Two-year double-masked comparison of bimatoprost with timolol in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension

Cohen, John; Gross, Ronald L.; Cheetham, Janet K; VanDenburgh, Amanda M.; Bernstein, Paula; Whitcup, Scott M.

doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2003.12.019

Cited by 69 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The lifespan of treatments requires not only good efficacy, but also [13][14][15][16][17] Nevertheless, side effects can result in patient discontinuation from treatment or additional office visits. 29 Therefore, comparing clinical signs and symptoms and IVCM findings between two similar glaucoma groups in monotherapy with one of the commercially available bimatoprost formulations (0.03 or 0.01%) may give important information regarding the role of the drug and BAK for the safety of antiglaucoma eye drop chronic instillation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12 It has been demonstrated to be safe and effective in lowering IOP by 6.5-8.9 mm Hg over the long term in glaucoma and ocular hypertension (OHT). [13][14][15][16][17] However, bimatoprost 0.03% eye drop is burdened with some side effects. Conjunctival congestion, which is believed to result from nitric oxide-mediated vasodilatation in the conjunctiva, 18,19 is the most frequent adverse effect, accounting for discontinuation of therapy in about 3% of patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bimatoprost 0.01% vs bimatoprost 0.03%: a 12-month prospective trial of clinical and in vivo confocal microscopy in glaucoma patients

Figus

Nardi

Piaggi

et al. 2014

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results Global clinical score (the sum of pruritus, stinging/burning, blurred vision, sticky eye sensation, eye dryness sensation, and foreign body sensation) significantly decreased in the bimatoprost 0.01% group from baseline 4.7±3.8 to 2.9±2.3 (Po0.001) and 2.5±2.0 (Po0.001) at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups, respectively. Comparison between groups showed differences at both follow-up visits (P ¼ 0.003 and Po0.001, respectively). In vivo confocal microscopy revealed a significant increase in goblet cell density in the bimatoprost 0.01% group compared with the bimatoprost 0.03% group (Po0.001 at both follow-up visits). All functional parameters and conjunctival hyperemia improved in the bimatoprost 0.01% group at each follow-up visit (Po0.05) and in comparison with bimatoprost 0.03% (Po0.05). ConclusionThe results of this trial suggest that bimatoprost 0.01% eye drops seem to decrease the ocular discomfort with respect to bimatoprost 0.03% eye drops.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bimatoprost 0.01% vs bimatoprost 0.03%: a 12-month prospective trial of clinical and in vivo confocal microscopy in glaucoma patients

Figus

Nardi

Piaggi

et al. 2014

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Homogeneous blue, green, or grey eyes are rarely affected. 214,216 Iris pigmentation may appear as soon as 3 months after initiation, develop in most (75%) affected subjects within 7 months, 217 and stabilize from 12 126 to 36 months. 215 Increased iris hyperpigmentation is likely to be related to PGA-stimulated increase melanogenesis, 22,[219][220][221][222] and possible increase in iris stromal melanocyte numbers 223 or their migration to the anterior border region with no net gain in melanin or melanocyte numbers.…”

Section: Ocular Adverse Eventsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bimatoprost lowered IOP to the same extent in blacks and non-blacks, while timolol was less effective in blacks (by approximately 2 mm). Mean reduction with bimatoprost 0.03% once daily was sustained over 2 126 and 4 127 years, and remained lower than timolol (P # 0.001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

Clinical utility and differential effects of prostaglandin analogs in the management of raised intraocular pressure and ocular hypertension

Lee

McCluskey

2010

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prostaglandin analogs (PGA) are powerful topical ocular hypotensive agents available for the treatment of elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). Latanoprost 0.005% and travoprost 0.004% are prodrugs and analogs of prostaglandin F2α. Bimatoprost 0.03% is regarded as a prostamide, and debate continues as to whether it is a prodrug. The free acids of all 3 PGAs reduce IOP by enhancing uveoscleral and trabecular outflow via direct effects on ciliary muscle relaxation and remodeling of extracellular matrix. The vast majority of clinical trials demonstrate IOP-lowering superiority of latanoprost, bimatoprost and travoprost compared with timolol 0.5%, brimonidine 0.2%, or dorzolamide 2% monotherapy. Bimatoprost appears to be more efficacious in IOPlowering compared with latanoprost, with weighted mean difference in IOP reduction documented in one meta-analysis of 2.59% to 5.60% from 1-to 6-months study duration. PGAs reduce IOP further when used as adjunctive therapy. Fixed combinations of latanoprost, bimatoprost or travoprost formulated with timolol 0.5% and administered once daily are superior to monotherapy of its constituent parts. PGA have near absence of systemic side effects, although do have other commonly encountered ocular adverse effects. The adverse effects of PGA, and also those found more frequently with bimatoprost use include ocular hyperemia, eyelash growth, and peri-ocular pigmentary changes. Iris pigmentary change is unique to PGA treatment. Once daily administration and near absence of systemic side effects enhances tolerance and compliance. PGAs are often prescribed as first-line treatment for ocular hypertension and open-angle glaucoma.

show abstract

“…The model supposed that from the initial treatment patients would enter into one of four health states: controlled (ie pressure p18 mmHg) without a side effect, uncontrolled (ie pressureX 18 mmHg) without a side effect, discontinue the medication due to a side effect and be controlled on the new medicine, or discontinue the medication due to a side effect and be uncontrolled on the new medicine. 4,7,[27][28][29][30][31] The cycle stage was assumed to be 1 year. Previously published persistency rates were used to determine discontinuation rates during the first year of therapy.…”

Section: Markov Model: Medical Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of latanoprost and timolol maleate for the treatment of glaucoma in Scandinavia and the United Kingdom, using a decision-analytic health economic model

Stewart

Mychaskiw

2007

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess the cost-effectiveness of latanoprost or timolol in glaucoma treatment in Norway, Sweden, Denmark (Scandinavia) and the United Kingdom (UK). Methods A Markov model was constructed to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis. Health states were 'stable' and 'progressed' glaucoma, and transition probabilities for both primary open-angle and exfoliation glaucoma were derived from the medical literature. Practice patterns were obtained from surveys completed by 54 ophthalmologists geographically dispersed throughout each country. Country specific unit costs were used for medications, patient visits, diagnostics, and therapeutic procedures. Results Over the life of the model latanoprost was less expensive than timolol by 5.3-7.6% (Scandinavia) and 2.1% (UK). Following adjustments, therapy in the original timolol-treated cohort was slightly more effective in each country with a difference in 0.003-0.015 years to progression of glaucoma existing between latanoprost. This may have resulted from the model design, which reflected that physicians ultimately control most patients' glaucoma over 5 years by adding or changing therapy. The associated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for latanoprost vs timolol generated by the Scandinavian and the UK models, respectively, were: Norway 351 396 NOK; Sweden 988 985 SEK; Denmark 351 641; and the UK 4751 GBP. Conclusions Over 5 years, in the UK timolol is the cost-effective option, whereas in Scandinavia latanoprost may be the costeffective alternative to timolol.

show abstract

Two-year double-masked comparison of bimatoprost with timolol in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension

Cited by 69 publications

References 15 publications

Bimatoprost 0.01% vs bimatoprost 0.03%: a 12-month prospective trial of clinical and in vivo confocal microscopy in glaucoma patients

Bimatoprost 0.01% vs bimatoprost 0.03%: a 12-month prospective trial of clinical and in vivo confocal microscopy in glaucoma patients

Clinical utility and differential effects of prostaglandin analogs in the management of raised intraocular pressure and ocular hypertension

Cost-effectiveness of latanoprost and timolol maleate for the treatment of glaucoma in Scandinavia and the United Kingdom, using a decision-analytic health economic model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About