Twenty-four hour intraocular pressure reduction with latanoprost compared with pilocarpine as third-line therapy in exfoliation glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To compare the 24 hour efficacy of latanoprost 0.005% given every evening with that of pilocarpine 4% given four times daily as third-line therapy in patients with exfoliation glaucoma receiving timolol 0.5% and dorzolamide 2% each given twice daily. METHOD: We enrolled 30 patients with exfoliation glaucoma not adequately controlled on timolol maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%. Each patient underwent a baseline 24 hour intraocular pressure curve testing at 06:00, 10:00, 14:00, 18:00, 22:00 and 02:00 hours. Patients were randomised to receive either latanoprost 0.005% or pilocarpine 4% for a minimum of 8 weeks and were then crossed over to the opposite therapy. Diurnal curve testing was repeated at the end of each treatment. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease from baseline in intraocular pressure at each timepoint for both study medicines (p < 0.016). Latanoprost provided better intraocular pressure control than pilocarpine at daytime measuresments (17.4 vs 19.7 mmHg at 06:00 hours, p < 0.001; 17.8 vs 19.1 mmHg at 10:00 hours, p = 0.04). However, pilocarpine reduced the pressure more than latanoprost at 22:00 hours (18.4 vs 19.5 mmHg, p = 0.016). Overall, the diurnal intraocular pressure was reduced from a baseline of 21.5 +/- 3.7 mmHg to 18.8 +/- 3.1 mmHg on pilocarpine and to 18.0 +/- 3.0 mmHg on latanoprost (p = 0.06). In addition, mean peak pressure was similar between pilocarpine (21.0 +/- 2.9 mmHg) and latanoprost (20.5 +/- 3.8 mmHg) (p = 0.20). Side-effects were similar with the exception of blurred vision, which was only found with pilocarpine (10%). Compliance was more difficult with pilocarpine. CONCLUSION: In exfoliation glaucoma, as a third-line adjunctive therapy added to timolol and dorzolamide, latanoprost and pilocarpine have similar diurnal efficacy. However, latanoprost provides a greater morning pressure reduction.

Comparison of 24-hour intraocular pressure reduction with two dosing regimens of latanoprost and timolol maleate in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To compare the 24-hour diurnal ocular hypotensive efficacy of two dosing regimens of latanoprost, once daily (8 AM or 10 PM), vs timolol maleate, twice daily. METHODS: We measured six diurnal intraocular pressure curves (6 AM, 10 AM, 2 PM, 6 PM, 10 PM, and 2 AM) in one randomly selected eye of 34 Greek patients newly diagnosed with primary open-angle glaucoma. The first diurnal curve was an untreated baseline. Patients began taking timolol 0.5%, twice daily, for 2 months. Patients were randomly assigned to latanoprost 0.005% given at 8 AM or 10 PM for 1 month and then changed to the other dosing regimen for 1 month. A diurnal curve was performed after each dosing period. RESULTS: The baseline diurnal pressure for all 34 subjects was 23.1 +/- 3.7 mm Hg. The average intraocular pressures at 6 AM for patients who were given latanoprost in the evening (17.9 +/- 2.9 mm Hg) was statistically lower than that in patients given timolol solution (20.1 +/- 2.5 mm Hg, P = .003); however, patients who were given timolol demonstrated a similar diurnal intraocular pressure (19.1 +/- 2.8 mm Hg) to both morning (18.8 +/- 3.7 mm Hg) and evening doses (18.8 +/- 3.6 mm Hg) of latanoprost (P =.329). When the two latanoprost dosages were compared directly, evening administration provided a statistically lower intraocular pressure at 10 AM (P = .0001) and morning administration at 10 PM (P = .0001). This study had an 80% power to exclude a 1.2-mm Hg difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that in a small population, both latanoprost and timolol are effective in lowering intraocular pressure throughout a 24-hour period; however, latanoprost is most effective in the 12-hour to 24-hour period after administration.