Efficacy and safety of bimatoprost/timolol fixed combination in the treatment of glaucoma or ocular hypertension

How latanoprost changed glaucoma management

Glaucoma is currently considered one of the leading causes of severe visual impairment and blindness worldwide. Topical medical therapy represents the treatment of choice for many glaucoma patients. Introduction of latanoprost, 25 years ago, with an entirely new mechanism of action from that of the antiglaucoma drugs used up to that time was a very important milestone. Since then, due mainly to their efficacy, limited systemic side effects and once daily dosing, prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) have become as the first-choice treatment for primary open-angle glaucoma. PGAs are in general terms well tolerated, although they are associated with several mild to moderate ocular and periocular adverse events. Among them, conjunctival hyperemia, eyelash changes, eyelid pigmentation, iris pigmentation and hypertrichosis around the eyes are the most prevalent. The objective of this paper is to review the role of PGAs in the treatment of glaucoma over the 25 years since the launch of Latanoprost and their impact on clinical practice outcomes.

Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension with Preservative-Free Tafluprost/Timolol Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy: Results from the VISIONARY Study Population in Spain

Purpose: Data are presented from ophthalmology clinics in Spain participating in the VISIONARY study, examining the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of the preservative-free tafluprost (0.0015%) and timolol (0.5%) fixed-dose combination (PF tafluprost/timolol FC) in the treatment of OAG and OHT. Methods: An observational, multicenter prospective study examined treatment outcomes following a switch to PF tafluprost/timolol FC in adult OAG/OHT patients demonstrating insufficient response to beta-blocker or prostaglandin analog (PGA) monotherapy. Primary end point was mean change in intraocular pressure (IOP) from baseline at month 6. Changes in the severity of ocular signs and symptoms were also assessed. Results: Overall, 92 patients (51.1% female) were included. Mean (standard deviation) age was 68.3 (12.1) years. Mean IOP was reduced from 21.9 mmHg at baseline to 16.7 mmHg at month 6 (22.3% decrease; P < 0.0001). Significant IOP reductions were observed at weeks 4 and 12 (P < 0.0001). Baseline PGA and beta-blocker users demonstrated mean month 6 IOP reductions of 5.5 mmHg (23.5%; P < 0.001) and 3.5 mmHg (14.6%; P = 0.029), respectively. Severity of conjunctival hyperemia, dry eye, irritation, itching, foreign body sensation, and eye pain was significantly reduced. Three treatment-related adverse events were reported, all were nonserious and mild/moderate in severity. Conclusion: In real-world clinical practice, PF tafluprost/timolol FC treatment provided significant IOP reductions over 6 months and was well tolerated among OAG/OHT patients showing poor response to PGA or beta-blocker monotherapy. IOP-lowering efficacy and improvements in ocular signs and symptoms were evident from week 4 and maintained over the 6-month study period. Trial Registration: European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorisation Studies (EU PAS) register number EUPAS22204.

Fixed-combination topical anti-hypertensive ophthalmic agents

INTRODUCTION

Fixed-combination glaucoma medications have altered the paradigm of ocular hypertension and glaucoma treatment and are in widespread use today. A comprehensive review of fixed-combination medications will help educate and inform providers for optimal patient care.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors describe the composition, mechanism of action, efficacy, side effects, and safety profile of fixed-combination agents for the treatment of ocular hypertension and glaucoma as well as comparisons between the most frequently prescribed medications.

EXPERT OPINION

Fixed-combination therapeutics provide an effective and efficient means of lowering intraocular pressure with comparable side effects and outcomes to constituent parts with lower patient exposure to preservatives and improvement in compliance.

Fixed-combination treatments for intraocular hypertension in Chinese patients - focus on bimatoprost-timolol

Glaucoma is a common eye disease that can lead to irreversible vision loss if left untreated. The early diagnosis and treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma is challenging, and visual impairment in Chinese glaucoma patients is a serious concern. Most of these patients need more than one topical antiglaucoma agent to control their intraocular pressures (IOPs). In the People’s Republic of China, the daily cost of different glaucoma medication varies greatly, and the treatment habits differ throughout the country. Prostaglandin analogs (PGAs) are recommended as first-line monotherapy, because of their efficacy and low risk of systemic side effects. Fixed-combination drops, particularly PGA-based fixed combinations, have recently been developed and used in patients with progression or who have failed to achieve their target IOPs. Here, we reviewed the current literature on the use of bimatoprost-timolol fixed combination (BTFC) in the People’s Republic of China. BTFC has achieved good efficacy and tolerability in Chinese clinical trials. In addition, BTFC is more cost effective compared with other fixed combinations available in the People’s Republic of China. Fixed-combination drops may offer benefits, such as keeping the ocular surface healthy, convenience of administration, and improvement in long-term adherence and quality of life. Therefore, BTFC has great potential for the treatment of Chinese glaucoma patients. However, the long-term efficacy of BTFC, comparisons of BTFC with other fixed-combination drugs, and treatment adherence and persistence with treatment in Chinese patients are unknown and will require further study.

Efficacy and tolerability of fixed-combination bimatoprost/timolol versus fixed-combination dorzolamide/brimonidine/timolol in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a multicenter, prospective, crossover study

BACKGROUND

Fixed-combination ocular hypotensives have multiple advantages, but triple-therapy dorzolamide/brimonidine/timolol (dorz/brim/tim) is only available in Latin and South America, and information on its relative efficacy is limited. This study compares the efficacy and tolerability of fixed-combination bimatoprost/timolol (bim/tim) and dorz/brim/tim in Mexican patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

METHODS

In this investigator-masked, crossover study, patients with unmet target intraocular pressure (IOP) on once-daily bim/tim or twice-daily dorz/brim/tim received the opposite medication for 3 months before returning to their pre-baseline medication for 3 months. IOP was evaluated before and after morning instillation at months 2, 3, 5 and 6. Primary endpoints were mean IOP change and Ocular Surface Disease Index© (OSDI) score at each visit. The intent-to-treat population was the a priori analysis population, but due to the number of discontinuations, the per-protocol and intent-to-treat populations were used for the primary efficacy and sensitivity analyses, respectively.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight and 56 patients were included in the intent-to-treat and per-protocol populations, respectively. At month 3, statistically significant IOP reductions from baseline were observed in the bim/tim (P < 0.01) and dorz/brim/tim (P < 0.0001) groups, regardless of assessment time. At month 6, patients returned to bim/tim exhibited no significant IOP increase (regardless of assessment time), but patients returned to dorz/brim/tim exhibited a statistically significant IOP increase (P < 0.001) when assessed before instillation of study treatment. Results were similar in both intent-to-treat and per-protocol analysis populations. In the per-protocol analysis, 70% of patients on bim/tim at month 3 had an IOP <14 mm Hg, which declined to 58% (P = 0.0061) at month 6 (ie, after 3 months of dorz/brim/tim treatment). In patients receiving dorz/brim/tim at month 3, 38% had an IOP <14 mm Hg, which remained comparable after return to bim/tim. OSDI scores and incidence of adverse events were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first direct comparison of the efficacy of dorz/brim/tim and bim/tim, patients switched from dorz/brim/tim to bim/tim demonstrated improved/lower IOP; when returned to dorz/brim/tim, IOP increased to levels seen at study initiation, suggesting that once-daily bim/tim may have greater IOP-lowering efficacy. Both bim/tim and dorz/brim/tim were well tolerated with minimal ocular surface damage.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01737853 (registered October 9, 2012).