Dataset Information

A randomized, controlled comparison of macroscopic conjunctival hyperemia in patients treated with bimatoprost 0.01% or vehicle who were previously controlled on latanoprost.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To evaluate conjunctival hyperemia associated with bimatoprost 0.01% treatment in patients who replace latanoprost 0.005% with bimatoprost 0.01%.

Methods

Randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, multicenter study of patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma whose intraocular pressure (IOP) was adequately controlled on latanoprost monotherapy. At baseline, patients discontinued latanoprost and were randomized to treatment with once-daily bimatoprost 0.01% (n = 151) or vehicle (n = 71). The primary endpoint was the peak change in macroscopic hyperemia (conjunctival hyperemia evaluated by gross visual inspection) from baseline to month 1.

Results

Bimatoprost 0.01% was noninferior to vehicle in the mean [standard deviation] peak change from baseline macroscopic hyperemia at month 1 (0.18 [0.46] in the bimatoprost 0.01% group vs 0.02 [0.32] in the vehicle group, P = 0.009). The between-group difference was 0.15 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04, 0.26), which was within the predefined margin for noninferiority of 0.5 on a hyperemia grading scale of 0 to +3. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the percentage of patients with a ≥1-grade increase in macroscopic hyperemia from baseline. Mean IOP was decreased from baseline (-0.7 to -1.3 mm Hg) in the bimatoprost 0.01% group (P ≤ 0.002) and was increased from baseline (+3.3 to +3.6 mm Hg) in the vehicle group (P < 0.001) at month 1. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in adverse events.

Conclusions

Bimatoprost 0.01% was noninferior to vehicle with respect to conjunctival hyperemia in this study population. Replacement of latanoprost with bimatoprost 0.01% in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma can result in additional IOP reduction without clinically important hyperemia.

SUBMITTER: Craven ER

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3000769 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized, controlled comparison of macroscopic conjunctival hyperemia in patients treated with bimatoprost 0.01% or vehicle who were previously controlled on latanoprost.

Craven E Randy ER Liu Ching-Chi CC Batoosingh Amy A Schiffman Rhett M RM Whitcup Scott M SM

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) 20101206

<h4>Purpose</h4>To evaluate conjunctival hyperemia associated with bimatoprost 0.01% treatment in patients who replace latanoprost 0.005% with bimatoprost 0.01%.<h4>Methods</h4>Randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, multicenter study of patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma whose intraocular pressure (IOP) was adequately controlled on latanoprost monotherapy. At baseline, patients discontinued latanoprost and were randomized to treatment with once-daily bimatoprost 0.01% (n = 151 ...[more]

PMID: 21188155

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of bimatoprost 0.01% or 0.03% as monotherapy in patients treated with latanoprost 0.005% monotherapy who require additional IOP lowering for their ocular hypertension or open-angle glaucoma.MethodsTwo prospective, investigator-masked, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter studies enrolled patients with baseline IOP ≥20 mmHg after ≥30 days of latanoprost 0.005% monotherapy. Patients were randomized to 12 weeks of study treatment (study 1, bimatoprost 0.01% once daily or bimatoprost 0.01% once daily plus brimonidine 0.1% three times daily; study 2, bimatoprost 0.03% once daily or bimatoprost 0.03% once daily plus fixed-combination brimonidine 0.2%/timolol 0.5% twice daily). Patient evaluations at weeks 4 and 12 included IOP at 8 am, 10 am, and 4 pm and safety assessments. Results in the monotherapy study arms (bimatoprost 0.01% or 0.03%) are presented.ResultsLatanoprost-treated baseline mean diurnal IOP (± standard error of the mean) was 22.2±0.3 mmHg and 22.1±0.4 mmHg in the bimatoprost 0.01% and bimatoprost 0.03% treatment arms, respectively (P=0.957). In both treatment arms, mean (± standard error of the mean) reduction in IOP from latanoprost-treated baseline was statistically significant at each time point at both follow-up visits (P<0.001), ranging from 3.7±0.4 (17.0%) mmHg to 4.4±0.4 (19.9%) mmHg with bimatoprost 0.01% and from 2.8±0.5 (12.8%) mmHg to 3.9±0.5 (16.7%) mmHg with bimatoprost 0.03%. Mean percentage IOP reduction from latanoprost-treated baseline was numerically greater with bimatoprost 0.01% than with bimatoprost 0.03% throughout follow-up. The incidence of conjunctival hyperemia of mild or greater severity increased from latanoprost baseline after 12 weeks of treatment only in the bimatoprost 0.03% treatment arm.ConclusionMany patients who do not reach their target IOP on latanoprost can achieve additional IOP lowering and maintain monotherapy by replacing latanoprost with bimatoprost. Reductions in IOP from latanoprost baseline were larger with bimatoprost 0.01% than with bimatoprost 0.03%, and bimatoprost 0.01% had a more favorable tolerability profile.

Project description:PurposeProstaglandin analogues (PGA's) are the mainstay and first line of treatment in current glaucoma practise. Though latanoprost and bimatoprost are the most commonly used PGA's with minimal side effects at lower concentrations like bimaotoprost 0.01%, direct comparison of their cytokine/MMP profile in tears has not been evaluated earlier. The study intends to ascribe PGA to the upregulation of MMPs, Cytokines and Chemokines mediating varied pathways to result in side effects of the drugs.MethodsTear sample collection was done from outer canthus of 30 eyes of 30 patients (primary open angle glaucoma (n = 26 and n' = 20), normal tension glaucoma (n = 4 and n' = 10), in latanoprost (n) 0.005% and bimatoprost (n') 0.01% group respectively, with a mean age of 62±10.5 years) on >6 months of PGA use using Tear floTM Schirmer filter strip. Tear samples from 30 eyes of 30 cataract patients without drug treatment were used as the control. Gelatinolytic activity of MMP-9 and MMP-2 were examined by substrate gelatine zymography MMP-1 and TIMP-1 concentrations from tears samples with PGAs were evaluated by ELISA while cytokine concentration in the eluted tears was evaluated using a convenient bioplex kit assay (Milliplex MAP kit, HCYTMAG-60K-PX41, Millipore, Massachusetts, United States). The mean duration of use of PGA in both groups did not differ significantly (median 1.3 years in bimatoprost and 1.1 years in latanoprost eyes, p = 0.6).ResultsThe tear MMP-9 expression was higher in eyes receiving latanoprost while the MMP-2 expression was higher in eyes receiving bimatoprost with MMP1 protein levels being higher in the former. Latanoprost treated eyes had marginally elevated tear cytokines involved in tissue remodelling while bimatoprost eyes showed elevated cytokines regulating allergic pathways.ConclusionDifferential cytokine and MMP expression indicates differential signalling pathways mediating different cellular effects (evident as clinical and side effects) with the two drugs which can be explored further.

Project description:AimWithin the clinical setting, some patients have been identified as lacking in response to PGAs. This meta-analysis study aimed to evaluate the responsiveness of latanoprost, travoprost, bimatoprost, and tafluprost in OAG/OHT patients, latanoprost nonresponders (LNRs), and the IOP-reducing efficacy and safety.MethodsA literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. The primary clinical endpoint was the number of responders at the end of the study. The secondary clinical endpoint was the IOP reduction at the endpoint from baseline. Safety evaluation included five common adverse events: conjunctival hyperemia, hypertrichosis, ocular burning, ocular itching, and foreign-body sensation.ResultsEleven articles containing ten RCTs were included in this meta-analysis study. The results highlighted that, in the OAG/OHT population, there was no statistically significant difference in the responsiveness of the four PGAs. Bimatoprost had a better IOP-reducing efficacy than latanoprost. There was no significant difference in the IOP-reducing efficacy of travoprost, latanoprost, and tafluprost. In LNRs, the responsiveness of bimatoprost, travoprost, and latanoprost did not show statistical differences. Bimatoprost reduced IOP with a greater extent than latanoprost and travoprost in LNRs, while there was no significant difference in the IOP-reducing efficacy of travoprost and latanoprost. No serious adverse events occurred with the treatment of the four PGAs. The prevalence of conjunctival hyperemia due to bimatoprost or tafluprost was significantly higher than that of latanoprost. Other adverse events had no significant difference between the four drugs.ConclusionThe existing studies cannot prove that latanoprost, travoprost, bimatoprost, and tafluprost have different responsiveness in OAG/OHT patients. Switching to bimatoprost or travoprost cannot achieve a significant improvement in responsiveness in LNRs. Bimatoprost has a better IOP-reducing efficacy than latanoprost and travoprost. No serious adverse events occurred during treatment with any medication we studied.

Dataset Information

A randomized, controlled comparison of macroscopic conjunctival hyperemia in patients treated with bimatoprost 0.01% or vehicle who were previously controlled on latanoprost.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A randomized, controlled comparison of macroscopic conjunctival hyperemia in patients treated with bimatoprost 0.01% or vehicle who were previously controlled on latanoprost.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets