Twelve-month, randomized, controlled trial of bimatoprost 0.01%, 0.0125%, and 0.03% in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension

Preservative-Free Bimatoprost 0.01% Ophthalmic Gel for Glaucoma Therapy: A Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial

PRCIS

Noninferiority of efficacy was demonstrated for a preservative-free bimatoprost 0.01% compared with BAK-containing bimatoprost 0.01% following a 12-week treatment period in patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Improved tolerability, in particular conjunctival hyperemia, was also observed.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of a preservative-free bimatoprost 0.01% ophthalmic gel (PFB 0.01% gel) compared with preserved bimatoprost 0.01% (PB 0.01%).

DESIGN

Phase III, international, multicenter, randomized, 2-parallel group, investigator-masked, 3-month treatment duration.

METHODS

Patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized after a 7-week run-in/washout period to receive once-daily PFB 0.01% gel (n=236) or PB 0.01% (n=249) for 3 months. The primary efficacy measure was changed from baseline in IOP at week 12. Safety measures included adverse events (AEs) and assessment of conjunctival hyperemia.

RESULTS

The mean changes from baseline in IOP at week 12 in the PFB 0.01% gel and PB 0.01% were -9.72±2.97 and -9.47±3.06 mm Hg, respectively, at 8 am , -9.41±3.03 and -9.19±3.12 mm Hg at 10 am , and -8.99±3.36 and -8.54±3.44 mm Hg at 4 pm . Noninferiority of PFB 0.01% gel to PB 0.01% was demonstrated at week 12 based on predetermined criteria (upper 95% CI margin of 1.5 mmHg at all time points). The most frequently reported AE was conjunctival hyperemia; 13 (5.5%) patients with PFB 0.01% gel and 17 (6.8%) patients with PB 0.01%. The percentage of patients experiencing a worsening from baseline in conjunctival hyperemia score was lower with PFB 0.01% gel compared to PB 0.01% at week 6 (20.1% vs. 29.3%, respectively) and week 12 (18.3% vs. 30.4%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

PFB 0.01% ophthalmic gel has the same efficacy in lowering IOP as PB 0.01% and demonstrated less aggravation of conjunctival hyperemia at weeks 6 and 12.

From Eye Care to Hair Growth: Bimatoprost

BACKGROUND

Bimatoprost has emerged as a significant medication in the field of medicine over the past several decades, with diverse applications in ophthalmology, dermatology, and beyond. Originally developed as an ocular hypotensive agent, it has proven highly effective in treating glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Its ability to reduce intraocular pressure has established it as a first-line treatment option, improving management and preventing vision loss. In dermatology, bimatoprost has shown promising results in the promotion of hair growth, particularly in the treatment of alopecia and hypotrichosis. Its mechanism of action, stimulating the hair cycle and prolonging the growth phase, has led to the development of bimatoprost-containing solutions for enhancing eyelash growth.

AIM

The aim of our review is to provide a brief description, overview, and studies in the current literature regarding the versatile clinical use of bimatoprost in recent years. This can help clinicians determine the most suitable individualized therapy to meet the needs of each patient.

METHODS

Our methods involve a comprehensive review of the latest advancements reported in the literature in bimatoprost formulations, which range from traditional eye drops to sustained-release implants. These innovations offer extended drug delivery, enhance patient compliance, and minimize side effects.

RESULTS

The vast literature published on PubMed has confirmed the clinical usefulness of bimatoprost in lowering intraocular pressure and in managing patients with glaucoma. Numerous studies have shown promising results in dermatology and esthetics in promoting hair growth, particularly in treating alopecia and hypotrichosis. Its mechanism of action involves stimulating the hair cycle and prolonging the growth phase, leading to the development of solutions that enhance eyelash growth. The global use of bimatoprost has expanded significantly, with applications growing beyond its initial indications. Ongoing research is exploring its potential in glaucoma surgery, neuroprotection, and cosmetic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Bimatoprost has shown immense potential for addressing a wide range of therapeutic needs through various formulations and advancements. Promising future perspectives include the exploration of novel delivery systems such as contact lenses and microneedles to further enhance drug efficacy and patient comfort. Ongoing research and future perspectives continue to shape its role in medicine, promising further advancements and improved patient outcomes.

A Randomized, Controlled Comparison of NCX 470, a Nitric Oxide-Donating Bimatoprost, and Latanoprost in Subjects with Open-Angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension: The MONT BLANC Study

PURPOSE

To compare intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of NCX 470, a nitric oxide (NO)-donating bimatoprost, to latanoprost in subjects with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT).

DESIGN

Prospective, phase 3, randomized, adaptive dose-selection, double-masked, parallel-group trial.

METHODS

691 subjects with OAG or OHT and unmedicated IOP ≥26 mmHg at 8AM, ≥24 mmHg at 10AM, and ≥22 mmHg at 4PM in the study eye were randomized to NCX 470 0.065%, NCX 470 0.1%, or latanoprost 0.005%. An interim analysis was performed to select the final dose of NCX 470. We evaluated noninferiority of NCX 470 versus latanoprost, based on IOP reduction from baseline at 8AM and 4PM at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months.

RESULTS

661 subjects were analyzed; IOP was significantly reduced at all on-treatment time points, with reductions ranging from 8.0 to 9.7 mmHg (P < .0001 at each time point) in the NCX 470 0.1% group. Mean IOP reductions were greater with NCX 470 0.1% than latanoprost 0.005% at all 6 time points and significantly greater (P < .05) at 4 of the 6 time points. The most common adverse event was conjunctival/ocular hyperemia.

CONCLUSION

The NO-donating prostaglandin analogue NCX 470 0.1% was well-tolerated and lowered IOP more than latanoprost in subjects with OAG or OHT at all 6 time points. With a dual mechanism of action that enhances both uveoscleral and trabecular outflow, NCX 470 could become an important first-line therapy for IOP reduction in glaucoma.

Effect of bimatoprost sustained-release intracameral implant on intraocular pressure and medication burden in patients with prior glaucoma surgery

The present retrospective study evaluated intraocular pressure (IOP) and medication burden after bimatoprost sustained-release (bimatoprost SR, Durysta, Allergan) implantation in patients with glaucoma. A secondary objective was to examine an effect of bimatoprost SR in a subset of patients with prior minimally invasive and incisional glaucoma surgery. A retrospective chart review of 122 eyes that received bimatoprost SR by 6 glaucoma specialists at Wills Eye Hospital between March 2020 and September 2021 was performed. One hundred and eighteen eyes from 84 patients had a reduction in IOP (18.5±5.7mmHg vs. 16.0±5.4mmHg, P<0.01) and required fewer glaucoma medications (2.1±1.4 vs. 1.2±1.2, P<0.01) after bimatoprost SR implantation. In 41 eyes from 31 patients who previously underwent glaucoma surgery (including iStent, goniotomy, trabeculectomy, Xen Gel Stent, or tube shunt surgery), medication burden was decreased after bimatoprost SR implantation (1.9±1.3 vs. 1.0±1.0, P<0.001). These data suggest that bimatoprost SR is an efficacious treatment modality for glaucoma, even in post-surgical patients.

United States Regulatory Approval of Topical Treatments for Dry Eye

PURPOSE

To report the heterogeneity in methodology of clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of topical dry eye treatments.

DESIGN

Comparative analysis of clinical trials' methods.

METHODS

We reviewed the online, publicly available FDA database, application review files, ClinicalTrials.gov registry records, and journal articles for each FDA-approved topical dry eye treatment. For each trial, we extracted information about the study, patient demographics, treatment names and doses, sample size in each arm, and the measurement instrument in a systematic fashion.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials were included that assessed 5 topical treatments for dry eye (cyclosporine 0.05%, cyclosporine 0.09%, lifitegrast 5%, and loteprednol 0.25% eye drops and varenicline 0.03-mg nasal spray). Median treatment duration was 12 weeks (range, 2-24 weeks). In all trials, treatments, including varying concentrations of the same treatment, were compared with vehicle. Twelve trials (85.7%) evaluated a primary clinician-measured clinical sign, and 10 trials (71.4%) evaluated a primary patient-reported symptom. Corneal staining was the most frequently evaluated clinical sign primary outcome, reported in half (6 of 12) of the trials, and was graded using 4 different scoring systems. Conjunctival staining, conjunctival hyperemia, and tear production were each measured using 2 different scoring systems. Ocular discomfort, the only patient-reported symptom primary outcome, was measured using 5 different instruments.

CONCLUSION

A variety of outcome measures were used in these clinical trials. Clinically meaningful dry eye outcome measures and standardized measurements can optimize the assessment of and comparison of therapeutic benefits.

Prostaglandin analogs in ophthalmology

Glaucoma is a major cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. Reducing intraocular pressure (IOP) is currently the only approach to prevent further optic nerve head damage. Pharmacotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for glaucoma patients. In recent years, a significant milestone in glaucoma treatment has been a transition to prostaglandin analogs (PGAs) as the first line of drugs. The rapid shift from traditional β-blockers to PGAs is primarily due to their excellent efficacy, convenient once-a-day usage, better diurnal control of IOP, and systemic safety profiles. This review article aims to provide information regarding the various PGAs in practice and also the newer promising drugs.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model to predict drug concentrations and intraocular pressure lowering effect for a bimatoprost six-month slow-release system

INTRODUCTION

Ophthalmic drug product development and dosing regimen selection depend on animal eye drug concentration-effect relationships since human eye tissues cannot be sampled for drug quantification. This study hypothesized that a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) mathematical model developed based on dog studies can be applied to the human eye of different ages, based on physiological parameter adjustment, to predict drug concentrations and effects in response to a new 6-month slow-release, intracameral, intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering, anti-glaucoma bimatoprost implant.

METHODS

Using previously reported dog concentration-effect relationship data at various doses, and the physiological parameters of dog eye, a PK-PD model was designed to predict dog aqueous humor drug concentrations and IOP lowering effects simultaneously for a given dose. After validating the model using the dog IOP data, it was applied to the human eye.

RESULTS

Using a drug release rate constant of 0.0002 h-1, the model predicted the dog IOP lowering effect with an error less than 6% or less at various doses (Observed = 0.91*Predicted + 2.35; R2 = 0.98). Considering literature reported aqueous humor volumes and flow rates in old (over 60 years) and young (20 to 30 years) humans, aqueous humor elimination rate constant was estimated to be 0.9 and 0.68 h-1, respectively. The model when modified using the older human eye parameters, predicted the IOP lowering effects reported in a clinical trial with 63-year-old adults, with an error of 6.2% or less. The model, when used for young adult eye not previously tested in clinical trials, predicted lower drug concentrations and effects, possibly due to 54% higher aqueous humor volume relative to older adults. The model predicted an IOP reduction of 26.3 and 30.6%, at 10 and 15 microgram doses, respectively, in young adults.

CONCLUSIONS

The PK-PD model developed is useful for product design and patient dosing by predicting eye drug concentration and effect time-courses in response to implant administration at various doses, frequencies, and release rates.

Triple Fixed-Combination Bimatoprost/Brimonidine/Timolol in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension in India: A Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study

Introduction

To evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of a triple fixed-combination of bimatoprost, brimonidine, and timolol (TFC) in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension (OHT) treated with fixed-combination or unfixed brimonidine and timolol therapy (dual-combination therapy).

Methods

In this multicenter, open-label, phase 3 study, patients who received 4-8 weeks of dual-combination therapy twice daily and had an IOP >18 and <34 mmHg in at least one eye were switched (at baseline) to treatment with TFC twice daily for 12 weeks. At Weeks 4, 8, and 12 on TFC, IOP was assessed at Hours 0, 2, and 8. Primary efficacy variable: mean diurnal IOP change from baseline in the study eye at Week 12 (modified intent-to-treat [mITT] population). Sensitivity (per-protocol [PP] population) and subgroup (≤65 vs >65 years) analyses were performed. Safety, including adverse events (AEs), was assessed at each visit.

Results

Of 126 patients enrolled, 121 and 103 formed the mITT/safety and PP populations, including 109 (90.1%) and 94 (91.3%) who completed the study, respectively. In the mITT/safety population, mean age was 58.6 years. Patients had open-angle glaucoma (51.2%), angle-closure glaucoma with patent iridotomy (36.4%), and/or OHT (13.2%). At Week 12, the mean diurnal change in IOP from dual combination-treated baseline was statistically significant (P<0.001) with TFC in the mITT (-3.98 mmHg) and PP (-4.22 mmHg) populations. Results were similar at all visits, regardless of the age subgroup. The most frequent treatment-related AEs were conjunctival hyperemia (14.0%) and dry eye (4.1%); 5.8% of the patients discontinued treatment due to ocular AEs.

Conclusion

TFC offers a beneficial therapeutic alternative for patients with glaucoma or OHT whose IOP is not sufficiently controlled with dual-combination therapy. Safety and efficacy findings support those of published studies of TFC in primary open-angle glaucoma and OHT, despite differences in study designs.

Phase 2b, Randomized, 3-Month, Dose-Finding Study of Sepetaprost in Patients with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension: The ANGEL Study

Purpose:

This phase 2b, randomized, observer-masked, placebo- and active-controlled, parallel-group, multinational (USA and Japan), multicenter study (NCT03216902) assessed the optimal dose of sepetaprost ophthalmic solution in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Methods:

After washout, patients ≥18 years (USA) or ≥20 years of age (Japan) received once-daily sepetaprost for 3 months [0.0005% (n = 43); 0.001% (n = 43); 0.002% (n = 44); and 0.003% (n = 45)], latanoprost 0.005% (n = 44) or placebo until week 6, followed by sepetaprost 0.003% until month 3 (n = 22). Safety assessments included adverse event (AE) occurrence.

Results:

Baseline mean diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP) was 24.3 mmHg for latanoprost and ranged between 24.1 and 24.5 mmHg for the sepetaprost groups. Sepetaprost 0.002% had the lowest IOP at each month 3 time point (9:00 AM; 1:00 PM; 5:00 PM) of all sepetaprost concentrations (mean ± standard error: 17.6 ± 0.5; 17.4 ± 0.4; 16.7 ± 0.4 mmHg); similar values were observed with latanoprost (18.1 ± 0.6; 17.3 ± 0.5; 17.2 ± 0.5 mmHg). A positive dose–response relationship was observed with the 3 lower sepetaprost doses; sepetaprost 0.002% had numerically greater IOP-lowering effects than sepetaprost 0.003%. All sepetaprost doses had statistically significantly greater IOP reductions from baseline versus placebo at week 6 (P < 0.0001). This IOP-lowering effect was consistent between Japan- and USA-based patients. Most AEs were mild and occurred numerically less frequently with sepetaprost 0.002% (34.1%) versus latanoprost (50.0%). The most frequently reported AE was conjunctival hyperemia.

Conclusion:

In this study, sepetaprost 0.002% was the optimal concentration, showing comparable IOP-lowering efficacy and safety with latanoprost 0.005%. Most AEs were mild; occurrence was numerically lower with sepetaprost 0.002% than latanoprost 0.005%.

A new look at the safety and tolerability of prostaglandin analogue eyedrops in glaucoma and ocular hypertension

INTRODUCTION

In the last 25 years, topical prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) have emerged to become first line and first choice therapeutic options in the management of glaucoma and ocular hypertension (OHT). Although the short-term efficacy and safety of PGAs has been extensively investigated, less is known about their long term safety and tolerability. This gap in current knowledge is clinically relevant, because treatment-related adverse events and long-term tolerability issues are key determinants of the overall success of long-term therapy and the final outcome of a lifelong, symptomless disease like glaucoma.

AREAS COVERED

We include selected evidence pertaining to the safety and tolerability of available and emerging PGA formulations. We also outline PGA formulations with different concentrations of the active ingredient, different preservatives, and preservative-free (PF) options.

EXPERT OPINION

Undoubtedly PGAs will continue to play a major role in the medical therapy of glaucoma and OHT. Despite extensive literature and prolonged clinical experience with these agents worldwide, a number of areas that warrant further research have been identified in the present review. Recently launched novel PGAs, or those still in development offer new opportunities and future challenges.

Comparison of preserved bimatoprost 0.01% with preservative-free tafluprost: A randomised, investigator-masked, 3-month crossover, multicentre trial, SPORT II

IMPORTANCE

This study compares the efficacy and tolerability of a preservative-free prostaglandin analogue (tafluprost 15 mg/ml) to a prostaglandin analogue that uses 0.02% of benzalkonium chloride (bimatoprost 0.1 mg/ml).

BACKGROUND

Different prostaglandin analogues have been commercially approved, with differences in tolerability.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomised, investigator-masked, 3-month crossover, multicentre trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-four patients with ocular hypertension or open-angle glaucoma were randomised to two groups, after a 4-week washout period from their current topical drop regimen.

METHODS

Participants were randomised to tafluprost (Group 1; n = 33) or bimatoprost (Group 2; n = 31). At month 3, each group switched to the opposite treatment. IOP was evaluated at multiple timepoints.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was difference in mean IOP between the two groups at the final visit. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline IOP at month 3 and month 6, difference in mean IOP at month 3 and difference in IOP at all timepoints. Safety outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), adverse events, ocular tolerability, optic nerve assessment and slit lamp biomicroscopy.

RESULTS

Both medications significantly lowered IOP at month 6 compared to baseline: 5.4 mmHg (27%) for tafluprost and 6.8 mmHg (33%) for bimatoprost (p < 0.0001). No significant differences in any of the safety measures (including conjunctival hypearemia) were detected.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Bimatoprost produced a statistically significant greater IOP reduction compared to tafluprost with minimal to no difference in side effects. This should be borne in mind when weighing up the pros and cons of preserved versus preservative-free prostaglandin analogue therapy.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT02471105.

Preservative-free versus preserved glaucoma eye drops and occurrence of glaucoma surgery. A retrospective study based on the French national health insurance information system, 2008-2016

PURPOSE

Preservatives contained in glaucoma eye drops have been shown to have a deleterious impact on the ocular surface. We aimed to assess the association between preservative exposure and the occurrence of further glaucoma surgery among patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension in France.

METHODS

The study concerned all patients who first received glaucoma eye drop treatments in a French medical-administrative database (EGB) between 2008 and 2015. Three groups were created according to the level of preservative exposure during the whole follow-up: '0% preservatives', 'mixed' and '100% preservatives'. The occurrence of glaucoma surgery was estimated according to preservative exposure indicators in Cox multivariate models adjusted on age, sex, number of glaucoma eye drops simultaneously used, systemic antihypertensive treatment and duration of treatment.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 12 454 patients. The median (interquartile range) follow-up was 4.1 (1.7-6.1) years. A total of 231 (1.9%) patients underwent glaucoma surgery during follow-up. On multivariable analysis, the risk of glaucoma surgery was increased for the 'mixed' group (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.94 [95% CI, 1.54-10.05]) and for the '100% preservative' group (HR = 7.97 [95% CI, 3.07-20.67]) when compared with the 0% preservative group.

CONCLUSION

We found an association between exposure to glaucoma eye drop preservatives and the prevalence of further glaucoma surgery. While these data might be used to support the consideration of routine use of preservative-free drops, in the absence of a randomized clinical trial, they cannot prove a direct cause-and-effect relationship between preservative-free glaucoma eye drops and further glaucoma surgery.

24-Month Phase I/II Clinical Trial of Bimatoprost Sustained-Release Implant (Bimatoprost SR) in Glaucoma Patients

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effects over 24 months of biodegradable bimatoprost sustained-release implant (Bimatoprost SR) administration versus topical bimatoprost 0.03% in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG).

Methods

This was a phase I/II, prospective, 24-month, dose-ranging, paired-eye controlled clinical trial. At baseline following washout, adult patients with OAG (N = 75) received Bimatoprost SR (6, 10, 15, or 20 µg) intracamerally in the study eye; the fellow eye received topical bimatoprost 0.03% once daily. Rescue topical IOP-lowering medication or single repeat administration with implant was permitted. The primary endpoint was IOP change from baseline. Safety measures included adverse events (AEs).

Results

At month 24, mean IOP reduction from baseline was 7.5, 7.3, 7.3, and 8.9 mmHg in eyes treated with Bimatoprost SR 6, 10, 15, and 20 µg, respectively, versus 8.2 mmHg in pooled fellow eyes; 68, 40, and 28% of pooled study eyes had not been rescued/retreated at months 6, 12, and 24, respectively. AEs in study eyes that occurred ≤ 2 days post-procedure typically were transient. After 2 days post-procedure, overall AE incidence was similar between study and fellow eyes, with some events typically associated with topical prostaglandin analogs having lower incidence in study eyes.

Conclusions

Bimatoprost SR showed favorable efficacy and safety profiles up to 24 months, with all evaluated dose strengths demonstrating overall IOP-reducing effects comparable to those of topical bimatoprost. Targeted and sustained delivery of bimatoprost resulted in protracted IOP lowering, suggesting that Bimatoprost SR may represent a transformational new approach to glaucoma therapy. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01157364

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40265-019-01248-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Episcleral Venous Pressure and the Ocular Hypotensive Effects of Topical and Intracameral Prostaglandin Analogs

There is a limit beyond which increasing either the concentration of a prostaglandin analog (PGA) or its dosing frequency fails to produce increases in ocular hypotensive efficacy with topical dosing. Intracameral PGA dosing with a bimatoprost implant, however, does not exhibit the same intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering plateau at studied concentrations, and the maximum-achievable ocular hypotensive effects are not yet known. This suggests that the bimatoprost intracameral implant may activate another mechanism of action in addition to the mechanism(s) activated by topical application. Episcleral venous pressure (EVP) is a key determinant of IOP, and experimental manipulation of the episcleral vasculature can change both EVP and IOP. The recent observation that topical and intracameral PGA drug delivery routes produce different patterns of conjunctival hyperemia suggested that the differences in the IOP-lowering profiles may be caused by differing effects on the episcleral vasculature. Recent experiments in animals have shown that topical PGAs increase EVP, while the bimatoprost intracameral implant causes a smaller, transient increase in EVP, followed by a sustained decrease. The increase in EVP could be limiting the IOP-lowering efficacy of topical PGAs. In contrast, the decrease in EVP associated with the bimatoprost implant could explain its enhanced IOP-lowering effects. Further research on EVP as a target for IOP lowering is indicated to improve our understanding of this potentially important pathway for treating patients with glaucoma.

Phase 2, Randomized, Dose-finding Studies of Omidenepag Isopropyl, a Selective EP2 Agonist, in Patients With Primary Open-angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension

PRéCIS:: Three randomized, multicenter studies demonstrated the stable intraocular pressure-lowering effects and tolerability of omidenepag isopropyl in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension; 0.002% was identified as the optimal dose for further investigation.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of omidenepag isopropyl, a selective EP2 agonist, and to determine the optimal dose for further investigation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Three randomized, controlled, masked, multicenter studies were conducted in United States (study 1, NCT01868126; study 2, NCT02179008) and Japan (study 3, NCT02623738). Patients were randomized to 1 of 7 omidenepag isopropyl concentrations (0.0003%, 0.001%, 0.0012%, 0.0016%, 0.002%, 0.0025%, and 0.003%), latanoprost (0.005%), or placebo, 1 drop once daily for 28 days (studies 1 and 3) or 90 days (study 2). Primary endpoints were the observed mean diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP) and IOP at each time point on the final visit (studies 1 and 2) and change from baseline in mean diurnal IOP at week 4 (study 3).

RESULTS

IOP-lowering effects of omidenepag isopropyl 0.0003% to 0.002% increased dose-dependently. Omidenepag isopropyl 0.002% and 0.0025% resulted in clinically relevant mean diurnal IOP reductions from baseline that were similar to those of latanoprost and superior to placebo (P<0.005). Maximum reductions had already been achieved by week 1, and stable IOP-lowering effects were observed at all postbaseline time points up to 3 months. Most adverse events (AEs) were mild. Conjunctival hyperemia was the most frequently reported AE, the incidence of which increased dose-dependently. The safety profiles of omidenepag isopropyl 0.002% and 0.0025% were similar, with a slightly lower incidence of AEs in the 0.002% group.

CONCLUSIONS

Omidenepag isopropyl demonstrated stable IOP-lowering effects and was well tolerated; 0.002% was identified as the optimal dose for phase 3 investigation.

Prostaglandin Coverage and Costs to Medicare and Medicare Beneficiaries, 2009-2017

BACKGROUND

Prostaglandin analogs are the most effective treatment for glaucoma, a common condition among older adults. Despite the availability of generic drugs, the costs associated with these prescription drugs are rising.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize Medicare prescription drug plan (PDP) formulary coverage and beneficiary out-of-pocket cost for prostaglandin analogs from 2009 to 2017 and Medicare spending on prostaglandin analogs from 2013 to 2017.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis. We used 2009, 2013, and 2017 Medicare PDP formulary, beneficiary cost, and pricing files to determine beneficiary first-prescription out-of-pocket costs and plan coverage (unrestricted, restricted, or not covered) of branded latanoprost 0.005%, travoprost 0.004%, bimatoprost 0.03% and 0.01%, and tafluprost 0.0015% and of generic latanoprost 0.005% and generic bimatoprost 0.03%. We also used Medicare Part D spending data to determine aggregate spend in 2013 and 2017.

RESULTS

In 2009, 92% of plans covered branded latanoprost, 83% covered branded bimatoprost; and 49% covered branded travoprost, whereas in 2017, 6% of plans covered branded latanoprost; 95% covered branded bimatoprost; and 96% covered branded travoprost. Although generic latanoprost was universally covered, generic bimatoprost was only covered by 35% of plans in 2017. Median out-of-pocket cost of branded prostaglandins without generic equivalents was $35 (IQR = $29-$40) in 2009, $45 (IQR = $42-$101) in 2013, and $90 (IQR = $45-$159) in 2017. Median out-of-pocket cost of all available generic prostaglandins was $10 (IQR = $5-$33) in 2013 and $10 (IQR = $4-$15) in 2017. In 2013, Medicare spent $733 million on prostaglandin analogs; in 2017, this increased to $1.09 billion, with $943 million (86%) spent on branded prostaglandins and $148 million (14%) spent on generics.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicare PDP coverage of branded prostaglandins remained stable from 2009 to 2017. While median beneficiary out-of-pocket costs associated with generic prostaglandins remained stable, those associated with branded prostaglandins increased nearly 3-fold.

DISCLOSURES

Research reported in this publication was supported by National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number T35HL007649. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute or the National Institutes of Health. Shah has received research support through Mayo Clinic from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to establish Yale-Mayo Clinic Center for Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI) program (U01FD005938); the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Innovation under the Transforming Clinical Practice Initiative (TCPI); the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (U19HS024075, R01HS025164, R01HS025402, R03HS025517); and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R56HL130496, R01HL131535), National Science Foundation, and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute to develop a clinical data research network. Ross has received research support through Yale University from Johnson & Johnson to develop methods of clinical trial data sharing; Medtronic and the FDA to develop methods for postmarket surveillance of medical devices (U01FD004585); the FDA to establish Yale-Mayo Clinic Center for Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation program (U01FD005938); the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association to better understand medical technology evaluation; the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services to develop and maintain performance measures that are used for public reporting (HHSM-500-2013-13018I); the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01HS022882); the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the NIH (R01HS025164); and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation to establish the Good Pharma Scorecard at Bioethics International and the Collaboration on Research Integrity and Transparency at Yale. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Fixed-combination Bimatoprost/Brimonidine/Timolol in Glaucoma: A Randomized, Masked, Controlled, Phase III Study Conducted in Brazil☆

PURPOSE

Many patients with open-angle glaucoma eventually require >2 medications to lower their intraocular pressure (IOP). Fixed-combination ophthalmic solutions can be advantageous in patients who require multiple medications, but the number of fixed combinations combining 3 complementary IOP-lowering agents remains limited. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of a triple fixed combination (TFC) of bimatoprost 0.01%/brimonidine 0.15%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT), compared with a dual fixed combination (DFC) of brimonidine 0.2%/timolol 0.5%.

METHODS

Patients with a baseline IOP of 23-34 mm Hg in both eyes and no history of IOP-lowering procedures were eligible for participation in this multicenter, double-masked, randomized, Phase III study. After washout of previous treatment (if applicable), patients were randomized to receive TFC or DFC twice daily in each eye for 3 months. The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline in mean IOP in the worse eye at week 12 in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population. TFC was superior to DFC if the treatment difference (TFC - DFC) favored TFC at week 12 (P ≤ 0.05; 2-sample t test). Secondary and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Safety, including adverse events, was assessed at all visits.

FINDINGS

The mITT/safety population included 185 patients (TFC, n = 90; DFC, n = 95). TFC superiority was demonstrated at all postbaseline visits (all, P < 0.001) through week 12 (week 12 treatment difference: ─2.17 mm Hg; 95% CI, ─3.12 to ─1.22). While treatment-related conjunctival hyperemia was more frequent with TFC than with DFC (47.8% vs 23.2%; P < 0.001), consistent with the additional presence of bimatoprost in TFC, most cases were mild and the numbers of patient discontinuations at week 12 were similar between the TFC and DFC groups (11 [12.2%] vs 7 [7.4%] patients; P = 0.266). No unexpected adverse events were reported.

IMPLICATIONS

Compared with DFC, TFC provided superior IOP lowering throughout the primary efficacy period. An acceptable tolerability profile was observed through 12 months of use of TFC, offering an effective therapeutic option in patients with POAG or OHT who require multiple medications to control their IOP. Additional studies are required for the assessment of the long-term effects of TFC. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01217606.

Efficacy and Safety of Bimatoprost 0.01% for the Treatment of Eyebrow Hypotrichosis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Vehicle-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Eyebrow hypotrichosis is an important dermatological problem. However, there is no standard treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy and safety of bimatoprost 0.01% for the treatment of eyebrow hypotrichosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Although bimatoprost 0.03% has been studied previously, this is the first study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bimatoprost 0.01% for the treatment of eyebrow hypotrichosis. A randomized, double-blinded, vehicle-controlled trial was conducted in 40 patients. All patients were randomized to receive bimatoprost 0.01% or placebo vehicle, once daily, for 6 months. The primary outcome was improvement in eyebrow density and diameter. Additional outcomes were the improvement in clinical assessments and safety evaluation.

RESULTS

Compared to the vehicle group, bimatoprost 0.01% significantly increased mean eyebrow hair density, eyebrow hair diameter, and clinical assessments (p < .001) in the drug group. Patients' satisfaction score was higher for the drug group than the vehicle group (p < .05). Adverse effects of the treatment were minimal and similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Bimatoprost 0.01% was found to be superior to a placebo for eyebrow enhancement. Bimatoprost 0.01% can be considered effective, safe, and well-tolerated for the treatment of eyebrow hypotrichosis.

Prospective randomized clinical trial on the effects of latanoprost, travoprost and bimatoprost on latanoprost non-responders

PURPOSE

To determine whether a patient who is non-responder to latanoprost after one month of use should continue using latanoprost or switch to either bimatoprost or travoprost.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective randomized clinical trial. We recruited new patients who were felt to require intraocular pressure reduction. Patients who had≤20% intraocular pressure reduction after one month of latanoprost treatment were randomly assigned to another month of treatment with latanoprost or a switch to bimatoprost or travoprost for an additional month.

RESULTS

Overall, 83 non-responders to latanoprost after one month of treatment were included in the study. Before latanoprost treatment, the mean intraocular pressure was 23.7±4.7mmHg. At randomization on latanoprost, mean intraocular pressure was 21.5±4.5mmHg. One month after the switch of medication, the mean reduction in intraocular pressure was not significantly different between the groups (P=0.148) and was -0.9mmHg, -2.10mmHg and -2.5mmHg, for latanoprost, bimatoprost and travoprost respectively. One month after randomization, 32 (38.5%) of the patients had become responders, with IOP reduction>20%. Of those patients, 9 (31%) were using latanoprost, 13 (41.9%) bimatoprost and 10 (43.5%) travoprost. The number of new responders was similar between the three groups (P=0.584).

CONCLUSION

There is no added benefit of switching latanoprost to another topical prostaglandin for patients who are initially non-responders. Regression towards the mean and the Hawthorne effect are probably important factors explaining the additional IOP reduction obtained after randomization and explain the result of most switch studies.

Ocular pharmacokinetics and tolerability of bimatoprost ophthalmic solutions administered once or twice daily in rabbits, and clinical dosing implications

Purpose

Fixed-combination medications can benefit patients requiring multiple agents to lower their intraocular pressure (IOP), but combining agents with complementary mechanisms of action is challenging if their dosing frequency differs. This study compares in vivo pharmacokinetic and ocular tolerability of bimatoprost 0.01% ophthalmic solutions dosed once or twice daily. Reports of twice-daily dosing in glaucoma patients are also reviewed.

Methods

New Zealand White rabbits were administered bimatoprost 0.01% monotherapy or fixed-combination bimatoprost 0.01%/brimonidine 0.1%, once or twice daily in both eyes for 4 days. Ocular tissues were harvested and analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. The pharmacokinetic parameters calculated included maximum observed concentration, time to maximum concentration, and area under the concentration-time curve.

Results

Due to extensive metabolism, bimatoprost concentration was below the quantitation limit by 1 hour post-dose in all samples. Bimatoprost acid exposure, however, could be measured up to 6–8 hours post-dose and was similar in the aqueous humor and iris-ciliary body (pharmacological site of action) of animals treated once or twice daily with either bimatoprost 0.01% or fixed-combination bimatoprost 0.01%/brimonidine 0.1%. Increasing dosage frequency in rabbits did not raise the incidence of drug-related conjunctival hyperemia (most common adverse event associated with bimatoprost use in humans), suggesting comparable ocular tolerability of the once- and twice-daily regimens for each formulation.

Conclusion

Bimatoprost 0.01% administered once or twice daily as monotherapy and in fixed-combination with brimonidine 0.1% in rabbits show similar pharmacokinetic profiles of bimatoprost acid, especially in the iris-ciliary body. Key findings from previous clinical studies suggest that by varying the concentration of benzalkonium chloride (a preservative with corneal penetration-enhancing properties), formulations of bimatoprost 0.01% can be administered once or twice daily. These findings support development of bimatoprost 0.01%-based fixed-dose combination therapies administered twice daily for patients who require multiple adjunctive medications to control their IOP.

Evaluating intraocular pressure-lowering solutions for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma: comparison between bimatoprost 0.03% and bimatoprost 0.01% - an observational switch study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of bimatoprost 0.01% solution in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), who were switched from bimatoprost 0.03% solution, compared to patients with POAG who continued on bimatoprost 0.03% solution.

METHODS

A retrospective review evaluated 35 patients (35 right eyes [OD], 34 left eyes [OS]) who remained on bimatoprost 0.03% and 30 patients (27 OD, 30 OS) who were switched to bimatoprost 0.01% during the period January 8, 2010 to December 26, 2012. Mean IOP was measured 6 and 3 months before the switch, at switch, and 3, 6, and 12 months after the switch. Hyperemia scores were recorded before and after the switch and were compared to a picture scale.

RESULTS

Mean IOP in the group that switched was 16.96±5.03 mmHg in OD and 17.67±5.33 mmHg in OS at baseline. Mean IOP postswitch to bimatoprost 0.01% solution was 17.60±4.34 mmHg in OD and 17.00±3.37 mmHg in OS. IOP was not significantly reduced in either OD or OS postswitch to bimatoprost 0.01% (P₁=0.5 OD, P₂=0.2 OS). The hyperemia scores improved remarkably when bimatoprost 0.03% solution was switched to bimatoprost 0.01% solution (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first switch study evaluating the hypotensive efficacy and tolerability of bimatoprost in a group of patients with open-angle glaucoma. In this study comparing bimatoprost 0.03% and 0.01% solution, we found improved tolerability postswitch to 0.01% from 0.03% bimatoprost, similar efficacy between the two concentrations before and after switch in the same patient population, and similar IOPs comparable to nonswitch bimatoprost 0.03% solution.

Patient considerations in ocular hypertension: role of bimatoprost ophthalmic solution

Glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. The reduction of intraocular pressure has been well established as an effective treatment to prevent both the development and the progression of all forms of glaucoma. Bimatoprost 0.03% ophthalmic solution, introduced in 2001, is a synthetic prostamide with the unique mechanism of improving both uveoscleral and trabecular outflow. Comparative studies with other pharmacotherapies have shown favorable results for bimatoprost as a potent ocular hypotensive agent that is generally well tolerated. Common side effects include conjunctival hyperemia, eyelash growth, iris pigmentation and periorbital changes. Hyperemia rates were reduced following the introduction of bimatoprost 0.01%. Bimatoprost should be used with caution in those with higher risk of developing ocular inflammation and macular edema. However, the perceived risk of bimatoprost in these patient populations is likely greater than the actual risk observed in practice. Bimatoprost is currently in the center of several clinical trials including its use for dermatologic applications and sustained-release therapies for the treatment of ocular hypertension and glaucoma.

Prospective, non-interventional, multicenter study of the intraocular pressure-lowering effects of prostaglandin analog/prostamide-containing therapies in previously treated patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy, tolerability, safety, and usage patterns of prostaglandin analog/prostamide (PGA/P)-containing topical ocular hypotensives in ocular hypertension (OHT) and primary open-angle glaucoma in the Turkish clinical setting.

METHODS

This non-interventional, multicenter study enrolled previously treated patients who failed to achieve target IOP (or experienced unacceptable adverse events [AEs]) and were prescribed a PGA/P-containing IOP-lowering agent. Treatment was initiated at baseline (V1), and patients returned at weeks 4-6 (V2) and 8-12 (V3). The primary efficacy measure was the change in IOP from baseline at V3 in each eye. The secondary measures were physician's assessment of IOP-lowering efficacy, patients (%) reaching target IOP determined at V1, hyperemia score, physician and patient assessment of study treatment tolerability at V3, and AE frequency/severity. A subgroup analysis of patients receiving the most common study treatment was conducted. All analyses were performed using the safety population (patients who received one or more doses and had any data available).

RESULTS

Of 358 enrolled patients, 60.6% had primary open-angle glaucoma, 29.9% had secondary open-angle glaucoma (protocol amendment), and 13.1% had OHT; 13 patients had multiple diagnoses. At V3, the mean IOP change from baseline was ≥-4.2 mmHg (≥21.1%). IOP met or was lower than the target in 81.7% of patients, 95% exhibited none to mild conjunctival hyperemia (most common AE), and tolerability was rated good/very good by >91.1% of patients and physicians. The results were similar in patients who received the most common study treatment, bimatoprost 0.03%/timolol 0.5% (bim/tim; n=310).

CONCLUSION

PGA/P-containing medications, including bim/tim, significantly reduced IOP in previously treated patients with open-angle glaucoma or OHT; most reached their target IOP or an IOP even lower than their target and reported good/very good tolerability. PGA/P-containing medications such as bim/tim should be considered as a safe, effective therapeutic option for Turkish patients who exhibit poor response, tolerance, or adherence to their previous therapy.

Bimatoprost Sustained-Release Implants for Glaucoma Therapy: 6-Month Results From a Phase I/II Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of a biodegradable bimatoprost sustained-release implant (Bimatoprost SR).

DESIGN

Phase I/II, prospective, 24-month, dose-ranging, paired-eye controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

At baseline following washout, open-angle glaucoma patients (n = 75) were administered Bimatoprost SR (6 μg, 10 μg, 15 μg, or 20 μg) intracamerally in the study eye; the fellow eye began topical bimatoprost 0.03% once daily. Rescue topical IOP-lowering medication or a single repeat treatment with implant was allowed. The primary endpoint was IOP change from baseline. The main safety measure was adverse events. Results through month 6 are reported.

RESULTS

Bimatoprost SR provided rapid, sustained IOP lowering. Overall mean IOP reduction from baseline through week 16 in study eyes was 7.2, 7.4, 8.1, and 9.5 mm Hg with the 6-μg, 10-μg, 15-μg, and 20-μg dose strengths of implant, respectively, vs 8.4 mm Hg in topical bimatoprost-treated pooled fellow eyes (data censored at rescue/retreatment). Rescue/retreatment was not required in 91% and 71% of study eyes up to week 16 and month 6, respectively. Adverse events in study eyes usually occurred within 2 days after the injection procedure and were transient. Conjunctival hyperemia with onset later than 2 days after the injection procedure was more common with topical bimatoprost than Bimatoprost SR (17.3% vs 6.7% of eyes).

CONCLUSIONS

Bimatoprost SR demonstrated favorable efficacy and safety through 6 months. All dose strengths were comparable to topical bimatoprost in overall IOP reduction through week 16. A single administration controlled IOP in the majority of patients for up to 6 months.

Tolerability and efficacy of bimatoprost 0.01 % in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension evaluated in the Taiwanese clinical setting: the Asia Pacific Patterns from Early Access of Lumigan 0.01 % (APPEAL Taiwan) study

BACKGROUND

In randomized, controlled trials of open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT), bimatoprost 0.01 % improved tolerability while retaining the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of bimatoprost 0.03 %. Given geographic/racial differences in glaucoma presentation, the APPEAL study assessed the occurrence and severity of hyperemia produced by bimatoprost 0.01 %, and its efficacy, in the Taiwanese clinical setting.

METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, observational study, treatment-naïve and previously treated patients with OHT or OAG received once-daily bimatoprost 0.01 % for 12 weeks. Hyperemia (primary endpoint) was graded at baseline, week 6, and week 12 using a photonumeric scale (0, +0.5, +1, +2, +3), grouped (≤ +1, none to mild; ≥ +2, moderate to severe), and reported as unchanged from baseline, improved, or worsened. IOP assessments followed the same schedule. Supplemental efficacy analyses were conducted based on previous therapies.

RESULTS

The intent-to-treat population (N = 312) included treatment-naïve (13.5 %) and previously treated (86.5 %) patients; mean age was 53.3 years. At baseline, 46.3 % of previously treated patients were receiving prostaglandin analog (PGA) monotherapy. At week 12, 91.2 %, 5.9 %, and 2.9 % of treatment-naïve patients exhibited unchanged, worsened, and improved hyperemia from baseline, respectively; 77.9 %, 12.9 %, and 9.2 % of previously treated patients showed no change, worsening, and improvement, respectively. There were no statistically significant shifts in hyperemia severity in either group, or in subgroups based on previous use of any PGA, any non-PGA, latanoprost, or travoprost monotherapies. In treatment-naïve patients, mean IOP reduction from baseline (18.0 ± 3.8 mm Hg) was 3.6 mm Hg at week 12 (P < 0.0001); 83.3 % had baseline IOP ≤ 21 mm Hg. In previously treated patients, mean additional IOP reduction from baseline (17.8 ± 3.9 mm Hg) was 2.6 mm Hg (P < 0.0001); similar results were observed in patient subgroups based on previous therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Taiwanese clinical setting, bimatoprost 0.01 % provided significant IOP lowering in treatment-naïve patients (regardless of baseline IOP) and previously treated patients (even those with relatively low IOP on other therapies), while causing no significant changes in hyperemia from baseline.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01814761 . Registered 18 March 2013.

A combined analysis of four observational studies evaluating the intraocular pressure-lowering ability and tolerability of bimatoprost 0.01% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

Objective

Combine and evaluate data from four clinical practice studies investigating the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering ability, tolerability of and patient adherence to bimatoprost 0.01% therapy in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Methods

Data were combined from four multicenter, prospective, observational studies. Patients (n=2,593) were recruited from 328 sites in Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Assessments were at study entry (baseline) and after 10–14 weeks.

Results

Bimatoprost 0.01% lowered mean IOP by 5.0 mmHg from baseline to final visit (P<0.0001). Individual IOP goals were achieved in 75.5% of patients. Results were similar in right and left eyes; right-eye data are presented here for brevity. The greatest mean IOP reduction was 6.7±4.7 mmHg (28.8% reduction from baseline to final visit, P<0.0001) in treatment-naïve patients. Switching to bimatoprost 0.01% monotherapy from previous monotherapy reduced mean IOP by a further 3.2±3.6 mmHg (17.2%, P<0.0001). Switching to bimatoprost 0.01% from previous prostaglandin monotherapy reduced mean IOP by 2.9±3.5 mmHg (15.5%), including by 3.1±3.4 mmHg (15.8%) and 3.3±4.1 mmHg (16.9%) for previous latanoprost and travoprost treatment, respectively (all P<0.0001). IOP reduction in patients previously treated with a fixed combination was 2.7±4.0 mmHg (14.2%, P<0.0001). The most commonly reported adverse events were conjunctival hyperemia (5.2%) and eye irritation (4.7%). Tolerability was rated as “very good” or “good” by 90.1% of patients. Adherence was rated by physicians as “better than” or “equal to” previous treatment in 97.2% of patients.

Conclusion

The combined studies demonstrated in a clinical practice setting, bimatoprost 0.01% lowered IOP effectively in treatment-naïve and previously treated ocular hypertension and primary open-angle glaucoma patients, and was associated with good tolerability and patient adherence over 12 weeks.

[Preservative-free glaucoma treatment : Selection of the correct treatment in 1 min]

BACKGROUND

The presence of preservatives in topical glaucoma treatments may impact ocular surface function and structure. For treatment to be effective, side effects need to be minimized, in order to promote compliance and allow continuation of therapy. Therefore, in daily clinical practice, it needs to be decided on an individual basis whether a preservative-free treatment is required.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop a questionnaire which helps to quickly and easily identify patients who require preservative-free treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was prepared to collect relevant clinical findings needed to make a therapeutic decision (preservative-free required? Yes/No). Moreover, a rating scheme was developed to enable efficient final assessment of the collected data. To check their practicability in daily clinical practice, both instruments were tested in 11 ophthalmological centers in Germany.

RESULTS

The questionnaire and rating scheme were easy to use, integrated efficiently into everyday routine, and performed in about 1 min. Data of 1150 glaucoma patients were collected and preservative-free eyedrops recommended for 586 (51 %). Parameters most frequently associated with such a recommendation were a reduced tear film break-up time of < 10 s (87.5 %) or marked corneal staining (65.5 %).

CONCLUSION

The presented approach helps to decide within 1 min, in daily clinical practice, whether preservative-free glaucoma threatment should be recommended. Individualized therapy decisions can thus be made, allowing goal-oriented use of preservative-free antiglaucomatosa. This might help to promote compliance and lead to reduced progression of glaucoma.

Effects of Topical Bimatoprost 0.01% and Timolol 0.5% on Circadian IOP, Blood Pressure and Perfusion Pressure in Patients with Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension: A Randomized, Double Masked, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Purpose

To compare the 24-hour (24h) effects on intraocular pressure (IOP) and cardiovascular parameters of timolol 0.5% and bimatoprost 0.01% in open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertensive subjects.

Methods

In this prospective, randomized, double masked, crossover, clinical trial, after washout from previous medications enrolled subjects underwent 24h IOP, blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) measurements and were randomized to either topical bimatoprost 0.01% at night plus placebo in the morning or to timolol 0.5% bid. After 8 weeks of treatment a second 24h assessment of IOP, BP and HR was performed and then subjects switched to the opposite treatment for additional 8 weeks when a third 24h assessment was performed. The primary endpoint was the comparison of the mean 24h IOP after each treatment. Secondary endpoints included the comparisons of IOP at each timepoint of the 24h curve and the comparison of BP, HR, ocular perfusion pressure and tolerability.

Results

Mean untreated 24h IOP was 20.3 mmHg (95%CI 19.0 to 21.6). Mean 24h IOP was significantly lower after 8 weeks of treatment with bimatoprost 0.01% than after 8 weeks of treatment with timolol 0.5% bid (15.7 vs 16.8 mmHg, p = 0.0003). Mean IOP during the day hours was significantly reduced from baseline by both drugs while mean IOP during the night hours was reduced by -2.3 mmHg (p = 0.0002) by bimatoprost 0.01% plus placebo and by -1.1 mmHg by timolol 0.5% bid (p = 0.06). Timolol 0.5% significantly reduced the mean 24h systolic BP from baseline, the diastolic BP during the day hours, the HR during the night hours, and the mean 24h systolic ocular perfusion pressure.

Conclusion

Both Bimatoprost 0.01% and Timolol 0.5% are effective in reducing the mean 24h IOP from an untreated baseline but Bimatoprost 0.01% is more effective than timolol 0.5% throughout the 24h. Timolol 0.5% effect on IOP is reduced during the night hours and is associated with reduced BP, HR and ocular perfusion pressure.

Trial Registration

EU Clinical Trial Register and EudraCT# 2010-024272-26

Efficacy of a preservative-free formulation of fixed-combination bimatoprost and timolol (Ganfort PF) in treatment-naïve patients vs previously treated patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate, using subgroup analysis, the effect of treatment status on the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of a preservative-free formulation of fixed-combination bimatoprost 0.03%/timolol 0.5% (FCBT PF).

METHODS

A primary, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, 12-week study compared the efficacy and safety of FCBT PF with preserved FCBT (Ganfort(®)) in 561 patients diagnosed with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. For this analysis, eligible patients were treatment-naïve or had inadequate IOP lowering and underwent a washout of previous treatment. IOP (8 am, 10 am, and 4 pm) was measured at baseline and weeks 2, 6, and 12. Subgroup analysis of the FCBT PF arm assessed changes in average eye IOP from baseline in treatment-naïve vs previously treated patients. To evaluate the effect of treatment status at baseline (treatment-naïve vs previously treated) on IOP reduction in the FCBT PF treatment group, an analysis of covariance model was used with treatment status and investigator as fixed effects, and baseline average eye IOP, age, glaucoma diagnosis, and baseline average eye corneal thickness as covariates. P-values and the 95% confidence intervals were determined using the model.

RESULTS

In the FCBT PF arm, IOP mean changes from baseline ranged from -8.7 mmHg to -9.8 mmHg in treatment-naïve patients (N=50), compared with -7.3 mmHg to -8.5 mmHg in previously treated patients (N=228). Baseline IOP, age, glaucoma diagnosis, and corneal thickness significantly affected IOP reduction in the FCBT PF group. Adjusting for these covariates, FCBT PF had a greater IOP-lowering effect (0.8-1.7 mmHg) in treatment-naïve patients than previously treated patients, which was statistically significant (P≤0.05) at seven of nine time points.

CONCLUSION

In this subgroup analysis, FCBT PF reduced IOP more effectively in treatment-naïve than in previously treated patients possibly due, in part, to altered responsiveness or tachyphylaxis that has been associated with prior ocular hypotensive agent treatment.

Bimatoprost 0.01 % for previously treated patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension in the Korean clinical setting

PURPOSE

To evaluate the occurrence of hyperemia with, and efficacy of, bimatoprost 0.01 % for patients in Korea previously treated for open-angle glaucoma (OAG; including normal tension glaucoma) or ocular hypertension (OHT).

METHODS

In this multicenter, observational study (Asia Pacific Patterns from Early Access of Lumigan 0.01 % in Korea; APPEAL Korea), patients with unachieved target intraocular pressure (IOP) despite previous treatment received bimatoprost 0.01 % daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was incidence of hyperemia and its severity, graded using the standard 5-point photographic scale and grouped as "none to mild" and "moderate to severe". Hyperemia shifts were reported. IOP and adverse events (AEs) were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 800 patients (intent-to-treat/safety population), 248 were switched from previous treatment to bimatoprost 0.01 % monotherapy. Hyperemia shifts from baseline at weeks 6 and 12 were unchanged (84.8, 89.8 %), improved (4.4, 4.8 %), or worsened (10.8, 5.4 %), respectively. The shift was significant at week 6 (P < 0.0001). Hyperemia did not worsen significantly in patients previously receiving a prostaglandin analog or prostamide (PGA/PSD). Baseline mean IOP ± SD was 17.0 ± 5.7 mmHg, decreasing to 14.6 ± 3.8 mmHg (P < 0.0001) after 6 weeks, and to 14.7 ± 3.6 mmHg (P < 0.0001) after 12 weeks. Patients switched from PGA or PSD (excluding bimatoprost 0.03 %) to bimatoprost 0.01 % experienced significant IOP reductions from baseline. Treatment-related ocular AEs were reported by 37 patients, the most common being hyperemia (7.3 %).

CONCLUSIONS

This subanalysis of the APPEAL Korea study supports use of bimatoprost 0.01 % for previously treated patients with OAG (including normal tension glaucoma) or OHT who did not reach target IOP or were intolerant of previous treatment.

New prostaglandin analog formulation for glaucoma treatment containing cyclodextrins for improved stability, solubility and ocular tolerance

Latanoprost is a practically insoluble prostaglandin F2α analog considered a first-line agent for glaucoma treatment. From a pharmaceutical point of view, latanoprost is challenging to be formulated as an eye drop due to its poor water solubility and the presence of an ester bond that needs to be cleaved in vivo but maintained unchanged during storage. Cyclodextrins (CDs) are known to form complexes with hydrophobic drugs, influencing their stability, availability, solubility, and tolerance in a non-predictable manner. A variety of CDs including native α, β, and γCDs as well as substituted hydroxypropylβCD, hydroxypropylγCD, dimethylβCD, sulphatedβCD, and propylaminoβCD were screened and the most appropriate CD for the formulation of latanoprost for an ocular topical application was selected. Among the tested CDs, propylaminoβCD had the best trade-off between latanoprost stability and availability, which was confirmed by its complex constant value of 3129M(-1). Phase-solubility and NMR investigations demonstrated that the propylaminoβCD effectively formed a complex involving the ester group of latanoprost providing protection to its ester bond, while ensuring proper latanoprost solubilization. Furthermore, in vivo experiments demonstrated that the latanoprost-propylaminoβCD formulation led to lower ocular irritation than the commercial latanoprost formulation used as a reference. The latanoprost-propylaminoβCD formulation was demonstrated to successfully address the main stability, solubility, and tolerance limitations of topical ocular latanoprost therapy for glaucoma.

Bimatoprost 0.01% in treatment-naïve patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: an observational study in the Korean clinical setting

Background

This study evaluates the efficacy and tolerability (ie, occurrence and severity of hyperemia) of bimatoprost 0.01% in treatment-naïve patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension in the Korean clinical setting.

Methods

In this multicenter, open-label, observational study, treatment-naïve patients with OAG, including patients with normal-tension glaucoma (NTG, defined as IOP ≤21 mm Hg), or ocular hypertension received bimatoprost 0.01% once daily. Hyperemia was assessed at baseline and weeks 6 and 12, graded by a masked evaluator using a photonumeric scale (0, +0.5, +1, +2, +3), and grouped as (0 to +1) and (+2 to +3). Shifts between groupings were reported as no change, improved ([+2 to +3] to [0 to +1]), or worsened ([0 to +1] to [+2 to +3]). Other adverse events were monitored. Mean IOP changes from baseline at weeks 6 and 12 were reported. Supplemental analyses were conducted for IOPs >21 versus ≤21 mm Hg.

Results

Of 295 treatment-naïve patients included in the intent-to-treat/safety population, 73 (24.7%) had baseline IOP >21 mm Hg (mean, 25.7 ± 5.0 mm Hg) and 222 (75.3%) had baseline IOP ≤21 mm Hg (mean, 16.3 ± 3.0 mm Hg); 96.3% had hyperemia graded none (36.3%) to mild (17.3%). At week 12, hyperemia was graded none to mild in 83.7% (n = 220). Worsening occurred in 12.3% of patients by week 6 and 12.7% by week 12. Small improvements occurred in 0.8% and 0.5% of patients at weeks 6 and 12, respectively. Hyperemia scores were generally low and the majority of patients had no change in severity during the study. Mean IOP at weeks 6 and 12 was reduced to 16.4 ± 4.0 mm Hg (-34.5%; P < 0.0001) and 16.7 ± 3.9 mm Hg (-32.0%; P < 0.001) in the baseline-IOP >21 mm Hg group versus 13.3 ± 2.6 mm Hg (-17.8%; P < 0.001) and 13.7 ± 2.8 mm Hg (-15.9%; P < 0.001) in the baseline-IOP ≤21 mm Hg group, respectively.

Conclusions

In treatment-naïve patients, bimatoprost 0.01% induced low shifts in worsening of hyperemia and significant reductions in IOP, regardless of baseline IOP.

Trial registration

Clinical trial registration number: NCT01594970

The impact of timolol maleate on the ocular tolerability of fixed-combination glaucoma therapies

Glaucomatous optic atrophy is the second most common cause of blindness worldwide, and lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) is the only proven method to slow or stop the progression of the disease. Approximately 40% of patients with elevated IOP will require more than one medication to obtain a modest 20% reduction in IOP, and as a result, some patients may require two medications, provided in either two separate bottles or in one bottle with the use of fixed-combination therapies. Each therapy has its own unique safety and efficacy profile. Topical beta-blockers have a particularly favorable ocular-tolerability profile, and several studies of fixed-combination medications containing the beta-blocker timolol maleate have shown a lower prevalence of some ocular adverse events for the fixed-combination therapy compared to the non-beta-blocker individual component. In this review, we examined clinical data pertaining to the ocular surface tolerability of fixed-combination medications containing timolol maleate in comparison to the individual components. In particular, preference was given to prospective, randomized, multicenter trials of 3 months in duration or longer that compared a fixed-combination therapy to monotherapy with the individual components. A review of the literature revealed that some fixed-combination therapies can provide a reduced risk of common side effects compared to their individual components, with conjunctival hyperemia and ocular allergy being less frequent in some timolol-containing fixed-combination therapies. This effect appears to be most significant for latanoprost 0.005%, bimatoprost 0.03%, and brimonidine 0.2%.

Late-day intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy and tolerability of travoprost 0.004% versus bimatoprost 0.01% in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Medications to control intraocular pressure (IOP) are frequently preserved using benzalkonium chloride (BAK), which can negatively affect the ocular surface. Data are needed to assess efficacy and safety of prostaglandin drugs preserved with and without BAK. The present study compared the efficacy and safety of BAK-free travoprost 0.004% (TRAV) and BAK 0.02%-preserved bimatoprost 0.01% (BIM) during late-day time points in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

METHODS

This was a 12-week, phase 4, randomized, investigator-masked, crossover study. 84 patients with IOP ≥24 and <36 mmHg were randomized 1:1 to receive once-daily TRAV or BIM for 6 weeks followed by an additional 6-week crossover period. IOP was measured at the end of each treatment period at 4, 6, and 8 pm. TRAV was considered noninferior to BIM if the upper limit of the 95% CI of the between-group difference in mean IOP was ≤1.5 mmHg. Adverse events were assessed throughout the study.

RESULTS

One patient discontinued due to allergic conjunctivitis, and 2 patients with missing data were excluded; 81 patients were included in the per-protocol population (mean ± SD age, 58.3 ± 11.4 years; TRAV/BIM, n = 41; BIM/TRAV, n = 40). After 6 weeks, mean IOP with TRAV (17.4 ± 2.7 mmHg; change from baseline, -6.0 mmHg) was similar to BIM (17.2 ± 2.6 mmHg; change from baseline, -6.3 mmHg); the between-group difference was 0.22 mmHg (95% CI, -0.22 to 0.67). Thus, noninferiority of TRAV versus BIM was demonstrated. Mean IOP at each time point and mean and percentage IOP change from baseline were not significantly different between treatments. All treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate. The incidences of mild ocular hyperemia with TRAV and BIM were 31% and 39%, respectively; moderate hyperemia was observed in 2% of patients receiving BIM.

CONCLUSION

Late-day IOP-lowering efficacy of BAK-free TRAV was noninferior to that of BAK 0.02%-preserved BIM; both reduced baseline IOP by 25%. Both treatments were well tolerated, although a higher incidence of moderate ocular hyperemia was observed with BIM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01464424; registered November 1, 2011.

Comparative Efficacy and Tolerability of Topical Prostaglandin Analogues for Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension

Objective: To systematically review the efficacy and tolerability of 4 prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) as first-line monotherapies for intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering in adult patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Data Sources: A literature search was performed in PubMed (1965-June 2013) and the Cochrane Library (1980-June 2013) using the search terms ocular hypertension, open-angle glaucoma, prostaglandin analogues, bimatoprost, latanoprost, tafluprost, and travoprost. Additional studies were searched from the reference lists of identified publications. Study Selection and Data Extraction: In all, 32 randomized controlled trials comparing between PGAs (bimatoprost 0.03%, latanoprost 0.005%, tafluprost 0.0015%, and travoprost 0.004%) or PGA with timolol were selected. Data Synthesis: A network meta-analysis was conducted. Using timolol as reference, the relative risks (RRs) of achieving treatment success, defined as the proportion of patients achieving at least 30% IOP reduction, with 95% CIs, were as follows: bimatoprost, 1.59 (1.28-1.98); latanoprost, 1.32 (1.00-1.74); travoprost, 1.33 (1.03-1.72); and tafluprost, 1.10 (0.85-1.42). The mean IOP reductions after 1 month were 1.98 (1.50-2.47), 1.01 (0.55-1.46), 1.08 (0.59-1.57), and 0.46 (−0.41 to 1.33) mm Hg, respectively, and the results were sustained at 3 months. Bimatoprost was associated with the highest risk of developing hyperemia, whereas latanoprost had the lowest risk, with RRs (95% CI) of 4.66 (3.49-6.23) and 2.30 (1.76-3.00), respectively. Conclusions: Bimatoprost achieved the highest efficacy in terms of IOP reduction, whereas latanoprost had the most favorable tolerability profile. This review serves to guide selection of the optimal PGA agent for individual patient care in clinical practice.

An observational study of bimatoprost 0.01% in patients on prior intraocular pressure-lowering therapy: the Canadian Lumigan(®) RC Early Analysis Review (CLEAR) trial

Purpose

To evaluate the ocular hyperemia and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of bimatoprost 0.01% in subjects with elevated IOP due to primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT) in a real-world clinical setting.

Subjects and methods

This open-label, 12-week, observational study was conducted at 67 centers in Canada. Subjects with elevated IOP due to POAG or OHT instilled bimatoprost 0.01% as monotherapy once daily. Ocular hyperemia was graded by the investigator at baseline, week 6, and week 12 using a standardized photographic 5-point grading scale. Change in IOP from baseline was also evaluated at these time points. This analysis includes the subgroup of 268 subjects who had been previously treated with latanoprost 0.005%, bimatoprost 0.03%, travoprost 0.004%, and travoprost 0.004% with SofZia™ or nonselective beta-adrenergic receptor blockers prior to the study.

Results

After 12 weeks of treatment with 0.01% bimatoprost, ocular hyperemia was graded as none-to-mild hyperemia (grades 0, +0.5, or +1) for 94.1% of subjects and as moderate-to-severe hyperemia (grades +2 or +3) for 5.9%. No statistically significant shifts in ocular hyperemia ratings were observed at week 12 for any of the prior IOP-lowering therapies except bimatoprost 0.03%, in which 20.8% of subjects experienced an improvement. The mean percentage change from baseline IOP at week 12 following the switch to bimatoprost 0.01% monotherapy ranged from −2.3%±17.3% to −26.3%±12.4%. Furthermore, the decreased mean percentage change from baseline IOP was statistically significant across all prior IOP-lowering medications, except for bimatoprost 0.03% at the 6- and 12-week visits and travoprost 0.004% at the 6-week visit.

Conclusion

This observational study demonstrates that bimatoprost 0.01% was well tolerated among POAG and OHT subjects who switched from prior IOP-lowering medication. Furthermore, a switch in ocular hypertensive treatment to bimatoprost 0.01% was associated with an additional 10%–15% reduction in IOP.

Patient adherence and persistence with topical ocular hypotensive therapy in real-world practice: a comparison of bimatoprost 0.01% and travoprost Z 0.004% ophthalmic solutions

BACKGROUND

Effective control of intraocular pressure is predicated upon patient compliance with pharmacotherapy. We compared patient adherence and persistence with two new ocular hypotensive formulations, using real-world utilization data.

METHODS

This observational cohort study employed pharmacy claims data from the Source(®) Lx (Wolters Kluwer Pharma Solutions) database. Patients with an initial (index) prescription for topical bimatoprost 0.01% or travoprost Z (April to June 2011) and no claim for ophthalmic prostaglandin or prostamide analogs within the previous 18 months were identified. Treatment adherence was expressed as proportion of days covered with study medication during the first 365 days after the index prescription. Treatment persistence with study medication was assessed over the first 12 months using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses, allowing a maximum 30-day gap for prescription refill. Treatment status was determined monthly over this period.

RESULTS

A total of 12,985 patients were assessed for treatment adherence, and 10,470 for treatment persistence. Adherence was better with bimatoprost 0.01% than with travoprost Z (mean proportion of days covered 0.540 versus [vs] 0.486, P<0.001), and more patients showed high adherence (proportion of days covered >0.80) with bimatoprost 0.01% than travoprost Z (29.1% vs 22.3%, P<0.001). Continuous 12-month persistence was higher with bimatoprost 0.01% than with travoprost Z (29.5% vs 24.2%, P<0.001). At month 12, more patients were on treatment with bimatoprost 0.01% than travoprost Z (48.8% vs 45.7%, P<0.01). Similar findings were demonstrated in cohorts of ocular hypotensive treatment-naïve patients, branded latanoprost switchers, and older patients (age ≥65 years), and after inclusion of patient characteristics as covariates.

CONCLUSION

For patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension, bimatoprost 0.01% offers compliance advantages over travoprost Z.

Bimatoprost 0.01% or 0.03% in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension previously treated with latanoprost: two randomized 12-week trials

Background

The 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.

Methods

Two 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.

Results

Latanoprost-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.

Conclusion

Many 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.

Intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy and safety of bimatoprost 0.03% therapy for primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension patients in China

BACKGROUND

To report the clinical outcomes in Chinese patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension treated with bimatoprost 0.03% therapy.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-three Chinese patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension who needed initial or additional intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering were recruited in this prospective, open-label, multicenter clinical study and were treated with bimatoprost 0.03%. Patients received bimatoprost 0.03% as initial, replacement or adjunctive IOP-lowering therapy, and follow-up visits were performed at week 1, and month 1 and 3 of the bimatoprost treatment. The efficacy outcome measure was the post-treatment IOP level. The safety outcome measures included the rate of medication-related symptoms, physical signs, reported adverse events, and the level of conjunctival hyperemia.

RESULTS

Among 240 patients who could be categorized by pre-existing therapies and the bimatoprost therapy regimen in the study, IOP values observed in all medication conditions showed significant IOP reduction at all study visits compared with baseline. At 3 months, 8.0 ± 3.7 mmHg (32.0%) reduction in IOP was observed in treatment-naive patients after bimatoprost monotherapy; in the patients previously on various therapy regimens, 1.9 ± 2.8 mmHg (9.5%) to 6.4 ± 6.1 mmHg (24.8%) additional IOP lowering was achieved after switching to bimatoprost monotherapy or bimatoprost combination therapy. The most common adverse event was conjunctival hyperemia, mainly of trace and mild intensity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that bimatoprost 0.03% was effective in lowering IOP with favorable safety in Chinese primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension patients.

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

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety of two commercially available formulations of bimatoprost eye drops: 0.03 and 0.01% ophthalmic solutions.

METHODS

This was a randomized, prospective, parallel-group, open-label, cohort study. A total of 60 glaucoma patients (60 eyes) under bimatoprost 0.03% monotherapy since at least 1 year were enrolled. Selected patients were randomized to receive a single drop of bimatoprost 0.01% (n=30) or bimatoprost 0.03% (n=30) ophthalmic solutions for 12 months. Statistical analysis was performed using paired t-test and repeated measures ANOVA test.

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 (P < 0.001) and 2.5 ± 2.0 (P < 0.001) at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups, respectively. Comparison between groups showed differences at both follow-up visits (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, 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 (P<0.001 at both follow-up visits). All functional parameters and conjunctival hyperemia improved in the bimatoprost 0.01% group at each follow-up visit (P < 0.05) and in comparison with bimatoprost 0.03% (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The 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.

A randomized, prospective study of bimatoprost 0.01% or travoprost/timolol in patients previously treated with latanoprost and timolol to reduce intraocular pressure

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of bimatoprost 0.01% with the fixed combination travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% in subjects with stable intraocular pressure (IOP) control on latanoprost and timolol.

METHODS

This was a randomized, prospective, investigator masked, crossover study comparing bimatoprost 0.01% with travoprost/timolol in 40 subjects diagnosed with primary open-angle glaucoma. Subjects were randomized to bimatoprost 0.01% qpm or travoprost/timolol qam and followed for 12 weeks, at which time they were crossed over to the alternate medication and followed for another 12 weeks. Intraocular pressure and hyperemia (rated on a standardized, 5-point photographic scale) were evaluated as change from baseline to 12 weeks following each therapy, and subject preference was elicited at the end of the study.

RESULTS

Both treatments were well tolerated and the majority of patients achieved effective IOP control relative to baseline. After 12 weeks of treatment, mean reductions from baseline IOP were -1.68 mmHg OD (right eye) and -1.58 mmHg OS (left eye) with bimatoprost and -0.45 mmHg OD and -0.53 mmHg OS with travoprost/timolol, although the differences between drugs were not statistically significant. Hyperemia scores were significantly higher with the fixed combination of travoprost/timolol than bimatoprost 0.01% as measured at 8 am (both P<0.01). Subject preference at the end of the study was more than 3 to 1 in favor of bimatoprost, with most citing greater tolerability.

CONCLUSION

Bimatoprost 0.01% and travoprost/timolol are both effective at reducing IOP in subjects with stable IOP control on latanoprost and timolol, but bimatoprost 0.01% is associated with less hyperemia.

Comparison of adherence and persistence with bimatoprost 0.01% versus bimatoprost 0.03% topical ophthalmic solutions

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient adherence and persistence with bimatoprost 0.01%, a new formulation that offers equivalent intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy to bimatoprost 0.03% and improved tolerability, with that of the original bimatoprost 0.03% formulation.

METHODS

Pharmacy claims from a longitudinal database of prescription and medical claims for >115 million patients were analyzed. Patients with an initial (index) prescription for bimatoprost 0.01% or 0.03% between April and June 2011, and with no claim for ophthalmic prostaglandin or prostamide analogs during the preceding 18 months, were identified. Treatment adherence was expressed as the proportion of days covered (PDC) with study medication over the first 365 days after the index prescription. Treatment persistence over the first 12 months following the index prescription was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses, assuming a 30 day grace period for prescription refill. Treatment status (on/off study medication) was determined monthly for 12 months post-index.

RESULTS

In total, 6150 patients were assessed for treatment adherence and 7660 for persistence. Adherence was significantly better with bimatoprost 0.01% than bimatoprost 0.03% (mean PDC 0.540 vs. 0.438; p < 0.001). Significantly more patients had high adherence (PDC > 0.80) with bimatoprost 0.01% than 0.03% (29.1% vs. 17.3%; p < 0.001). Persistence was also significantly better with bimatoprost 0.01%, with 29.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.3%, 30.8%) versus 18.3% (95% CI: 16.8%, 19.9%) of patients remaining on continuous treatment for 12 months (p < 0.001). At 12 months, significantly more patients were 'on treatment' (continuing/restarting treatment) with bimatoprost 0.01% than 0.03% (48.8% vs. 33.9%; p < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar findings in cohorts of ocular hypotensive treatment-naïve and elderly (≥65 years) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Bimatoprost 0.01% offers adherence and persistency advantages over bimatoprost 0.03% in patients requiring ocular hypotensive therapy. Study limitations included the observational design, lack of control for imbalances in patient characteristics, and assumption that prescription refill is synonymous with medication use.

An adherence based cost-consequence model comparing bimatoprost 0.01% to bimatoprost 0.03%

OBJECTIVES

Estimate the long-term direct medical costs and clinical consequences of improved adherence with bimatoprost 0.01% compared to bimatoprost 0.03% in the treatment of glaucoma.

METHODS

A cost-consequence model was constructed from the perspective of a US healthcare payer. The model structure included three adherence levels (high, moderate, low) and four mean deviation (MD) defined health states (mild, moderate, severe glaucoma, blindness) for each adherence level. Clinical efficacy in terms of IOP reduction was obtained from the randomized controlled trial comparing bimatoprost 0.01% with bimatoprost 0.03%. Medication adherence was based on observed 12 month rates from an analysis of a nationally representative pharmacy claims database. Patients with high, moderate and low adherence were assumed to receive 100%, 50% and 0% of the IOP reduction observed in the clinical trial, respectively. Each 1 mmHg reduction in IOP was assumed to result in a 10% reduction in the risk of glaucoma progression. Worse glaucoma severity health states were associated with higher medical resource costs. Outcome measures were total costs, proportion of patients who progress and who become blind, and years of blindness. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed on uncertain model parameters.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients progressing, becoming blind, and the time spent blind slightly favored bimatoprost 0.01%. Improved adherence with bimatoprost 0.01% led to higher costs in the first 2 years; however, starting in year 3 bimatoprost 0.01% became less costly compared to bimatoprost 0.03% with a total reduction in costs reaching US$3433 over a lifetime time horizon. Deterministic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that results were robust, with the majority of analyses favoring bimatoprost 0.01%. Application of 1 year adherence and efficacy over the long term are limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Modeling the effect of greater medication adherence with bimatoprost 0.01% compared with bimatoprost 0.03% suggests that differences may result in improved economic and patient outcomes.

Ocular pharmacokinetics of bimatoprost formulated in DuraSite compared to bimatoprost 0.03% ophthalmic solution in pigmented rabbit eyes

PURPOSE

To compare the aqueous humor (AH) and iris-ciliary body (ICB) concentration of bimatoprost in rabbit eyes treated with ISV-215 (0.03% bimatoprost formulated in DuraSite) with the marketed product bimatoprost 0.03% ophthalmic solution.

METHODS

The left eye of rabbits received a single topical instillation of either ISV-215 (n = 32 eyes) or bimatoprost 0.03% (n = 32 eyes). At predetermined time points, levels of bimatoprost and bimatoprost acid in the AH and the ICB were quantified by HPLC-MS/MS.

RESULTS

Both bimatoprost and bimatoprost acid were detected in the AH and the ICB within 15 minutes of dosing. Bimatoprost acid concentrations in both compartments were markedly higher than bimatoprost. There was a statistically significant (P < 0.01) increase in the concentration of the prodrug in the AH and its acid form in the ICB in animals treated with ISV-215 compared to bimatoprost 0.03%. In the ISV-215-treated rabbit eyes, the highest concentrations of bimatoprost and bimatoprost acid were in the ICB and AH, respectively, while in the bimatoprost 0.03%-treated eyes, no differences in the drug content of the selected ocular tissues were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Bimatoprost 0.03% formulated in DuraSite has superior ocular distribution and area under the curve compared to bimatoprost 0.03% in rabbit eyes. This improvement in the pharmacokinetic parameters of ISV-215 may provide us with a better platform to optimize a bimatoprost formulation that offers the same degree of efficacy in lowering intraocular pressure and improved therapeutic index in glaucomatous patients by lessening the ocular side effects associated with long-term use of topical prostaglandin F2α analogs.