Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of preoperative IOP reduction using a preservative-free fixed combination of dorzolamide/timolol eye drops versus oral acetazolamide and dexamethasone eye drops and assessment of the clinical outcome of trabeculectomy in glaucoma.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

To demonstrate that preoperative treatment for 28 days with topical dorzolamide/timolol is non-inferior (? = 4 mm Hg) to oral acetazolamide and topical dexamethasone (standard therapy) in terms of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction 3 and 6 months after trabeculectomy in glaucoma patients.

Materials and methods

Sixty-two eyes undergoing trabeculectomy with mitomycin C were included in this monocentric prospective randomized controlled study. IOP change between baseline and 3 months post-op was defined as the primary efficacy variable. Secondary efficacy variables included the number of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) injections, needlings, suture lyses, preoperative IOP change, hypertension rate and change of conjunctival redness 3 and 6 months post-op. Safety was assessed based on the documentation of adverse events.

Results

Preoperative treatment with topical dorzolamide/timolol was non-inferior to oral acetazolamide and topical dexamethasone in terms of IOP reduction 3 months after trabeculectomy (adjusted means -8.12 mmHg versus -8.30 mmHg; Difference: 0.18; 95% CI -1.91 to 2.26, p = 0.8662). Similar results were found 6 months after trabeculectomy (-9.13 mmHg versus -9.06 mmHg; p = 0.9401). Comparable results were also shown for both groups concerning the classification of the filtering bleb, corneal staining, and numbers of treatments with 5-FU, needlings and suture lyses. More patients reported AEs in the acetazolamide/dexamethasone group than in the dorzolamide/timolol group.

Discussion

Preoperative, preservative-free, fixed-dose dorzolamide/timolol seems to be equally effective as preoperative acetazolamide and dexamethasone and has a favourable safety profile.

SUBMITTER: Lorenz K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5310886 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of preoperative IOP reduction using a preservative-free fixed combination of dorzolamide/timolol eye drops versus oral acetazolamide and dexamethasone eye drops and assessment of the clinical outcome of trabeculectomy in glaucoma.

Lorenz Katrin K Wasielica-Poslednik Joanna J Bell Katharina K Renieri Giulia G Keicher Alexander A Ruckes Christian C Pfeiffer Norbert N Thieme Hagen H

PloS one 20170215 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>To demonstrate that preoperative treatment for 28 days with topical dorzolamide/timolol is non-inferior (Δ = 4 mm Hg) to oral acetazolamide and topical dexamethasone (standard therapy) in terms of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction 3 and 6 months after trabeculectomy in glaucoma patients.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Sixty-two eyes undergoing trabeculectomy with mitomycin C were included in this monocentric prospective randomized controlled study. IOP change between baseli ...[more]

PMID: 28199397

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe aim of this prospective crossover study was to evaluate the non-inferiority of PRO-122 (a preservative-free fixed combination) compared with 0.5% timolol + 0.2% brimonidine + 2.0% dorzolamide fixed combination (KOF) by evaluating its efficacy, tolerability and safety in subjects with controlled primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) previously treated with KOF for at least 2 months.MethodsIn a prospective, crossover, randomized, double-masked multicenter study, patients previously treated with KOF were randomly assigned to receive either PRO-122 or KOF for 30 days. On day 31, the A sequence changed to KOF, while the B sequence received PRO-122. All patients remained in the protocol for 30 additional days for a total of 60 days. The main efficacy endpoint was maintaining the controlled intraocular pressure (IOP). The safety and tolerability of both products were assessed by the presence of adverse events (AEs), ocular findings, a questionnaire on ocular comfort and the VF-14 index.ResultsA total of 51 patients participated. After application of PRO-122 twice a day, its efficacy was demonstrated through maintenance of the controlled IOP in patients previously controlled with KOF. The crossover between PRO-122 and KOF and vice versa, after 30 days of use, did not affect IOP control. PRO-122 was shown not to be inferior to KOF in maintaining IOP at control levels. The safety of both drugs is similar, as neither presented drug-related AEs or differences regarding safety issues. The tolerability of the two medications-evaluated by ocular findings, the questionnaire on ocular comfort and the VF-14 index-was also determined to be similar.ConclusionsThe controlled IOP in patients with controlled POAG treated with PRO-122 was maintained both in relation to the initial controlled IOP of the study and when compared with KOF in the B sequence. Finally, the treatment with PRO-122 demonstrated similar safety and tolerability to KOF.FundingLaboratorios Sophia, S.A. de C.V. (Zapopan, Jalisco, México).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03257813 (registered retrospectively).

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The aim of the present study was to evaluate the 24-h efficacy, tolerability, and ocular surface health with preservative-free (PF) tafluprost and a PF triple drug regimen comprising tafluprost and dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination (DTFC) in open-angle glaucoma patients who were insufficiently controlled with preserved branded or generic latanoprost monotherapy and who exhibited signs or symptoms of ocular surface disease (OSD). METHODS:Prospective, observer-masked, crossover, comparison. Eligible consecutive open-angle glaucoma patients were randomized to either PF tafluprost or the triple PF regimen for 3 months. They were then crossed over to the opposite therapy for another 3 months. At the end of the latanoprost run-in period and after each PF treatment period, patients underwent habitual 24-h intraocular pressure (IOP) monitoring with Goldmann tonometry in the sitting position (at 10:00, 14:00, 18:00, and 22:00) and Perkins tonometry in the supine position (at 02:00 and 06:00). Tolerability and selected ocular surface parameters were evaluated at baseline and the end of each treatment period. RESULTS:Forty-three open-angle glaucoma patients completed the trial. Mean 24-h IOP on preserved latanoprost was 22.2 ± 3.9 mmHg. Compared with latanoprost monotherapy, PF tafluprost obtained a greater reduction in mean, peak, and fluctuation of 24-h IOP including the 02:00 and 06:00 time points (P < 0.05). With the exception of 24-h fluctuation, the triple PF regimen provided significantly lower IOP parameters than latanoprost or PF tafluprost (P < 0.001). Finally, PF tafluprost therapy displayed significantly improved tear film break-up times (6.7 vs 6.0 s), corneal staining (1.3 vs 2.2), and Schirmer I test results (9.1 vs 8.2 mm) compared with the preserved latanoprost baseline (all P < 0.01). The triple PF regimen demonstrated similar tear film break-up times (6.1 vs 6.0 s) and Schirmer I test results (8.2 vs 8.2 mm) to latanoprost, but revealed a significant improvement in the corneal stain test (1.7 vs 2.2; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In this trial PF tafluprost therapy provided statistically greater 24-h efficacy and improved tolerability compared with preserved latanoprost. The combination of PF tafluprost and PF dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination was statistically and clinically more efficacious than both monotherapies and demonstrated similar ocular surface characteristics to preserved latanoprost monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02802137). FUNDING:Santen.

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.

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).

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of preoperative IOP reduction using a preservative-free fixed combination of dorzolamide/timolol eye drops versus oral acetazolamide and dexamethasone eye drops and assessment of the clinical outcome of trabeculectomy in glaucoma.

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Efficacy and safety of preoperative IOP reduction using a preservative-free fixed combination of dorzolamide/timolol eye drops versus oral acetazolamide and dexamethasone eye drops and assessment of the clinical outcome of trabeculectomy in glaucoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets