A comparison of the fourth-generation fluoroquinolones gatifloxacin 0.3% and moxifloxacin 0.5% in terms of ocular tolerability

PURPOSE: To compare the ocular tolerability of the commercially available ophthalmic solutions of the fourth-generation fluoroquinolones, gatifloxacin 0.3% (Zymar, Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) with benzalkonium chloride (BAK) and moxifloxacin 0.5% (Vigamox) without BAK. METHODS: A baseline evaluation was conducted on 30 healthy volunteers for conjunctival hyperemia, conjunctival vascularity, pupil size, and anterior chamber (AC) cell and flare. Pupils were measured under scotopic conditions with a Colvard pupillometer. Conjunctival hyperemia and vascularity, and AC reaction were measured on a Likert-like scale of 0-3. Subjects then received drops in both eyes from masked bottles of gatifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.3% with BAK (in one eye determined randomly) and moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.5% without BAK (in the contralateral eye) in a double-masked fashion. Subjects graded pain and ocular irritation in each eye on a scale of 1-10 after 5 min with their eyes closed. The examination was then repeated. RESULTS: The average age of this study population was 34.4 years. The groups of eyes receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% demonstrated an increase in mean conjunctival hyperemia (0.21 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 1.52 [range: 0-3] at 5 min.) that was significantly greater (p = 0.0005) compared with that of the group receiving gatifloxacin 0.3% (0.22 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 0.45 [range: 0-2] at 5 min). The group receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% showed an increase in conjunctival vascularity (0.55 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 1.61 [range: 0.5-3] at 5 min.) that was significantly greater (p = 0.0005) compared with that of the group receiving gatifloxacin 0.3% (0.52 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 0.68 [range: 0-2] at 5 min.). Significantly less pain (1.2 vs. 3.2, p = 0.001) and irritation (0.64 vs. 3.42, p = 0.001) occurred with gatifloxacin 0.3% than with moxifloxacin 0.5%. Pupil size was significantly reduced (5.65 mm-5.05 mm) in eyes receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% (p = 0.004) and no significant change occurred in pupil size (5.60 mm-5.65 mm) in eyes that received gatifloxacin 0.3% (p = 0.878). No AC reaction was noted with either medication. CONCLUSIONS: The group of eyes receiving gatifloxacin 0.3% with BAK demonstrated greater ocular tolerability in comparison to the group receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% without BAK. Moxifloxacin-induced pupillary miosis may be due to prostaglandin release in the anterior chamber. A limitation of this study is the relatively young age of the study population.     

The effect of gatifloxacin 0.3% or moxifloxacin 0.5% on corneal healing,ocular tolerability and toxicity following pterygium surgery

Purpose: To compare the rate of corneal epithelial healing and ocular tolerability following pterygium surgery between gatifloxacin and moxifloxacin.

Methods: In this double masked, prospective, controlled study 40 patients were randomized to receive prophylactic topical gatifloxacin 0.3% or moxifloxacin 0.5% following pterygium surgery. Patients were examined on days 1, 3, 7 and 21 post-operatively or until complete corneal epithelial healing. The primary outcome measure was the area of corneal epithelial defect during the post-operative period. Patients graded post-operative ocular pain, foreign body sensation, tearing, general burning sensation and burning sensation post-antibiotic drops instillation on a scale of 1–5. Conjunctival hyperemia and superficial punctate keratopathy (SPK) were measured on a scale of 0–3.

Results: No significant differences between groups were found in terms of corneal epithelial defect percentage over time (p?=?0.989) and there was no significant difference between groups on each of the post-operative days. No significant differences were noted in terms of post-operative ocular pain, foreign body sensation, tearing, general burning sensation, burning sensation post-antibiotic drops instillation, conjunctival hyperemia and SPK.

Conclusions: Gatifloxacin and moxifloxacin showed equivalent results in terms of corneal epithelial healing and ocular tolerability following pterygium surgery. This study suggests that there was no apparent added epithelial toxicity due to the presence of benzalkonium chloride in the gatifloxacin preparation when compared to moxifloxacin.     

Ocular penetration of moxifloxacin 0.5% and gatifloxacin 0.3% ophthalmic solutions into the aqueous humor following topical administration prior to routine cataract surgery

ABSTRACT

A prospective, double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study (n = 25) was conducted to examine the ocular penetration of moxifloxacin 0.5% ophthalmic solution and gatifloxacin 0.3% solution into the aqueous humor following topical administration prior to routine cataract surgery. One drop of antibiotic was instilled every 10?min for four doses beginning 1?h prior to surgery. Preliminary results showed aqueous humor concentrations for moxifloxacin that were significantly greater (?p < 0.01) than those for gatifloxacin.     

A randomized,investigator-masked clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of gatifloxacin 0.3% administered BID versus QID for the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of gatifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.3% (Zymar) administered BID versus QID in patients with acute bacterial conjunctivitis.

Methods: In a randomized, investigator-masked clinical trial, patients diagnosed with bacterial conjunctivitis (based on signs and symptoms) received gatifloxacin either BID or QID for 5?days. Visits were scheduled at day 0, day 3, and day 5. Conjunctival cultures were taken at each visit. The clinical cure rate at day 5 was determined for the entire patient population (primary endpoint). Additionally, clinical cure at day 5 was evaluated for a population of patients defined a priori (per protocol) as being culture positive at baseline and with no substantial protocol deviations. Safety was determined through recording of adverse events. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) and susceptibility of isolates to gatifloxacin were determined using a broth dilution method.

Results: Patient characteristics in both the BID and QID groups (N = 104) were similar in terms of baseline demographics and disposition. The clinical cure rate on day 5 in the entire, intent-to-treat (ITT) population was 86.5% (45/52) in the gatifloxacin BID group and 71.2% (37/52) in the gatifloxacin QID group (95% CI: [–0.03, 30.80]; p = 0.096). In both treatment groups, 5/52 patients (9.6%) reported adverse events. The most common adverse event was conjunctivitis. No serious adverse events were reported. In the a priori-defined per-protocol (PP) population, the clinical cure rate on day 5 was 95.5% (21/22) in the gatifloxacin BID group and 85.7% (18/21) in the gatifloxacin QID group (95% CI: [–7.57, 21.05]; p = 0.294). At baseline, 96.1% (98/102) of the isolates were susceptible to gatifloxacin. The overall MIC₉₀ (mean ± standard error of the mean) was 0.5 ± 1.3?µg/mL.

Conclusion: In this study, gatifloxacin 0.3% administered BID was as effective and as safe as gatifloxacin 0.3% administered QID for 5?days for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis.     

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of loteprednol 0.5%/tobramycin 0.3% withdexamethasone 0.1%/tobramycin0.3% in the treatment of blepharokeratoconjunctivitis

ABSTRACT

Objective: This study compared the safety and efficacy of loteprednol etabonate 0.5%/tobramycin 0.3% (LE/T; Zylet) with dexamethasone 0.1%/tobramycin 0.3% (DM/T; Tobradex) in the treatment of ocular inflammation associated with blepharokeratoconjunctivitis.

Research design and methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, investigator-masked, parallel-group study. Subjects with clinically diagnosed blepharokeratoconjunctivitis in at least one eye were randomized to LE/T (n?=?138) or DM/T (n?=?138) administered four times per day, for 14 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline to Day 15 (± 1?day) in the signs and symptoms composite score using a non-inferiority metric to compare LE/T to DM/T. Safety endpoints included visual acuity (VA), biomicroscopy, intraocular pressure (IOP) assessments, and adverse events.

Results: At Day 15, the mean (SD) change from baseline in the signs and symptoms composite score was ?15.2 (7.3) for LE/T-treated subjects and ?15.6 (7.7) for DM/T-treated subjects. The upper bound of the 90% confidence interval for the difference in change from baseline was less than the non-inferiority margin not only at Day 15 but also at Day 7 and Day 3 for both the intent-to-treat and per protocol populations. Subjects treated with DM/T experienced a significant increase in IOP versus those treated with LE/T at Day 7, Day 15, and overall (mean [SD] of 0.6 [2.3] vs, ?0.1 [2.2], p?=?0.03, 1.0 [3.0] vs. ?0.1 [2.4], p?=?0.01, and 2.3 [2.3] vs. 1.6 [1.7], p?=?0.02, respectively).

Conclusions: LE/T satisfied the condition of non-inferiority to DM/T in decreasing the signs and symptoms of ocular inflammation associated with blepharokeratoconjunctivitis. Subjects treated with DM/T experienced more of an increase in IOP.

Limitation: Although the single-masked design of this study could be considered a limitation, care was taken to ensure that the investigator was masked.     

Ocular penetration of moxifloxacin 0.5% and gatifloxacin 0.3% ophthalmic solutions into the aqueous humor following topical administration prior to routine cataract surgery

A prospective, double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study (n = 25) was conducted to examine the ocular penetration of moxifloxacin 0.5% ophthalmic solution and gatifloxacin 0.3% solution into the aqueous humor following topical administration prior to routine cataract surgery. One drop of antibiotic was instilled every 10 min for four doses beginning 1 h prior to surgery. Preliminary results showed aqueous humor concentrations for moxifloxacin that were significantly greater (p < 0.01) than those for gatifloxacin.     

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

Abstract

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.     

The ocular penetration of levofloxacin 1.5% and gatifloxacin 0.3% ophthalmic solutions in subjects undergoing corneal transplant surgery

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare corneal tissue and aqueous humor concentrations of levofloxacin 1.5% and gatifloxacin 0.3% ophthalmic solutions after topical dosing.

Research design and methods: This was a randomized, observer-masked, parallel-group, multicenter study. Fifty-nine subjects undergoing planned penetrating keratoplasty were randomly assigned to receive either levofloxacin 1.5% or gatifloxacin 0.3% as follows: one drop 15?min prior to surgery and a second drop 10?min before surgery. Corneal button and aqueous humor samples were collected during surgery and immediately stored at –70?°C. Levofloxacin and gatifloxacin concentrations were determined by high-pressure liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry.

Main outcome measures: Corneal tissue and aqueous humor concentrations of levofloxacin and gatifloxacin.

Results: Levofloxacin achieved statistically significantly higher concentrations in both corneal tissue and aqueous humor compared to gatifloxacin in patients undergoing penetrating keratoplasty. In corneal tissue the mean concentration of levofloxacin was 64.8 ± 123.4?µg/g vs. 7.0 ± 9.3?µg/g for gatifloxacin (p < 0.0001). Mean aqueous humor concentration of levofloxacin was 0.976 ± 2.215?µg/mL vs. 0.0523 ± 0.143?µg/mL for gatifloxacin (p = 0.0002).

Conclusions: The high concentrations of levofloxacin achievable in corneal tissue with topical dosing suggest that levofloxacin 1.5% should be a useful agent in the treatment of ocular bacterial infections. However, the corneal concentrations achieved in this study may not be representative of concentrations in patients using less frequent dosing.     

Incidence of allergic reactions associated with antibacterial use in a large, managed care organisation.

BACKGROUND: Data on the incidence of serious allergic reactions to fluoroquinolone antibacterials are mainly derived from spontaneous reports that cannot be used to accurately estimate incidence. METHODS: This study estimated the drug-specific incidence of serious allergic reactions after fluoroquinolone, cephalosporin and phenoxymethylpenicillin potassium exposure, using claims for healthcare services with confirmation through medical record abstraction within a large health insurer database. Cohorts exposed to each antibacterial of interest (moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, gatifloxacin, cephalosporins and penicillin) were identified, and followed for 14 days for anaphylaxis (9th revision of the International Classification of Diseases [ICD-9] code 995.0), other allergic drug reactions (ICD-9 995.2, 995.3) or cardiopulmonary resuscitation. RESULTS: The incidence per 10,000 first dispensings of any allergic diagnosis made in the hospital or emergency department was similar for moxifloxacin (4.3; 95% CI 3.5, 5.3), penicillin (4.7; 95% CI 3.8, 5.7) and ciprofloxacin (5.4; 95% CI 4.4, 6.5). The incidence for moxifloxacin was lower than that for levofloxacin (8.7; 95% CI 7.4, 10.0), gatifloxacin (6.7; 95% CI 5.6, 7.9) and the cephalosporins (7.5; 95% CI 6.3, 8.8). The incidence of anaphylaxis/anaphylactoid reactions after first dispensings was similar for the fluoroquinolones: 0.1 (95% CI 0.0, 0.3) for ciprofloxacin, 0.3 (95% CI 0.1, 0.5) for moxifloxacin, 0.3 (95% CI 0.1, 0.6) for gatifloxacin and 0.5 (95% CI 0.3, 0.9) for levofloxacin; and comparable with that of the cephalosporins (0.2; 95% CI 0.0, 0.4) and penicillin (0.1; 95% CI 0.0, 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Anaphylactic reactions were rare and their incidence did not differ substantially among the drug groups studied. By determining the occurrence of reactions following defined exposures, these results provide a context for the interpretation of spontaneous reports of allergic reactions.     

Comparative efficacy of olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution versus levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic suspension using the conjunctival allergen challenge model

SUMMARY

Objective: To compare the efficacy of olopatadine and levocabastine in reducing ocular allergic itching and vascular hyperemia (redness) induced by conjunctival allergen challenge.

Research design and methods: The study was a randomized, double-masked, contralateral study using the conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) model. At Visit 1, subjects with a positive allergen skin test and a history of allergic conjunctivitis were administered increasing concentrations of allergen until at least a moderate grade 2 ocular itching and conjunctival redness response was obtained in both eyes. Allergic signs were graded on standardized 0–4 scales. Subjects who reacted positively were re-challenged at Visit 2 with the pre-determined concentration of allergen. Subjects who again responded with at least a grade 2 bilateral ocular itching and conjunctival redness score at Visit 2 were eligible for drug evaluation. At Visit 3, subjects received olopatadine in one eye and levocabastine in the contralateral eye according to a computer-generated randomization scheme generated prior to commencement of the study. Ocular discomfort was then graded in both eyes. Subjects were bilaterally challenged with the predetermined concentration of allergen 27?min after topical drug administration, such that the first post-challenge assessment was made 30?min post-drug instillation. Allergic signs and symptoms were evaluated at 3?min, 10?min, and 20?min post-challenge and safety and efficacy analyses were performed.

Results: Sixty-eight subjects received study drug and were included in the safety and efficacy analyses. Ocular itching scores for olopatadine were significantly lower than levocabastine at 3?min and 10?min post-challenge (?p < 0.001). Ocular redness scores for olopatadine were significantly lower than levocabastine at all time points post-challenge (?p < 0.0001). Of all subjects, 4.41% reported ocular discomfort in the olopatadine eye and 26.5% in the levocabastine treated eye.

Conclusion: Olopatadine treated eyes had significantly less itching and redness than levocabastine treated eyes after conjunctival allergen challenge. Olopatadine was also associated with less discomfort upon instillation than levocabastine.     

A randomized, investigator- masked clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of gatifloxacin 0.3% administered BID versus QID for the treatment BID versus QID for the treatment of acute bacterial conjunctivitis of acute bacterial conjunctivitis

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of To compare the efficacy and safety of gatifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.3% (Zymar) administered BID versus QID in patients with acute bacterial conjunctivitis. METHODS: In a randomized, investigator-masked clinical trial, patients diagnosed with bacterial conjunctivitis (based on signs and symptoms) received gatifloxacin either BID or QID for 5 days. Visits were scheduled at day 0, day 3, and day 5. Conjunctival cultures were taken at each visit. The clinical cure rate at day 5 was determined for the entire patient population (primary endpoint). Additionally, clinical cure at day 5 was evaluated for a population of patients defined a priori (per protocol) as being culture positive at baseline and with no substantial protocol deviations. Safety was determined through recording of adverse events. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) and susceptibility of isolates to gatifloxacin were determined using a broth dilution method. RESULTS: Patient characteristics in both the BID and QID groups (N = 104) were similar in terms NN of baseline demographics and disposition. The clinical cure rate on day 5 in the entire, intentto-treat (ITT) population was 86.5% (45/52) in the gatifloxacin BID group and 71.2% (37/52) in the gatifloxacin QID group (95% CI: [-0.03, 30.80]; p = 0.096). In both treatment groups, 5/52 patients (9.6%) reported adverse events. The most common adverse event was conjunctivitis. No serious adverse events were reported. In the a priori-defined per-protocol (PP) population, the clinical cure rate on day 5 was 95.5% (21/22) in the gatifloxacin BID group and 85.7% (18/21) in the gatifloxacin QID group (95% CI: [-7.57, 21.05]; p = 0.294). At baseline, 96.1% (98/102) of the isolates were susceptible to gatifloxacin. The overall MIC(90) (mean +/- standard error of the mean) was 0.5 +/- 1.3 microg/mL. CONCLUSION: In this study, gatifloxacin 0.3% administered BID was as effective and as safe as gatifloxacin 0.3% administered QID for 5 days for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis.     

Efficacy,tolerability and safety of the fixed combination of bimatoprost 0.03% and timolol 0.5% in a broad patient population: multicenter,open-label observational study*

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy, tolerability, and safety of the fixed combination of bimatoprost 0.03% and timolol 0.5% (Ganfort^?) among German patients.

Methods: Multicenter, observational, open-label study of patients with primary open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension (n?=?606). As determined by participating physicians, patients had insufficient IOP control and required a medication change. They were switched to once-daily fixed-combination bimatoprost/timolol with no wash-out period. IOP was recorded at treated baseline, 4–6 weeks and 12 weeks after switching. Tolerability was measured using a 4-step scale (excellent, good, moderate, poor) and all adverse events were recorded.

Results: A total of 405 patients switched from monotherapy, 97 switched from other fixed combinations, and 104 switched from non-fixed combinations. Among all patients, 32.5% had used prostaglandin analog (PGA) monotherapy, 8.7% had been using a fixed combination that included a PGA, and 6.9% had been using an adjunctive combination of a PGA and a β-blocker. Mean treated baseline IOP (±SD) for all patients was 20.7?±?3.5?mmHg. Overall, changing medication to fixed-combination bimatoprost/timolol lowered IOP to 16.6?±?2.7?mmHg (p?<?0.001 vs. baseline) after 4–6 weeks and to 16.1?±?2.6?mmHg (p?<?0.001) after 12 weeks; reductions of 19.8% and 22.2%, respectively. Combined bimatoprost/timolol provided an additional IOP reduction versus baseline in most subgroups based on prior treatment. At week 12, patients who had previously used a β-blocker achieved an additional 25.8% decrease from baseline and IOP was reduced by 22.6% in former PGA monotherapy patients. At week 12, 84.6% of all eyes reached a target pressure less than or equal to 18?mmHg. Tolerability of bimatoprost/timolol was rated excellent or good by the physicians for 98.7% of patients and by 96.7% of the patients themselves. Few adverse events occurred during the treatment period.

Conclusions: Although this study was limited by its observational design, our results show that the fixed combination of bimatoprost 0.03%/timolol 0.5% was effective, well tolerated, and safe in a broad patient population.     

Effects of gatifloxacin and levofloxacin on rates of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia among elderly hospitalized patients

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare rates of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia among elderly hospitalized patients with normal blood glucose concentrations at baseline who were receiving either gatifloxacin or levofloxacin, and to determine if appropriateness of their doses, according to their package inserts, was associated with hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Integrated Veterans Administration (VA) health care system. PATIENTS: Nine hundred thirty-seven elderly (>or= 65 yrs) patients with documented blood glucose levels of 65-140 mg/dl before receiving a fluoroquinolone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Between January 2003 and April 2004, 405 patients receiving levofloxacin met study criteria. In April 2004, gatifloxacin was substituted for levofloxacin on the formulary of this VA system. Thus, between April 2004 and December 2004, 532 patients received gatifloxacin. All blood glucose concentrations during hospitalization that were measured during fluoroquinolone therapy or within 72 hours of completion of therapy were reviewed. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, insulin and oral hypoglycemic therapies, disease severity, blood glucose levels, and outcomes were recorded and compared between groups. The two groups were similar at baseline for all characteristics examined except previous hospitalization. In the logistic regression, gatifloxacin was independently associated with both hypoglycemia (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-5.7, p=0.04) and hyperglycemia (AOR 2.4, 95% CI 1.5-3.6, p<0.001). Improper dosage adjustment based on renal function was not associated with higher rates of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia for either drug. Of the 532 patients receiving gatifloxacin, 465 (87.4%) received appropriate doses, yet gatifloxacin was associated with higher rates of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia compared with patients receiving levofloxacin. CONCLUSIONS: Higher rates of both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia were noted among elderly hospitalized patients who received gatifloxacin compared with those receiving levofloxacin, irrespective of dosing.     

Phase III efficacy and safety study of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the clinical and antimicrobial efficacy of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% with that of vehicle in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis.

Research design and methods: This was a randomized, multicenter, double-masked, vehicle-controlled study. A total of 957 patients aged 1 year and older with bacterial conjunctivitis were randomized to treatment with besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% or vehicle applied topically three times daily for 5 days.

Main outcome measures: Primary endpoints were clinical resolution and microbial eradication of baseline bacterial infection at Visit 2 (Day 5?±?1). Secondary endpoints included clinical resolution and microbial eradication at Visit 3 (Day 8 or 9), individual clinical outcomes at follow-up visits, and safety.

Clinical trial registration: NCT number, NCT00347932.

Results: Three hundred and ninety patients had culture-confirmed bacterial conjunctivitis. Clinical resolution and microbial eradication were significantly greater with besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension than with vehicle at Visit 2 (45.2% vs. 33.0%, p?=?0.0084; and 91.5% vs. 59.7%, p?<?0.0001, respectively) and Visit 3 (84.4% vs. 69.1%, p?=?0.0011; and 88.4% vs. 71.7%, p?<?0.0001, respectively). Results for secondary endpoints of individual clinical outcomes were consistent with primary endpoints. Fewer eyes receiving besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension experienced adverse events than those receiving vehicle (9.2% vs. 13.9%; p?=?0.0047).

Conclusions: Besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension produces clinical resolution and microbial eradication rates significantly better than vehicle and is safe for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis.

Limitations: A limitation of this study is the lack of a non-treatment control group.     

Pioglitazone as monotherapy or in combination with sulfonylurea or metformin enhances insulin sensitivity (HOMA-S or QUICKI) in patients with type 2 diabetes

Background: Miyazaki etal, demonstrated using the hyperinsulinemic, euglycemic clamp that pioglitazone (PIO) enhanced insulin sensitivity in patients (n?=?23) with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Although considered the reference method for measuring insulin sensitivity, the clamp is seldom used in large clinical trials because of its complexity. The Homeostasis Model Assessment-Insulin Sensitivity (HOMA-S) and Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index (QUICKI) are two alternative insulin sensitivity surrogates that correlate with the clamp method and are suitable for use with large study populations.

Study aim: To evaluate the effect of PIO monotherapy and in combination therapy with sulfonylurea (SU) or metformin (MET) on insulin sensitivity as assessed by HOMA-S and QUICKI in a large group of patients (～1000).

Research design and methods: Patient data from three randomized, double blind, multicenter, parallel group, placebo-controlled registration trials (Studies-001 PIO monotherapy and 010 and 027 combination therapy with SU or MET, respectively) were analyzed for this study. We

evaluated insulin sensitivity for all three studies using HOMA-S and QUICKI.

Results: PIO 15, 30 and 45?mg enhanced HOMA-S compared with baseline (56.9-63.6%, p?=?0.0298); (53.7-64.7%, p?=?0.0008); (59.0-75.9%, p?<?0.0001), respectively. Only the 45?mg dose showed a difference from placebo (p?=?0.0025). Similarly, PIO enhanced QUICKI versus baseline (0.290-0.296, p?=?0.0026); (0.287-0.299, p?=?0.0001); (0.290-0.306, p?=?0.0001), respectively. Both the 30 and 45mg doses were different from placebo for QUICKI (p?=?0.0005, p?<?0.0001). PIO 15 and 30mg plus SU enhanced HOMA-S compared with baseline (58.4–.7%, p?=?0.0007; 53.2–68.4%, p?<?0.0001) and placebo plus SU (p?=?0.0129, p?<?0.0001, respectively). Likewise, PIO 15 and 30?mg plus SU enhanced QUICKI versus baseline (0.289-0.300, p?=?0.0001; 0.287-0.305, p?=?0.0001, respectively). Both doses had different effects from placebo plus SU (p?=?0.0001) for QUICKI. PIO 30mg combined with MET enhanced HOMA-S versus baseline (66.2–82.2%, p?<?0.0001) and placebo plus MET (p?=?0.0002).     

Effect of mydriasis induced by topical 0.5% tropicamide instillation on the corneal biomechanical properties in healthy individuals measured by ocular response analyzer

Purpose: This observational study aims to investigate the effects of tropicamide (0.5%) on corneal biomechanical properties, with the ocular response analyzer (ORA), in healthy individuals.

Methods: Corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), Goldmann-correlated intraocular pressure (IOPg), and corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc) measurements of 38 (21 female and 17 male) healthy individuals, before and after 30?min of 0.5% tropicamide instillation, were performed by using the ORA.

Results: The mean CH, CRF, IOPg and IOPcc measurements of the eyes were 10.2?±?1.9?mmHg, 10.3?±?2.1?mmHg, 15.7?±?3.4?mmHg, 16.4?±?3.3?mmHg pre-tropicamide, and 10.4?±?1.7?mmHg, 10.3?±?2.1?mmHg, 15.3?±?3.4?mmHg, 15.8?±?2.7?mmHg post-tropicamide, respectively. The differences between the pre- and post-tropicamide measurements of the eyes were insignificant (p?=?0.184, p?=?0.659, p?=?0.294, p?=?0.150, respectively; paired t-test).

Conclusions: A tropicamide instillation does not lead to significant changes in the corneal biomechanical properties. Therefore, it can be used safely in disease, i.e. in the diagnosis and follow-up ORA as it does not cause any change.     

Effects of a Fixed Mixture of 25% Insulin Lispro and 75% NPL on Plasma Glucose during and after Moderate Physical Exercise in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Summary

Objective: To compare the plasma glucose (PG) response with a fixed mixture of 25% insulin lispro and 75% NPL (Mix25), prior to a meal and 3?h before exercise, to human insulin 30/70 (30/70) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Research design and methods: Thirty-seven patients were treated in a randomized, open-label, 8-week, two-period crossover study. Mix25 was injected 5?min before breakfast and dinner throughout the study, as was 30/70 on inpatient test days and on outpatient dose titration days. Following the 4-week outpatient phase, patients were hospitalized, and exercised at a heart rate of 120 beats/min on a cycle ergometer two times for 30?min, separated by 30?min rest, starting 3?h after a 339 kcal breakfast.

Results: The 2-h postprandial PG was significantly lower with Mix25 ((mean?±?SEM) 10.5?±?0.4 mmol/lvs 11.6?±?0.4 mmol/l; p?=?0.016). Maximum decrease in PG from onset of exercise to end of exercise was significantly less with Mix25 (-3.6?±?0.29 mmol/l vs -4.7?±?0.31 mmol/l; p?=?0.001). The maximum decrease in PG over 6?h, after exercise onset, was significantly less with Mix25 (-4.3?±?0.4 mmol/l vs -5.9?±?0.4 mmol/l; p?<?0.001). The frequency of hypoglycemia (blood glucose (BG) < 3 mmol/l or symptoms) during the inpatient test was not different between treatments. During the outpatient phase, the frequency of patient-recorded hypoglycemia was significantly lower with Mix25 (0.7?±?0.2 episodes/30d vs 1.2?±?0.3 episodes/30 d; p?=?0.042).

Conclusions: Mix25 resulted in better postprandial PG control without an increase in exercise-induced hypoglycemia. The smaller decrease in PG during the postprandial phase after exercise may suggest a lower risk of exercise-induced hypoglycemia with Mix25 than with human insulin 30/70, especially for patients in tight glycemic control.     

Efficacy and comfort of olopatadine 0.2% versus epinastine 0.05% ophthalmic solution for treating itching and redness induced by conjunctival allergen challenge

ABSTRACT

Background: Olopatadine 0.2% (Pataday, Alcon Laboratories Inc., Fort Worth, Texas, USA) and epinastine 0.05% (Elestat, Inspire Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Durham, NC, USA) are topical ocular anti-allergic agents. Both are H₁ antihistamine/mast cell stabilizers indicated for the treatment of ocular itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and comfort of olopatadine 0.2% with epinastine 0.05%, in the prevention of ocular itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis following conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC).

Research design and methods: This was a 7 week, four visit, double-masked, randomized, placebo-controlled CAC study. Visit 1 screened subjects for positive ocular allergic responses and Visit 2 confirmed those responses. At Visit 3, 92 subjects were randomized into one of four treatment groups to receive one drop of study medication in each eye: (1) olopatadine 0.2%/placebo, (2) epinastine 0.05%/placebo, (3) olopatadine 0.2%/epinastine 0.05%, (4) placebo/placebo. Subjects were challenged 12?h after drop instillation to evaluate duration of action. At Visit 4, subjects were challenged 5?min after drop instillation to evaluate onset of action. Drop comfort was assessed at Visit 4.

Main outcome measures; results: This article focuses on the results of the onset-of-action challenge (Visit 4). At Visit 4, ocular itching was assessed at 3, 5, and 7?min and redness was assessed at 7, 15, and 20?min post-challenge. Drop comfort was assessed upon instillation, at 30?s, and at 1, 2, and 5?min post-instillation. Olopatadine 0.2%-treated eyes exhibited significantly lower mean ocular itching scores versus epinastine 0.05%-treated eyes at 5 (?p = 0.024) and 7?min (?p = 0.003) post-challenge. Olopatadine 0.2%-treated eyes exhibited significantly lower mean redness scores versus epinastine 0.05%-treated eyes at all time points post-challenge (ciliary: p ≤ 0.013, conjunctival: p ≤ 0.015, episcleral: p ≤ 0.006). Olopatadine 0.2% was rated as significantly more comfortable than epinastine 0.05% at 1?min post-drop instillation (?p = 0.003). All adverse events were non-serious and unrelated to study medication. Although the CAC model reproduces allergic responses that are not environmentally-induced, patients experience varying severities of responses as are seen in real-world situations.

Conclusion: Olopatadine 0.2% was superior to epinastine 0.05% in preventing ocular itching and redness at onset when induced by the CAC model.     

Treatment of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma with a fixed combination of brimonidine 0.2%/timolol 0.5%: multicenter,open-label,observational study in Germany*

ABSTRACT

Objective: At the introduction of the fixed-combination of brimonidine/timolol in Germany in 2006, a non-interventional, multicenter, observational, open-label study was initiated to evaluate efficacy, tolerability, and safety of this preparation in a broad patient population.

Methods: The study population comprised patients with bilateral primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension with insufficient intraocular pressure (IOP) control who participating physicians determined required a change of medication, and who switched to exclusive use of the new fixed-combination brimonidine 0.2%/timolol 0.5%. Patient demographics and information on specific risk factors were collected. IOP readings were recorded for each eye at treated baseline (previous therapy), 4 to 6 weeks, and 12 weeks after changing to twice-daily brimonidine/timolol. Tolerability was measured using a four-step scale ranging from excellent to poor. All adverse events were recorded.

Results: Mean treated baseline IOP (±SD) for all patients (N?=?861) was 20.8?±?3.5?mmHg. Five hundred sixty-five patients switched from monotherapy, 138 patients switched from other fixed combinations, and 158 patients had been using non-fixed combinations of up to four different active agents. The brimonidine/timolol fixed combination provided an additional IOP decrease in most pretreatment subgroups, with an overall reduction to 16.9?±?2.6?mmHg after 4 to 6 weeks and to 16.5?±?2.7?mmHg after 12 weeks. Both of these values were significantly lower than baseline IOP (p?<?0.001). A target pressure of <18?mmHg was achieved in 79.5% of all eyes at week 12. Tolerability of fixed-combination brimonidine/timolol was rated excellent or good by the physicians for 97.1% of patients, and by 93.4% of the patients themselves. Few adverse events occurred during the treatment period.

Conclusions: Although this study was limited by its observational design, our results show that the fixed combination of brimonidine 0.2%/timolol 0.5% was effective, well tolerated, and safe in a broad POAG patient population.