Fixed-dose combination of tafluprost and timolol in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: comparison with other fixed-combination products.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hollo G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4177040 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionReducing intraocular pressure (IOP), the only modifiable risk factor for open-angle glaucoma (OAG), is important for the preservation of vision and slowing of disease progression. Preservative-free tafluprost (0.0015%)/timolol (0.5%) fixed combination (PF Taf-T FC) is an approved combination therapy for OAG treatment. The VISIONARY study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of PF Taf-T FC in real-world clinical settings. Here, we present the results from the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland.MethodsThis observational, multicentre, European, prospective study recorded data during routine clinic appointments on the use of PF Taf-T FC for the treatment of OAG and ocular hypertension (OHT) in patients whose disease was insufficiently controlled on a prostaglandin analogue (PGA) or beta blocker monotherapy or who did not tolerate these medications. Mean change in IOP, symptom severity, changes in clinical signs, and tolerability were investigated over 6 months.ResultsEighty-two patients were recruited in the UK and Ireland. After 6 months of PF Taf-T FC treatment, mean IOP was significantly reduced from 22.0 to 16.2 mmHg in the UK group and from 18.6 to 14.1 mmHg in the Ireland group. In the UK (65 patients), 49 adverse events (AEs) were reported, of which 3 were serious. No AEs were reported in the Ireland group (17 patients). Overall, 91.9% of UK physicians reported PF Taf-T FC treatment to be the same or better than prior medication for improving clinical signs; 90.0% of UK patients reported PF Taf-T FC treatment to have good or very good tolerability.ConclusionsTreatment with PF Taf-T FC resulted in significant reductions in mean IOP over 6 months. Patients and physicians reported that treatment was well tolerated. These data demonstrate real-world efficacy of PF Taf-T FC for the treatment of OAG and OHT in routine clinical practice in the UK and Ireland.Trial registrationEuropean Union electronic Register of Post-Authorisation Studies (EU PAS) register number, EUPAS22204.
| S-EPMC8190000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess ocular discomfort upon instillation and patient preference for brinzolamide/timolol relative to dorzolamide/timolol, in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.MethodsThis was a multicenter, prospective, patient-masked, randomized, crossover study. On day 0, patients received one drop of brinzolamide/timolol in one eye and one drop of dorzolamide/timolol in the contralateral eye. On day 1, patients were randomly assigned to receive one drop of either brinzolamide/timolol or dorzolamide/timolol in both eyes; on day 2, patients received one drop of the alternate treatment in both eyes. Measures included a patient preference question on day 2 (primary) and mean ocular discomfort scale scores on days 1 and 2 (secondary). Safety assessments included adverse events, visual acuity, and slit-lamp examinations.ResultsOf 120 patients who enrolled, 115 completed the study. Of these, 112 patients instilled both medications and expressed a study medication preference on day 2. A significantly greater percentage preferred brinzolamide/timolol to dorzolamide/timolol (67.0% versus 30.4%; P < 0.001). The ocular discomfort (expressed as mean [standard deviation]) with brinzolamide/timolol was significantly lower than with dorzolamide/timolol (day 2:1.9 [2.3] versus 3.7 [2.8], respectively [P = 0.0003]; both days combined: 2.1 [2.5] versus 3.5 [2.9], respectively [P = 0.00014]). On day 1, five patients receiving brinzolamide/timolol reported five nonserious adverse events (AEs): flu (n = 1), bitter taste (n = 2), and headache (n = 2). Four events, bitter taste (two events) and headache (two events), were considered related to brinzolamide/timolol. Events were mild in intensity, except bitter taste of moderate intensity reported by one patient. No AEs were reported at day 2. All AEs resolved without additional treatment. No clinically relevant changes from baseline were observed in best-corrected visual acuity or slit-lamp examinations of ocular signs.ConclusionPatients had less discomfort with brinzolamide/timolol than with dorzolamide/timolol, and more expressed a preference for brinzolamide/timolol. Both treatments were generally safe and well tolerated.
| S-EPMC3578670 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To determine patient preference of and ocular discomfort with fixed combination brinzolamide/timolol compared with fixed combination dorzolamide/timolol. METHODS:In a prospective, double-masked, randomized, active-controlled, crossover, multicenter study, patients received 1 drop of brinzolamide/timolol and dorzolamide/timolol in both eyes on consecutive days in random order. Ocular discomfort was rated 1 minute after instillation of each medication, and preference was noted on Day 2. Adverse events, if any, were solicited at each visit. RESULTS:127 subjects with ocular hypertension or open-angle glaucoma were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Of the 106 subjects who expressed a drug preference, 79.2% preferred brinzolamide/timolol (p < 0.0001). Ocular discomfort scores were significantly higher with dorzolamide/timolol than brinzolamide/timolol (2.9 vs 1.4, respectively; p < 0.0001). Significantly more patients reported ocular pain and discomfort after dorzolamide/timolol instillation and transient blurred vision after brinzolamide/timolol instillation. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with ocular hypertension or open-angle glaucoma preferred the brinzolamide/timolol fixed combination over the dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination. This is likely due to the greater ocular discomfort associated with dorzolamide/timolol. The differences in preference, discomfort, and adverse events are likely attributable to formulation differences given the similarities of the active ingredients. Stronger patient preference for brinzolamide/timolol may lead to better therapeutic compliance.
| S-EPMC2694004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFixed-combination glaucoma medications are commonly used to achieve target intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction in patients uncontrolled with monotherapy; however, ocular discomfort associated with eye drops can decrease adherence. This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of twice-daily fixed-combination brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% (BRINZ/TIM-FC) in Latin American patients transitioned from fixed-combination brimonidine 0.2%/timolol 0.5% (BRIM/TIM-FC) because of insufficient IOP control or treatment intolerance.MethodsThis 8-week, open-label, prospective study was conducted at six sites in Argentina, Chile, and Mexico. Enrolled patients were aged ≥18 years with open-angle glaucoma (including primary, exfoliative, or pigment-dispersion glaucoma) or ocular hypertension with IOP of 19-35 mmHg in ≥1 eye at baseline (on BRIM/TIM-FC). Patients self-administered BRINZ/TIM-FC to both eyes at 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. daily for 8 weeks. The primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were mean IOP change from baseline at week 8 and percentage of patients achieving target IOP (≤18 mmHg) at week 8, respectively. Exploratory endpoints included patient and investigator preference for treatment at week 8. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed as the safety endpoint.ResultsFifty patients (mean ± SD age, 66.7 ± 11.5 years) received BRINZ/TIM-FC, and 49 were included in the intent-to-treat population. Mean ± SD IOP was significantly reduced from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment with BRINZ/TIM-FC (-3.6 ± 3.0 mmHg; P < 0.0001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test; 17.1% reduction). Overall, 55.3% of patients achieved IOP ≤18 mmHg at week 8. Significantly more patients (89.4%) and investigators (95.7%) preferred BRINZ/TIM-FC to BRIM/TIM-FC (both P < 0.0001, exact binomial test). Of the 13 AEs observed, 8 were related to BRINZ/TIM-FC; the most common treatment-related AEs were eye irritation (n = 4) and abnormal sensation in the eye (n = 2).ConclusionBRINZ/TIM-FC provides an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for patients transitioned from BRIM/TIM-FC.
| S-EPMC4177101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed-dose combination (TRAV/TIM-FC) in patients not achieving the target IOP of ≤18 mmHg while on timolol 0.5% (TIM) monotherapy.MethodsA multicenter, prospective, open-label study (NCT01336569) was conducted in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Eligible patients were receiving TIM monotherapy with a screening/baseline IOP of 19-35 mmHg in ≥1 eye. TIM was discontinued on the baseline visit day (no washout period) and TRAV/TIM-FC was initiated and administered once daily at 8 pm for 4-6 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was mean change in IOP from TIM-treated baseline to study end, measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. Results were analyzed by analysis of variance and paired samples t-test (5% significance).ResultsA total of 49 patients were enrolled (mean age, 63 [range, 42-82] years; 55.1% White; 73.5% women), and 45 were included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Mean duration of treatment with TRAV/TIM-FC was 31 days. Mean ± standard deviation IOP reduction from baseline (TIM) to the follow-up visit (TRAV/TIM-FC) was -5.0±3.6 mmHg. IOP decreased significantly (P<0.0001) from baseline (22.1±2.6 mmHg) to study end (17.1±3.9 mmHg) in the ITT population, with a mean IOP reduction of 22.3%. Most patients (n=33/45; 73.3%) achieved IOP ≤18 mmHg. Two patients experienced a total of four adverse events (AEs), including a patient who reported one serious AE (enterorrhagia) that was considered unrelated to treatment, and a patient who reported one event each of drug-related redness, pruritus, and foreign body sensation. Most patients (n=47/49; 95.9%) reported no AEs.ConclusionsTRAV/TIM-FC lowered IOP in patients who were not at target IOP while receiving TIM monotherapy, with most patients achieving an IOP ≤18 mmHg with TRAV/TIM-FC. TRAV/TIM-FC was well tolerated in this population.
| S-EPMC4144930 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Fixed-combination ocular hypotensives have multiple advantages, but triple-therapy dorzolamide/brimonidine/timolol (dorz/brim/tim) is only available in Latin and South America, and information on its relative efficacy is limited. This study compares the efficacy and tolerability of fixed-combination bimatoprost/timolol (bim/tim) and dorz/brim/tim in Mexican patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS:In this investigator-masked, crossover study, patients with unmet target intraocular pressure (IOP) on once-daily bim/tim or twice-daily dorz/brim/tim received the opposite medication for 3 months before returning to their pre-baseline medication for 3 months. IOP was evaluated before and after morning instillation at months 2, 3, 5 and 6. Primary endpoints were mean IOP change and Ocular Surface Disease Index© (OSDI) score at each visit. The intent-to-treat population was the a priori analysis population, but due to the number of discontinuations, the per-protocol and intent-to-treat populations were used for the primary efficacy and sensitivity analyses, respectively. RESULTS:Seventy-eight and 56 patients were included in the intent-to-treat and per-protocol populations, respectively. At month 3, statistically significant IOP reductions from baseline were observed in the bim/tim (P?<?0.01) and dorz/brim/tim (P?<?0.0001) groups, regardless of assessment time. At month 6, patients returned to bim/tim exhibited no significant IOP increase (regardless of assessment time), but patients returned to dorz/brim/tim exhibited a statistically significant IOP increase (P?<?0.001) when assessed before instillation of study treatment. Results were similar in both intent-to-treat and per-protocol analysis populations. In the per-protocol analysis, 70% of patients on bim/tim at month 3 had an IOP <14 mm Hg, which declined to 58% (P?=?0.0061) at month 6 (ie, after 3 months of dorz/brim/tim treatment). In patients receiving dorz/brim/tim at month 3, 38% had an IOP <14 mm Hg, which remained comparable after return to bim/tim. OSDI scores and incidence of adverse events were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS:In this first direct comparison of the efficacy of dorz/brim/tim and bim/tim, patients switched from dorz/brim/tim to bim/tim demonstrated improved/lower IOP; when returned to dorz/brim/tim, IOP increased to levels seen at study initiation, suggesting that once-daily bim/tim may have greater IOP-lowering efficacy. Both bim/tim and dorz/brim/tim were well tolerated with minimal ocular surface damage. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01737853 (registered October 9, 2012).
| S-EPMC4298061 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A noninferiority trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of a single evening dose of fixed-combination latanoprost 50 ?g/mL and timolol 0.5 mg/mL (Xalacom®; LTFC), in Chinese patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OH) who were insufficiently controlled on ?-blocker monotherapy or ?-blocker-based dual therapy.This 8-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, noninferiority study compared once-daily evening dosing of LTFC with the unfixed combination of latanoprost, one drop in the evening, and timolol, one drop in the morning (LTuFC). The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change from baseline to week 8 in diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP; mean of 8 AM, 10 AM, 2 PM, 4 PM IOPs). LTFC was considered noninferior to LTuFC if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference was < 1.5 mmHg (analysis of covariance).Baseline characteristics were similar for LTFC (N = 125; POAG, 70%; mean IOP, 25.8 mmHg) and LTuFC (N = 125; POAG, 69%; mean IOP, 26.0 mmHg). Mean diurnal IOP changes from baseline to week 8 were -8.6 mmHg with LTFC and -8.9 mmHg with LTuFC (between-treatment difference: 0.3 mmHg; 95%-CI, -0.3 to 1.0). Both treatments were well tolerated.A single evening dose of LTFC was at least as effective as the unfixed combination of latanoprost in the PM and timolol in the AM in reducing IOP in Chinese subjects with POAG or OH whose IOP was insufficiently reduced with ?-blocker monotherapy or ?-blocker-based dual therapy. LTFC is an effective and well tolerated once-daily treatment for POAG and OH.
| S-EPMC3175210 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of this study is to compare the 24-hour efficacy of dorzolamide/timolol-fixed combination (DTFC) and brimonidine/timolol-fixed combination (BTFC) in primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG).MethodsOne eye each of 77 POAG patients was included in this prospective, observer-masked, crossover comparison. Following a 2-month timolol run-in period, patients had three intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements at 1000, 1200 and 1400 h while on timolol treatment. Patients showing at least a 20% IOP reduction on timolol were randomised to 3 months of therapy with DTFC or BTFC, and then were crossed over to the opposite therapy.ResultsSixty POAG patients completed the study. The mean 24-hour IOP was significantly reduced with both the fixed combinations compared with the timolol-treated diurnal IOP (P < 0.001). When the two fixed combinations were compared directly, DTFC demonstrated a lower mean 24-hour IOP level as compared with BTFC (mean difference: -0.7 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval (CI): (-1.0, -0.3), P < 0.001). At two individual time points, DTFC significantly reduced IOP more than BTFC: at 1800 h (-1.0 mm Hg, 95% CI (-1.6,-0.5), P = 0.001) and at 0200 (-0.9 mm Hg, 95% CI: (-1.4,-0.5), P = 0.001). No significant difference existed for the other time points.ConclusionBoth the fixed combinations significantly reduce 24-hour IOP in POAG. DTFC provided significantly better 24-hour efficacy.
| S-EPMC3259580 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe efficacy of lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) and safety of switching to travoprost/timolol fixed combination ophthalmic solution (Duotrav(®), Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA) in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma, normal tension glaucoma or ocular hypertension undergoing prostaglandin analog (PGA) monotherapy was investigated.MethodsPatients treated with travoprost, latanoprost, tafluprost, or bimatoprost for ≥3 months and requiring additional medication were switched to Duotrav without washout. Baseline IOP was calculated from measurements at two visits during PGA monotherapy. IOP reductions at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after switching to Duotrav and adverse events were assessed.ResultsOf 162 patients enrolled, 157 patients (96.9%) with ≥4 weeks of follow-up after switching to Duotrav were analyzed. The mean IOP decreased significantly (baseline = 16.3 ± 3.1 mmHg; 4 weeks = 14.6 ± 3.1 mmHg, 8 weeks = 14.7 ± 3.3 mmHg, 12 weeks = 14.6 ± 3.2 mmHg; all P < 0.0001). When study eyes were divided into three groups according to baseline IOP (≥19 mmHg: 33 eyes, 21.0%; ≥15 to <19 mmHg: 78 eyes, 49.7%; <15 mmHg: 46 eyes, 29.3%), all groups showed significant IOP reductions (P = 0.0324 ~ P < 0.0001) after switching to Duotrav. Twenty-seven of 166 patients (16.3%) in the safety analysis experienced adverse events and 26/166 patients (15.7%) experienced adverse events, for which a relationship to Duotrav could not be ruled out. Adverse events in five patients led to treatment discontinuation (eye pruritus; eye irritation; increased blood pressure and rash; increased blurred vision; deepening of the eyelid sulcus and blepharoptosis). Twelve weeks after treatment switching, eyelash changes, blepharal pigmentation and deepening of the eyelid sulcus occurred in 42 (26.8%), 29 (18.5%), and 13 (8.3%) cases, respectively, among 157 patients with follow-up. There was no significant worsening from baseline for superficial punctate keratopathy (SPK) or conjunctival hyperemia after switching (SPK score: baseline = 0.58 ± 1.31; 12 weeks = 0.92 ± 1.76, P = 0.1819; conjunctival hyperemia score: baseline = 0.41 ± 0.64; 12 weeks = 0.49 ± 0.63, P = 0.3774).ConclusionOur findings confirm that switching to Duotrav(®) in PGA monotherapy patients shows IOP-lowering effect with minimal safety concerns.FundingJapan Association of Health Service and Alcon Japan. Ltd.Trial registrationUMIN Clinical Trials Registry identifier, UMIN000007028.
| S-EPMC4604505 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Fixed-combination (FC) therapy is used in primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) patients who require more than one medication to reach their target intraocular pressure (IOP). Currently, there are several FC therapies available for the treatment of glaucoma. The FC of latanoprost/timolol (LTFC) is a commonly used FC. Here, we conducted systematic review to compare the IOP-lowering effects of LTFC with other FCs for patients with POAG and OHT. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for randomized-controlled clinical trials and cross-over studies. The outcomes were mean IOP and IOP fluctuation after one month of treatment. Meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan (version 5.1) software. After conducting meta-analyses, we rated the quality of each meta-analysis as high, moderate, low, or very low using the "GRADE" system. RESULTS:We included 16 trials in this meta-analysis. Moderate-quality meta-analysis showed that LTFC had a comparable mean IOP to that of a fixed combination of travoprost and timolol (TTFC) [mean difference (MD): 0.07 mmHg] and a fixed combination of dorzolamide and timolol (DTFC) [MD: -0.31 mmHg], and it also had a comparable IOP-fluctuation effect compared to that of TTFC [MD: 0.13 mm Hg] and DTFC [MD: 0.25 mmHg]. Compared to the fixed combination of bimatoprost and timolol (BiTFC), moderate-quality evidence showed a higher mean IOP in the LTFC group [MD 0.76 mmHg], whereas low-quality meta-analysis showed higher IOP fluctuation [MD 1.09 mmHg] in the LTFC group. CONCLUSIONS:LTFC is as effective as TTFC and DTFC, but worse than BiTFC in controlling mean IOP and IOP fluctuation for POAG or OHT patients. The quality of our meta-analyses was assessed as moderate, with the exception of one low-quality analysis that compared the IOP fluctuation of LTFC and BiTFC.
| S-EPMC7046276 | biostudies-literature