease was 69% to 82% with bimatoprost and 50% to 62% with latanoprost (P < or = .003). In addition, the distribution of patients achieving target pressures in each range (< or = 13 to < or = 15 mm Hg, >15 to < or = 18 mm Hg, and > 18 mm Hg) showed that bimatoprost produced lower target pressures compared with latanoprost at all times measured (P < or = .026). Few patients were discontinued for adverse events (6 on bimatoprost; 5 on latanoprost). On ophthalmologic examination, conjunctival hyperemia (P <.001) and eyelash growth (P =.064) were more common in bimatoprost patients. CONCLUSIONS: Bimatoprost is more effective than latanoprost in lowering IOP. Both drugs were well tolerated, with few discontinuations for adverse events.     

The effect of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost on circadian variation of intraocular pressure in patients with open-angle glaucoma

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost given in the evening over the 24-hour curve in newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma patients. METHODS: This 8-week, randomized, parallel group, masked evaluator study compared the efficacy of once daily administration of latanoprost 0.005%, bimatoprost 0.03%, and travoprost 0.004% ophthalmic solutions. After enrollment at baseline, 48 patients were randomized to 3 treatment groups: latanoprost (n=17), bimatoprost (n=16), and travoprost (n=15). At baseline and 8 weeks of therapy, masked evaluators measured intraocular pressure (IOP) at 8 AM, 10 AM, 1 PM, 4 PM, 8 PM, 11 PM, and 3 AM. RESULTS: Baseline mean IOP levels were similar across the groups. By week 8, reductions were observed in all 3 groups (P<0.001 for each). Travoprost-treated patients' IOP levels were reduced 8.7 and 8.1 mm Hg at 8 and 10 AM, respectively. Latanoprost-treated patients experienced 4.8 and 5.3 mm Hg reductions, whereas bimatoprost-treated patients experienced 5.5 and 4.9 mm Hg reductions at these time points. The amount of IOP reduction seen at 8 and 10 AM in travoprost group was significantly higher when compared with latanoprost and bimatoprost-treated group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost were comparable in their ability to reduce IOP in open-angle glaucoma patients. On the basis of our data, the IOP reduction of these drugs is indistinguishable within statistical parameters.     

24-h IOP control with latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost in subjects with exfoliation syndrome and ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: To compare the 24-h IOP reductions induced by latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost in eyes with exfoliation syndrome (XFS) associated with ocular hypertension (OH). METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, single masked, and parallel design study with 15 patients in each treatment group. After washout of any previous medications, each patient underwent a baseline 24-h IOP curve testing at 0600, 0900, 1200, 1500, 1800, 2100, and at 2400 (midnight) hours. Patients were then randomized to receive latanoprost, travoprost, or bimatoprost once a day for 3 months. The 24-h curve testing was repeated at first week, and first and third months. RESULTS: Maximal and minimal IOP was recorded at 0600 and 1800-2100 hours. There was no significant difference among treatment groups at any time-point except for the first week. At the first week, the travoprost group had significantly lower IOP levels than the latanoprost and bimatoprost groups. All medicines significantly lowered 24-h IOP from baseline (P=0.001 for each). Although there was no significant difference in IOP reduction among groups at first week and first month, bimatoprost reduced the 24-h IOP (7.9+/-1.4) more than travoprost (6.6+/-0.5) at the end of the third month (P=0.003). The mean 24-h range of IOP was lowest with travoprost in all visits, and between-group differences was significant for travoprost vslatanoprost (P=0.007) and travoprost vsbimatoprost (P=0.001) at the third month. CONCLUSION: Latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost were effective in reducing the 24-h IOP in patients with XFS and OH, and more research is required with a larger study.     

A double-masked, randomized clinical trial comparing latanoprost with unoprostone in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) reducing effect and safety of latanoprost 0.005% once daily with unoprostone 0.12% twice daily in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OH). DESIGN: An 8-week, double-masked, randomized, parallel-group, single-center clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 108 patients with POAG or OH were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: After completing a wash-out of ocular hypotensive medications, patients were randomized to receive either latanoprost once daily in the evening plus placebo once daily in the morning, or unoprostone twice daily (morning and evening). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: IOP was measured at 10:00 AM and at 5:00 PM at baseline and at week 8, and before 12:00 noon at week 2. Ocular and systemic safety assessments were performed. RESULTS: From an overall baseline of 24.1 mmHg, latanoprost reduced IOP by 6.7 mmHg (28%) and unoprostone reduced IOP by 3.3 mmHg (14%). The difference between the groups of 3.4 mmHg was significant (P: < 0.001, analysis of covariance; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.7 to -2.1) in favor of latanoprost. A >/=30% reduction in mean IOP from baseline was achieved by 44% of latanoprost-treated patients compared with 8% of unoprostone-treated patients. The incidence of adverse events was low and comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Latanoprost administered once daily was significantly more effective in reducing IOP compared with unoprostone administered twice daily in patients with POAG and OH.     

Latanoprost or brimonidine as treatment for elevated intraocular pressure: multicenter trial in the United States

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of latanoprost or brimonidine in patients with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized, masked-evaluator, parallel-group, multicenter study in the United States included patients with primary open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Patients received latanoprost 0.005% once daily (8:00 AM; n = 152) or brimonidine tartrate 0.2% twice daily (8:00 AM and 8:00 PM; n = 151). Patients underwent evaluation at screening, baseline (randomization), and after 0.5, 3, and 6 months of treatment. IOP was measured at 8:00 AM, 10:00 AM, noon, and 4:00 PM at baseline and the months 3 and 6 visits, and at 8:00 AM only at week 2. The main outcome measure was the difference in diurnal IOP change from baseline to month 6 between treatment groups. Adverse events were recorded at each visit. RESULTS: Baseline mean diurnal IOP levels were similar between groups. At month 6, the adjusted mean (+/- SEM) diurnal IOP reduction was 5.7 +/- 0.3 mm Hg in the latanoprost group and 3.1 +/- 0.3 mm Hg in patients receiving brimonidine (P < 0.001). The mean difference in diurnal IOP reduction was 2.5 +/- 0.3 mm Hg (95% CI: 1.9, 3.2; P < 0.001). Five times more patients receiving brimonidine than latanoprost were withdrawn from the study due to adverse events. CONCLUSION: Latanoprost instilled once daily is more effective and better tolerated than brimonidine administered twice daily for the treatment of patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. During therapy, the range of daily fluctuation of IOP is less for latanoprost compared with brimonidine.     

三种前列腺素类滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼的降眼压效果比较

目的 比较拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素及贝美前列素3种前列腺素类滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼患者4周后的24h降眼压效果。方法 病例对照研究。选取2009年1月至6月门诊就诊的原发性开角型青光眼患者63例（63只眼）。其中拉坦前列素组21例（21只眼）,曲伏前列素组22例（22只眼）,贝美前列素组20例（20只眼）,分别使用相应的滴眼液,均为每日滴药1次,共观察4周,测量用药前后的24h眼压曲线。3组间用药前或用药后24h不同时间点眼压值比较采用两因素重复测量的方差分析,眼压波动幅度比较采用单因素方差分析。结果 3组患者用药4周后眼压均明显下降,拉坦前列素组眼压从(18.9±2.1)mm Hg（1mm Hg =0.133 kPa）降至(15.3±2.7)mm Hg,下降幅度（用药前后眼压差值/用药前眼压值）为19.0％;曲伏前列素组眼压从(19.1±3.1)mm Hg降至(15.3 ±2.1)mm Hg,下降幅度为19.4％;贝美前列素组眼压从(18.6±1.9) mm Hg降至(14.9±1.9)mm Hg,下降幅度为19.9％。波幅下降幅度（用药前后波幅差值/用药前波幅值）,拉坦前列素组为31.0％,曲伏前列素组为31.1％,贝美前列素组为31.9％。用药前及用药后3组间眼压值随时间点变化差异均无统计学意义(F= 1.501,P=0.110),3组间用药后眼压波幅下降幅度差异无统计学意义(F =0.286,P=0.752)。结论 拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素、贝美前列素3种滴眼液对原发性开角型青光眼的昼夜降眼压效果显著且无明显差别。     

Randomized clinical trial of latanoprost and unoprostone in patients with elevated intraocular pressure

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect and safety of latanoprost 0.005% once daily with that of unoprostone 0.15% twice daily for patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. METHODS: In a prospective, 8-week, investigator-masked, parallel-group study conducted at numerous centers in the United States, 165 previously treated patients with IOP >or= 25 mm Hg in one or both eyes after washout were randomly assigned to receive either latanoprost 0.005% once daily in the evening or unoprostone 0.15% twice daily. Observations procedures were Goldmann applanation tonometry, best-corrected visual acuity, slit lamp biomicroscopy, and ophthalmoscopy. The main outcome measure was change in the mean of the IOPs measured at 8:00 AM, 12 noon, and 4:00 PM between baseline (before treatment) and after 8 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The change in the mean +/- SD of the IOPs measured at 8:00 AM, 12 noon, and 4:00 PM was -7.2 +/- 3.2 mm Hg (28%) for latanoprost (25.3 +/- 2.8 mm Hg at baseline to 18.2 +/- 2.8 mm Hg at 8 weeks) and -3.9 +/- 2.6 mm Hg (15%) for unoprostone (25.5 +/- 3.3 mm Hg at baseline to 21.6 +/- 4.0 mm Hg; P 相似文献   

Effect of bimatoprost on patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension who are nonresponders to latanoprost

PURPOSE: To test the efficacy of bimatoprost 0.03% 2D for lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients affected by primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension who did not respond to treatment with latanoprost 0.005% 2D. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized clinical trial with a cross over design (two 30-day treatment phases with a 30-day washout phase in between). PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen patients were enrolled. Random allocation to treatment to a single eye only of every subject. Eligibility criteria: (1) IOP > 22 mmHg in both eyes on current treatment (on three separate readings > 24 hours apart), (2) angle wide open in both eyes, (3) no pseudoexfoliation and/or pigment dispersion in either eye, (4) documented medical history consistent with < 10% IOP decrease in both eyes on 2-month treatment with latanoprost 0.005% every day. METHOD: The following variables were measured at each study visit: (1) IOP (Goldmann applanation tonometry, 5 readings, 8 AM, 12 noon, 4 PM, 8 PM, and 12 midnight); (2) visual acuity (Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart, logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution); (3) estimate of conjunctival hyperemia based on 5 standard photographs (graded as "none," "trace," "mild," "moderate," and "severe"). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: IOP. RESULTS: IOP data (mean and standard deviation) were the following: baseline = 24.7 +/- 0.9 mmHg, after washout = 24.8 +/- 1.1 mmHg, after latanoprost phase = 24.1 +/- 0.9 mmHg, after bimatoprost phase = 18.1 +/- 1.7 mmHg. IOP on bimatoprost proved lower than both baseline (P < 0.0001) and latanoprost (P = 0.0001). Thirteen of 15 patients showed a > or =20% IOP decrease with bimatoprost treatment. None of the 15 patients showed a > or =20% decrease of IOP after 30 days of latanoprost treatment. No significant IOP changes were observed in the fellow untreated eye in each patient throughout the study. Trace-to-mild conjunctival hyperemia was recorded more often with bimatoprost phase (P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Thirteen of 15 patients, who were nonresponders to latanoprost, 0.005%, 2D, were successfully treated with bimatoprost, 0.03%, 2D. Bimatoprost treatment was associated with a higher incidence of trace-to-mild conjunctival hyperemia than latanoprost.     

A 1-year study to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% to once-daily latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution (Trav/Tim) to latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution (Lat/Tim), dosed once daily in the morning, in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OH). METHODS: This was a randomized, double-masked, multicenter, parallel group, active-controlled study conducted at 41 sites. At the eligibility visit the patients were randomized (1:1) to the assigned masked medication if they met inclusion/exclusion criteria, and the mean IOP values in the eligible eyes were > or =24 mmHg at 9 AM and > or =21 mmHg at 11 AM and 4 PM. Patients were excluded if the mean IOP in either eye was >36 mmHg. Patients were instructed to administer the assigned medication each morning at 9 AM. During the treatment phase of the study, IOP was measured at 9 AM at week 2, week 6, month 3, and month 9. At the month 6 and month 12 visits, IOP was measured at 9 AM, 11 AM, and 4 PM. Statistical methods included a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA); to test for noninferiority, a 95% confidence interval for the treatment group difference was constructed based on the ANOVA results for each time point at month 12. RESULTS: Patients (n=408) with OAG or OH were enrolled at 41 sites. One patient withdrew prior to receiving medication so 207 in the Trav/Tim group and 200 in the Lat/Tim group were evaluable for safety. Baseline demographic characteristics as well as IOP values showed no statistical differences between the two groups. Trav/Tim provided lower mean IOP values than Lat/Tim that were statistically significant at the week 2 9 AM (p=0.0081), month 6 9 AM (p=0.0056), and month 6 11 AM (p=0.0128) time points and at 9 AM time point pooled across all visits (p=0.0235) when mean IOP was 0.6 mmHg lower in the Trav/Tim group. Treatment-related adverse events were mild in both groups. Although hyperemia was reported from a higher percentage of patients in Trav/Tim group, differences in average hyperemia scores between the two groups were not considered clinically relevant. CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution produced mean IOP levels that are statistically noninferior to latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution. Furthermore, at 9:00 AM, 24 hours after dosing, IOP was statistically lower for travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% pooled across all visits. Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination ophthalmic solution is an effective treatment for reducing IOP and it is safe and well-tolerated in patients with OAG or OH.     

A comparison of travoprost, latanoprost, and the fixed combination of dorzolamide and timolol in patients with pseudoexfoliation glaucoma

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering effect and safety of latanoprost, travoprost given every evening, and the fixed combination dorzolamide + timolol (DTFC) given twice daily in pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (PXG). METHODS: This randomized, prospective, investigator-masked study has been conducted with 50 PXG patients. Patients were assigned to one of three groups: travoprost 0.004%, fixed combination of dorzolamide 2%+timolol 0.5%, or latanoprost 0.005% for 6 months. At baseline and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months of therapy, IOP (8 am, 10 am, 4 pm), blood pressures, and pulse rates were measured, and ophthalmologic examination was performed. The side effects were recorded at each visit. RESULTS: Forty-two of the 50 patients initially enrolled completed this study. Withdrawn patients included one (latanoprost) for lack of efficacy, five (three travoprost, one latanoprost, one DTFC) for adverse events, and two (one latanoprost, one DTFC) for loss of follow-up. Each of the three drugs considerably reduced the IOP in PXG cases throughout the 6 months. Mean IOP reduction at 6 months was -9.3+/-2.9 mmHg in the travoprost group, -8.2+/-1.2 mmHg in the latanoprost group, and 11.5+/-3.3 mmHg in the DTFC group. Comparing the groups, DTFC is more effective than latanoprost and travoprost in lowering IOP (p<0.05). There was no difference between travoprost and latanoprost. The most common treatment-related adverse event was conjunctival hyperemia. Intensity of ocular hyperemia was greater in the travoprost group compared with the latanoprost and DTFC groups (p<0.05). There were no significant effects on systemic safety parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated that DTFC is more effective in reducing IOP than latanoprost and travoprost. Latanoprost and travoprost had similar ocular hypotensive effects in patients with PXG. All three drugs were well tolerated; there were fewer ocular side effects attributable in the latanoprost group.     

Bimatoprost and travoprost: a review of recent studies of two new glaucoma drugs

Bimatoprost (Lumigan [Allergan, Inc, Irvine CA]) and travoprost (Travatan [Alcon, Ft Worth, TX]) are two new intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering drugs for use in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. This review evaluates recent studies comparing these new drugs with timolol and with latanoprost. In each study, the statistical analyses support the conclusion that these agents were more effective than timolol and as effective as latanoprost in terms of their ability to reduce IOP. The side effect profiles for bimatoprost, latanoprost, and travoprost were similar, but with statistically higher occurrences of hyperemia and eyelash growth for bimatoprost or travoprost versus latanoprost or timolol.     

Conjunctival hyperemia in healthy subjects after short-term dosing with latanoprost,bimatoprost, and travoprost

PURPOSE: To evaluate conjunctival hyperemia after short-term use of latanoprost 0.005%, bimatoprost 0.03% and travoprost 0.004% in normal adults. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-masked crossover active controlled comparison. METHODS: We evaluated conjunctival hyperemia by a standard photographic measure at the slit lamp and by anterior segment photographs in healthy subjects after dosing for 5 days with latanoprost, bimatoprost, or travoprost. Conjunctival hyperemia was evaluated at 24-hour trough (hour 0) and at hour 1 after dosing. Each subject was crossed over between periods after a 1-week washout interval. RESULTS: Twenty-eight subjects (mean age 26 +/- 9 years) completed this study. Several comparisons were noted to be significant between groups by slit-lamp biomicroscopy: first, at hour 0 latanoprost had significantly less hyperemia than bimatoprost; second, at hour 0 latanoprost showed significantly less change than bimatoprost compared with the study baseline (visit 2); third, at hour 1 latanoprost had significantly less hyperemia than travoprost; fourth, at hour 1 latanoprost demonstrated significantly less change from baseline in hyperemia than travoprost (visit 2); fifth, at hour 1 latanoprost had less change in hyperemia than bimatoprost or travoprost between the study and the nonstudy eye (P = .03); and last, at hour 1 latanoprost showed significantly less change than bimatoprost and travoprost compared with hour 0 (P = .04). Additionally, similar grades were observed by photographs with latanoprost demonstrating the lowest levels of hyperemia. Subjects complained less about other people noticing their red eye with latanoprost than bimatoprost or travoprost (P = .048). No serious adverse events were noted. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that latanoprost may cause significantly less short-term conjunctival hyperemia on average than bimatoprost or travoprost in healthy subjects.     

Comparative effects of latanoprost (Xalatan) and unoprostone (Rescula) in patients with open-angle glaucoma and suspected glaucoma

PURPOSE: To compare, in paired eyes of open-angle glaucoma patients and glaucoma suspects, hydrodynamic and visual changes after 1 month of topical latanoprost in one eye and unoprostone in the other.DESIGN: Single-center, institutional randomized clinical trial.METHODS: After completing a washout period off all topical medication, 25 adults (mean age 54 +/- SEM 2 years) with bilateral open-angle glaucoma or glaucoma suspect status underwent morning (8 to 10 AM) and afternoon (1 to 3 PM) measurements of intraocular pressure (IOP), pulsatile ocular blood flow (POBF), contrast, sensitivity, frequency doubling technology, and Humphrey 10-2 perimetry (HVFA II) in both eyes. Each then started unoprostone 0.15% (Rescula) in one randomly assigned eye and latanoprost 0.005% (Xalatan) in the other. Unoprostone was administered at 8 AM and 8 PM and latanoprost at 8 PM with placebo at 8 AM, both from masked bottles. After 28 days, differences were determined for each measured variable by two-tailed paired t test.RESULTS: Starting from similar baseline IOP levels, after 1 month of treatment, the mean morning IOP values differed according to the topical agent received (16.2 +/- SEM 0.6 mm Hg for latanoprost vs 17.9 +/- 0.7 mm Hg for unoprostone; P =.001). These morning pressures were 2.6 mm Hg lower than baseline in the eyes receiving latanoprost (P <.0001), and 1.6 mm Hg lower in unoprostone-treated eyes (P =.02). Afternoon values were 3.1 +/- SEM 0.6 lower than corresponding baseline in eyes receiving latanoprost, and 2.4 +/- SEM 0.6 mm Hg in unoprostone-treated eyes (P <.0001 from baseline for both medications; interdrug mean IOP difference; P =.04). Eyes receiving unoprostone showed a 1.7-db improvement in frequency doubling mean deviation (P =.03), the only significant visual function change observed. Pulsatile ocular blood flow increased 30% relative to baseline in eyes receiving latanoprost, (P <.0001) and 16% in eyes receiving unoprostone (P =.05) by the morning of day 28. That afternoon, mean POBF had increased 30% (P <.0001) relative to afternoon baseline values among eyes receiving latanoprost and 18% (P =.03) among those receiving unoprostone (interdrug change difference, P =.05). Humphrey perimetry and contrast sensitivity remained stable with both prostanoids.CONCLUSIONS: Both latanoprost and unoprostone produced significant reductions in IOP and increases in POBF, with stable central and perimacular visual function. Latanoprost once daily produced IOP reduction and POBF increases nearly twofold greater than those obtained with unoprostone twice daily. These differences in IOP and POBF change between unoprostone and latanoprost were statistically significant.     

Comparing the Efficacy of Latanoprost (0.005%), Bimatoprost (0.03%), Travoprost (0.004%), and Timolol (0.5%) in the Treatment of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma

Purpose

To compare the efficacy and safety of latanoprost, bimatoprost, travoprost and timolol in reducing intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with primary open angle glaucoma.

Methods

This was a prospective study conducted at a tertiary-care centre. One hundred and forty patients with newly diagnosed primary open angle glaucoma were randomly assigned to treatment with latanoprost (0.005%), bimatoprost (0.03%), travoprost (0.004%) or timolol gel (0.5%); 35 patients were assigned to each group. All patients were followed for 2, 6, and 12 weeks. The main outcome measure studied was the change in IOP at week 12 from the baseline values. Safety measures included recording of adverse events.

Results

The mean IOP reduction from baseline at week 12 was significantly more with bimatoprost (8.8 mmHg, 35.9%) than with latanoprost (7.3 mmHg, 29.9%), travoprost (7.6 mmHg, 30.8%) or timolol (6.7 mmHg, 26.6%) (ANOVA and Student''s t-tests, p < 0.001). Among the prostaglandins studied, bimatoprost produced a maximum reduction in IOP (-2.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.25 to -3.18) followed by travoprost (-1.27; 95% CI, -0.81 to -1.27) and latanoprost (-1.25; 95% CI, -0.79 to -1.71); these values were significant when compared to timolol at week 12 (Bonferroni test, p < 0.001). Latanoprost and travoprost were comparable in their ability to reduce IOP at each patient visit. Ocular adverse-events were found in almost equal proportion in patients treated with bimatoprost (41.3%) and travoprost (41.9%), with a higher incidence of conjunctival hyperemia (24.1%) seen in the bimatoprost group. Timolol produced a significant drop in heart rate (p < 0.001) at week 12 when compared to the baseline measurements.

Conclusions

Bimatoprost showed greater efficacy when compared to the other prostaglandins, and timolol was the most efficacious at lowering the IOP. Conjunctional hyperemia was mainly seen with bimatoprost. However, the drug was tolerated well and found to be safe.     

Effect of timolol, latanoprost, and dorzolamide on circadian IOP in glaucoma or ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: To compare the around-the-clock intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction induced by timolol 0.5%, latanoprost 0.005%, and dorzolamide in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT). METHODS: In this crossover trial, 20 patients with POAG (n = 10) or OHT (n = 10) were treated with timolol, latanoprost, and dorzolamide for 1 month. The treatment sequence was randomized. All patients underwent measurements for four 24-hour tonometric curves: at baseline and after each 1-month period of treatment. The patients were admitted to the hospital, and IOP was measured by two well-trained evaluators masked to treatment assignment. Measurements were taken at 3, 6, and 9 AM and noon and at 3, 6, and 9 PM and midnight by handheld electronic tonometer (TonoPen XL; Bio-Rad, Glendale, CA) with the patient supine and sitting, and a Goldmann applanation tonometer (Haag-Streit, Bern, Switzerland) with the patient sitting at the slit lamp. Systemic blood pressure was recorded at the same times. The between-group differences were tested for significance by means of parametric analysis of variance. The circadian IOP curve of a small group of untreated healthy young subjects was also recorded using the same procedures. To compare the circadian IOP rhythms in the POAG-OHT and control groups, the acrophases for each subject were calculated. RESULTS: When Goldmann sitting values were considered, all the drugs significantly reduced IOP in comparison with baseline at all times, except for timolol at 3 AM. Latanoprost was more effective in lowering IOP than timolol at 3, 6, and 9 AM (P = 0.03), noon (P = 0.01), 9 PM, and midnight (P = 0.05) and was more effective than dorzolamide at 9 AM, noon (P = 0.03), and 3 and 6 PM (P = 0.04). Timolol was more effective than dorzolamide at 3 PM (P = 0.05), whereas dorzolamide performed better than timolol at midnight and 3 AM (P = 0.05). An ancillary finding of this study was that in the group of healthy subjects, the pattern of IOP curve was different that in patients with eye disease. CONCLUSIONS: Latanoprost seemed to lead to a fairly uniform circadian reduction in IOP, whereas timolol seemed to be less effective during the nighttime hours. Dorzolamide was less effective than latanoprost but led to a significant reduction in nocturnal IOP. The reason for the difference in the pattern of the IOP curve of healthy subjects is currently unknown and deserves further investigation.     

The effects of prostaglandin analogues on the blood aqueous barrier and corneal thickness of phakic patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of topical latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost on the blood-aqueous barrier and central corneal thickness (CCT) of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT). DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, masked-observer, crossover clinical trial. METHODS: A total of 34 phakic patients with POAG or OHT with no previous history of intraocular surgery or uveitis completed the study. Patients were randomized to use latanoprost 0.005%, travoprost 0.004%, or bimatoprost 0.03% once daily (2000 hours) for 1 month, followed by a washout period of 4 weeks between each drug. Aqueous flare was measured with a laser flare metre. CCT was calculated as the average of five measurements using ultrasound pachymetry. All measurements were performed by a masked observer (1000 h). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between baseline mean IOP, mean CCT, and mean flare values among the groups. There was no statistically significant increase in mean flare values from baseline in all groups (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between mean flare values among the groups (P>0.05). All medications significantly reduced the mean IOP from baseline (P<0.0001). IOP reduction obtained with travoprost (7.3+/-3.8 mmHg) was significantly higher than that obtained with latanoprost (4.7+/-4.2 mmHg) (P=0.01). A statistically significant reduction in mean CCT (0.6+/-1.3%) from baseline was observed when patients instilled bimatoprost (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost had no statistically significant effect on the blood-aqueous barrier of phakic patients with POAG or OHT. Bimatoprost may be associated with a clinically irrelevant reduction in mean CCT.     

Inter-visit intraocular pressure range: an alternative parameter for assessing intraocular pressure control in clinical trials

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether inter-visit intraocular pressure (IOP) range, which reflects extreme and potentially damaging IOP fluctuations, provides additional information on IOP control compared to mean IOP. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of Xalatan/Lumigan/Travatan study data, a masked-evaluator, randomized, parallel-group comparison of 12-week efficacy of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost in open-angle glaucoma/ocular hypertension patients. METHODS: Pretreatment inter-visit IOP range defined as highest IOP minus lowest IOP at screening, safety check, and baseline (six measurements); posttreatment inter-visit IOP range defined as highest IOP minus lowest IOP at weeks two, six, and 12 or early termination (nine measurements). Ranges dichotomized as "high" (>6 mm Hg) vs "low" (< or =6 mm Hg). RESULTS: Included were 410 patients (latanoprost, 136; bimatoprost, 136; travoprost, 138). Each resulted in significant mean IOP range reductions during 12 weeks. Pretreatment inter-visit IOP range was associated with African-American race, male gender, and presence of visual field defect (P < .05 for all). Percentages with high pretreatment inter-visit IOP ranges were comparable across treatments (63% to 64%). High posttreatment inter-visit IOP range was seen in 21% (28/136), 28% (38/136), and 36% (50/138) of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost groups, respectively (P = .016, overall; P = .005, latanoprost vs travoprost). High posttreatment inter-visit IOP range was associated with African-American race, high pretreatment inter-visit IOP range, and treatment with travoprost vs latanoprost (P < .05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Given that high inter-visit IOP range is associated with risk factors for glaucomatous damage and that such differences cannot be evaluated using mean IOPs, inter-visit IOP range may be another useful approach to assessing IOP control in clinical trials.     

拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素和噻吗洛尔治疗原发性开角型青光眼的疗效比较分析

目的：比较拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素及噻吗洛尔滴眼液治疗原发性开角型青光眼（ POAG）的效果。方法将收治的120例患者随机分为A、B、C组,每组均为40例,其中A 组患者给予拉坦前列素滴眼液;B组患者给予曲伏前列素滴眼液;C组患者给予马来酸噻吗洛尔滴眼液,A、B组均为每天晚上约20：00给药1次,每次1滴,疗程为4周,C组为每天早上约08：00给药1次,每次1滴,疗程为4周。结果三组患者治疗前比较,眼压无统计学差异（ P ＞0．05）,三组患者用药治疗4周眼压值均有显著下降,用药前后差异具有统计学意义（ P ＜0．05）;拉坦前列素和曲伏前列素两种滴眼液组间治疗无显著性差异（ P ＞0．05）,但与噻吗洛尔治疗分别进行组间效果比对具有显著性差异（ P ＜0．05）。结论拉坦前列素、曲伏前列素及噻吗洛尔滴眼液治疗POAG在一个疗程内（4周）均能有效降低眼压,疗效持久,且两种前列素降眼压作用明显优于噻吗洛尔滴眼液治疗效果。     

Travoprost compared with other prostaglandin analogues or timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: It is still uncertain whether travoprost has comparable or better efficacy compared with other prostaglandin analogues or timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. The authors performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the incidence of reported side-effects and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of travoprost versus other prostaglandin analogues (latanaprost, bimatoprost, unoprostone) or timolol. METHODS: Systematic literature retrieval was conducted in Pubmed, EMBASE, Chinese Bio-medicine Database and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register to identify the potentially relevant randomized controlled trials. The statistical analysis was performed by RevMan 4.1 software that was provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. The outcome measures were the incidence of reported side-effects (hyperaemia, iris pigmentation, eyelash changes) and mean IOP pooled over treatment visits. RESULTS: In total, 12 articles involving 3048 patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were included in this meta-analysis. The combined results showed that travoprost 0.004% was more effective than timolol or travoprost 0.0015% in lowering IOP, but not more effective than bimatoprost or latanoprost. Travoprost 0.004% caused a higher percentage of hyperaemia than timolol, latanoprost, or travoprost 0.0015%. There was an increased incidence of pigmentation with travoprost than timolol. Travoprost 0.004% caused a higher percentage of eyelash changes than timolol, latanoprost, or travoprost 0.0015%. CONCLUSION: According to data available, travoprost is more effective than timolol in lowering IOP in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Compared with other prostaglandin analogues, travoprost appears to be equivalent to bimatoprost and latanoprost. Although a limited number of local side-effects were reported, no serious treatment-related side-effects were reported.     

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.