IntroductionThe efficacy, safety and tolerability of the preservative-free (PF) fixed combination (FC) of tafluprost 0.0015% and timolol 0.5% (once daily) were compared to those of the individual components (PF tafluprost 0.0015% once daily and PF timolol 0.5% twice daily) in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension inadequately controlled on prior timolol or prostaglandin monotherapy for 6 months.MethodsA stratified, double-masked, randomized, multicenter phase III study was conducted. A total of 189 prior timolol users were randomized within the timolol stratum (TS) to receive either FC (n = 95) or timolol 0.5% (TIM; n = 94). Furthermore, a total of 375 prior prostaglandin analog (PGA) users were randomized within the prostaglandin stratum (PS) to receive either FC (n = 188) or tafluprost 0.0015% (TAF; n = 187). To be eligible for participation in the study, the patients were required to have an intraocular pressure (IOP) of ≥22 mmHg when on timolol (TIM) or of ≥20 mmHg when on PGA in either treated eye at the screening and end-of-run-in visits. In addition to these, the study included visits at baseline, 2 and 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months and at a post-study visit. IOP was measured at 8 a.m., 10 a.m., 4 p.m., and 8 p.m.ResultsIn the TS, a significant reduction from baseline IOP was seen with FC and TIM throughout the study. Average diurnal IOP change from baseline at month 3 was −8.55 mmHg (32%) for FC and −7.35 mmHg (28%) for TIM. The model-based treatment difference (FC–TIM) was −0.885 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) −1.745 to −0.024; p = 0.044] demonstrating the superiority of FC over TIM. In the PS, a significant reduction in IOP was seen with both FC and TAF throughout the study. The average diurnal IOP change from baseline at month 3 was −8.61 mmHg (33%) for FC and −7.23 mmHg (28%) for TAF. The model-based treatment difference (FC–TAF) was −1.516 mmHg (95% CI −2.044 to −0.988; p < 0.001) demonstrating the superiority of FC over TAF. In the TS, related ocular adverse events (AEs) were more frequent for patients treated with FC compared to TIM (16.8% versus 6.4%), whereas related non-ocular AEs were more frequent with TIM compared to FC (2.1% versus 0.0%). In the PS, AEs were similarly distributed between FC and TAF. The frequency of conjunctival hyperemia of FC was low (6.4%).ConclusionThe preservative-free fixed combination of tafluprost and timolol provided a substantial and significant IOP reduction in both strata. The IOP reduction was superior to both tafluprost 0.0015% and timolol 0.5% when given as monotherapies. Overall, the study treatments were safe and well tolerated.FundingSanten Oy, Tampere, Finland.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0163-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Medical service management in LACs demands to define groups of priority for VRS between the wounded with WROGI during triage at the first echelon of SOC. Multistage VRS determines unfavorable outcomes of the WROGI. Treatment should be determined by diagnosis, and there is a need to introduce a new category into the OGI classification--eye destruction, because only this damage determines the choice of enucleation/evisceration of the eye.
Electrophysiological studies were performed to measure the threshold (upper end of range) spatial frequency using visual evoked potentials and comparison with visual acuity neuron 26 healthy subjects. The aim of the present work was to create a method for objective measurement of visual acuity. This was addressed by initial measurements using a universally accepted method of visual stimulation and processing of electroencephalograms, which allows errors due to individual differences in visual system function to be minimized. These experiments yielded a strong correlation between the threshold spatial frequency of the test grid yielding an evoked potential on presentation and visual acuity, in degrees, expressed as the resolving ability of the visual system for this optotype. A logarithmic relationship was found between these values and an equation allowing automated calculation of visual acuity (resolving ability) from electrophysiological data was derived. The results were independent of the subject's responses and therefore provides a maximally objective assessment of visual acuity.
The accurate diagnosis of keratoconus, especially in its early stages of development, allows one to utilise timely and proper treatment strategies for slowing the progression of the disease and provide visual rehabilitation. Various keratometry indices and classifications for quantifying the severity of keratoconus have been developed. Today, many of them involve the use of the latest methods of computer processing and data analysis. The main purpose of this work was to develop a machine-learning-based algorithm to precisely determine the stage of keratoconus, allowing optimal management of patients with this disease. A multicentre retrospective study was carried out to obtain a database of patients with keratoconus and to use machine-learning techniques such as principal component analysis and clustering. The created program allows for us to distinguish between a normal state; preclinical keratoconus; and stages 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the disease, with an accuracy in terms of the AUC of 0.95 to 1.00 based on keratotopographer readings, relative to the adapted Amsler–Krumeich algorithm. The predicted stage and additional diagnostic criteria were then used to create a standardised keratoconus management algorithm. We also developed a web-based interface for the algorithm, providing us the opportunity to use the software in a clinical environment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.