Safety and efficacy of a fixed versus unfixed brinzolamide/timolol combination in Japanese patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

Comparison of adherence between fixed and unfixed topical combination glaucoma therapies using Japanese healthcare/pharmacy claims database: a retrospective non-interventional cohort study

Background

Adherence to chronic therapies is crucial to prevent the progression of disease, such as glaucoma. However, only a limited number of studies have investigated them using real-world data in Japan. This study aimed to evaluate Japanese patients’ adherence to fixed- and unfixed-combination eye drops as a second-line therapy for glaucoma in real-world practice.

Methods

This retrospective, non-interventional cohort study utilized a commercially available Japanese healthcare database (MinaCare database). Medical/pharmacy claims data were collected from 2011 to 2016. The primary endpoint was adherence to medications, assessed by proportion of days covered (PDC) with medication during a 12-month post-index period. Meanwhile, the secondary endpoints included the persistence rate.

Results

A total of 738 patients were included in this study: 309 and 329 in the fixed- and unfixed-combination cohorts, respectively. Prostaglandin analog (PG)/β-blocker (BB) was most commonly claimed in 241/309 (78.0%) patients in the fixed-combination cohort. In the unfixed-combination cohort, PG and BB were claimed in 130/329 (39.5%) patients, whereas PG and α2-agonist were claimed in 87/329 (26.4%) patients. Patients were more adherent to the fixed-combination than the unfixed-combinations (mean PDCs [SD], 79.1% [32.1] vs. 62.2% [38.0]; P < 0.0001). The proportion of patients with good adherence (PDC ≥ 80%) was also higher in the fixed-combination cohort (69.6%) than in the unfixed-combination cohort (48.6%) (P < 0.0001). During the 12-month post-index period, the persistence rate was higher in the fixed-combination cohort than in the unfixed-combination cohort (47.6% [95% confidence intervals (CI): 41.9–53.0] vs. 24.9% [95% CI: 20.4–29.7], P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Japanese patients with glaucoma preferred the fixed-combination therapies over the unfixed-combination therapies. Hence, fixed-combination therapies would contribute to the improvement of adherence.

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.

Safety and efficacy of switching from dorzolamide 1.0%/timolol maleate 0.5% eye drops to brinzolamide 1.0%/timolol maleate 0.5% eye drops

Purpose

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching from dorzolamide 1.0%/timolol maleate 0.5% fixed-combination (DTFC) eye drops to brinzolamide 1.0%/timolol maleate 0.5% fixed-combination (BTFC) eye drops in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Methods

A total of 35 eyes of 35 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension using DTFC eye drops were included. Participants discontinued DTFC drops and immediately began using BTFC drops. All other eye drops currently being used were continued. Intraocular pressure (IOP) 1 and 3 months after switching medications was compared with baseline IOP. One month after switching medications, participant preference and adherence were evaluated. Adverse reactions were monitored at each study visit.

Results

The IOP was 17.9±2.6 mmHg at baseline and 18.3±4.1 mmHg and 17.8±3.4 mmHg 1 month and 3 months after switching medications, respectively (P=0.633). The frequency of missing a dose was not different before (6.1%) and after (6.1%) switching to BTFC. Significantly fewer participants reported stinging after switching to BTFC (15.2%) than while using DTFC (51.5%, P,0.01). Blurred vision was reported with the same frequency before (39.4%) and after (42.4%) switching to BTFC. A total of 33.3% and 27.3% of patients preferred DTFC and BTFC, respectively. Several patients withdrew from the study because of discomfort (n=2, 5.7%), discharge (n=1, 2.9%), dizziness (n=1, 2.9%), or increased IOP (n=2, 5.7%).

Conclusion

Switching from DTFC to BTFC was well tolerated and did not result in IOP changes or a decreased patient adherence. When glaucoma patients complain of stinging with DTFC administration, switching to BTFC is an acceptable treatment option.

Efficiency, safety, and patient preference of switching from dorzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% to brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% while maintaining the prostaglandin F2α analog

Background

We investigated the efficiency, safety and patient preference of switching from dorzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% to brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% while maintaining the prostaglandin F2α analog.

Methods

We initially enrolled 44 eyes from 44 primary open angle glaucoma patients, and a total of 42 patients completed the study. All patients were under treatment with various prostaglandin F2α analogs and dorzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%. While maintaining the prostaglandin F2α analog, dorzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% was switched to brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%. Conjunctival hyperemia, superficial punctate keratopathy, and intraocular pressure (IOP) were evaluated at baseline and at 4, 12, and 24 weeks. Adverse events and patient preferences, measured using a questionnaire at study initiation and at 24 weeks, were also noted.

Results

The IOP was 17.7±1.7, 16.8±2.6, 16.7±2.2, and 16.7±2.4 mmHg at baseline and at 4, 12, and 24 weeks, respectively, with no significant differences in IOP values at any time point (P=0.117, one-way analysis of variance). In addition, no significant differences were found in the incidence of conjunctival hyperemia or SPK score at any time point (all P>0.5, by Kruskal–Wallis test). Based on the evaluation of side effects using the questionnaire, stinging/burning was less common (P=0.042), while blurred vision was more common (P=0.003), after switching to brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%. Regarding patient preferences, 13 patients (31%) preferred dorzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%, 12 patients (29%) preferred brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%, and 17 patients (40%) preferred neither.

Conclusion

When switching from dorzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% to brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%, the IOP values and incidence of superficial punctate keratopathy and conjunctival hyperemia were sustained throughout the 24-week observation period, and the patient preferences were similar for the two regimens. However, differences were observed in the ocular sensations of stinging/burning with dorzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% and blurred vision with brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%.

Brinzolamide plus brimonidine for the treatment of glaucoma: an update

INTRODUCTION

Glaucoma is a common sight-threatening condition that is primarily treated by lowering intraocular pressure (IOP). Today the mainstay of treatment is topical ocular hypotensive medications; many patients require more than one agent to achieve target IOP. For such patients, fixed combination formulations have several advantages including simplicity of treatment regimen, adherence to the treatment regimen, efficacy, improved ocular surface comfort and reduced cost. All currently available fixed combinations contain a β-blocker, which is contraindicated in some patients. Hence there is a clinical need for fixed-combination preparations without a β-blocker. This paper reviews the current literature on a new fixed-combination drug containing brinzolamide 1% and brimonidine 0.2% (BBFC).

AREAS COVERED

A PubMed, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov registry search was performed to identify all relevant studies. Four published clinical papers pertaining to three randomized controlled trials were identified for review. All studies demonstrated a significant reduction (p < 0.01) in mean IOP in patients administered with BBFC compared with its individual components, brinzolamide 1% or brimonidine 0.2%. Adverse effects from BBFC were no different from each of the individual components, the most common being blurred vision, eye irritation and dysgeusia (abnormal taste sensation). Although BBFC use was associated with more adverse effects compared with the individual components used as monotherapy (p < 0.001), the cumulative adverse effect profile from BBFC did not appear greater than one would expect from the simultaneous use of the two components.

EXPERT OPINION

BBFC is a potential alternative to other fixed-combination medications and is especially useful when topical β-blockers are contraindicated. Longer-term experience will determine if additional adverse effects occur or if efficacy is maintained over longer periods.

Signal detection for Thai traditional medicine: examination of national pharmacovigilance data using reporting odds ratio and reported population attributable risk

Herbal containing medicine consumption has increased while the awareness of adverse drug reaction (ADR) was less than conventional medicine. Early detection of unexpected numbers of ADRs from herbal medicines' reports which are abnormal from the whole database needs quantification. Disproportionality analysis has been performed for signal detection by using reporting odds ratio (ROR) as measurement. The impact of having medicine as exposures in each ADR should be measured by using reported population attributable risks (RPAR). This study aimed to quantify the contribution of Thai traditional medicine (TTM) to ADR reports and to assess the association between TTMs and serious adverse drug reactions. Data were retrieved from the adverse drug reaction surveillance database, Thai-Food and Drug Administration from 2002 to 2013. Crude and adjusted RORs for each drug-ADR pair and RPARs were computed. TTM contributed only 0.001% of all serious ADRs reported. Out of 4208 TTM-ADR pairs were examined, three had the statistically significant RORs, namely Andrographis paniculata and anaphylactic shock (ROR 2.32, 95% CI 1.03, 5.21); green traditional medicine and Stevens-Johnson syndrome (ROR 13.04, 95% CI 5.4-31.51) and Derris scandens Benth and angioedema (ROR 2.71, 95% CI 1.05-6.95). Their RPARs ranged from 0.05% to 0.16%. We conclude that TTMs need more intensive surveillance.