Brimonidine 0.2% vs unoprostone 0.15% both added to timolol maleate 0.5% given twice daily to patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of brimonidine 0.2% vs unoprostone 0.15%, both added to timolol maleate 0.5% each given twice daily. METHODS: In this prospective, multi-centred, double-masked, crossover comparison, patients were randomized to one treatment group for a 6-week treatment period, and then crossed over to the opposite treatment. Measurements were performed at 0800, 1000, 1600, 1800, and 2000 h at baseline and at the end of each treatment period. RESULTS: In all, 33 patients entered this trial and 29 completed. The baseline trough intraocular pressure (IOP) was 23.3+/-2.4 and the diurnal curve IOP was 22.0+/-1.3 mmHg. For the brimonidine and timolol maleate treatment group, the trough IOP was 21.6+/-3.3 and the diurnal curve IOP was 19.8+/-2.1 mmHg, while the timolol and unoprostone treatment showed a trough IOP of 20.9+/-3.8 and a diurnal curve IOP of 19.3+/-2.4 mmHg. There was no significant difference between treatment groups at any time point for the diurnal curve, or in the reduction from baseline (P>0.05). Both treatments failed to statistically reduce the IOP from baseline at 1800 h. There was no difference between treatment groups regarding ocular and systemic unsolicited adverse events, but patients admitted to more dryness (P=0.02) and burning upon instillation (P<0.0001) with unoprostone by survey. CONCLUSION: Brimonidine 0.2% or unoprostone 0.15% added to timolol maleate 0.5% provide similar efficacy and safety throughout the daytime diurnal curve.

Two multicenter, randomized studies of the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion in moderate to severe dry eye disease. CsA Phase 3 Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of cyclosporin A ([CsA] 0.05% and 0.1% ophthalmic emulsions) to vehicle in patients with moderate to severe dry eye disease. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, 6-month, vehicle-controlled. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 877 patients with defined moderate to severe dry eye disease (292 to 293 in each treatment group). METHODS: Two identical clinical trials; patients were treated twice daily with either CsA, 0.05% or 0.1%, or vehicle. The results of these two trials were combined for analysis. EFFICACY: corneal and interpalpebral dye staining, Schirmer tear test (with and without anesthesia), tear break-up time, Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), facial expression, patient subjective rating scale, symptoms of dry eye, investigator's evaluation of global response to treatment, treatment success, and daily use of artificial tears. SAFETY: occurrence of adverse events, best-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, biomicroscopy, and blood trough CsA concentrations. RESULTS: Treatment with CsA, 0.05% or 0.1%, gave significantly (P < or = 0.05) greater improvements than vehicle in two objective signs of dry eye disease (corneal staining and categorized Schirmer values). CsA 0.05% treatment also gave significantly greater improvements (P < 0.05) in three subjective measures of dry eye disease (blurred vision, need for concomitant artificial tears, and the physician's evaluation of global response to treatment). There was no dose-response effect. Both CsA treatments exhibited an excellent safety profile, and there were no significant topical or systemic adverse safety findings. CONCLUSIONS: The novel ophthalmic formulations CsA 0.05% and 0.1% were safe and effective in the treatment of moderate to severe dry eye disease yielding improvements in both objective and subjective measures. Topical CsA represents a new pharmacologically based treatment for dry eye disease that may provide significant patient benefits.

Effects of carteolol and timolol on plasma lipid profiles in older women with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect on serum lipid levels of carteolol hydrochloride 1.0% or timolol maleate 0.5% given twice a day to women age 60 years and older with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHOD: We included 112 patients in this double-masked, randomized, multicenter trial. Fasting clinical laboratory studies were evaluated at baseline and at 12 weeks. Patients were instructed not to change their dietary, alcohol consumption, or exercise habits during the study. RESULTS: For the carteolol group, the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein (TC/HDL) ratio at baseline of 50.1 +/- 1.5 mg/dl and 4.7 +/- 0.2 changed by the 12-week visit to 51.3 +/- 1.9 mg/dl (P = .25) and 4.6 +/- .02 (P = .47), respectively. For the timolol maleate group, the baseline HDL and TC/HDL ratio of 53.6 +/- 2.2 mg/dl and 4.4 +/- 0.2 changed to 50.2 +/- 1.9 mg/dl (P < .001) and 4.7 +/- 0.2 (P = .001), respectively, at the 12-week visit. Carteolol patients showed no significant change from baseline, whereas the HDL (P < .001) and TC/HDL ratio decreased (P = .001) significantly in the timolol maleate group. There also was a significant difference in the change from baseline at 12 weeks between carteolol and timolol maleate groups for the HDL and TC/HDL ratio (P = .01 and .012, respectively). No differences in TC, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), or triglycerides (TG) or in changes from baseline were observed between groups at 12 weeks (P > .05). At 12 weeks, no differences were observed between carteolol and timolol maleate groups in intraocular pressure or safety (P > .05), except that patients given carteolol demonstrated fewer solicited ocular symptoms (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Carteolol appears to be neutral in its effect on serum lipid levels, whereas timolol maleate adversely affects the HDL and TC/HDL ratio in women age 60 years and older with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma.

The efficacy and safety of diclofenac 0.1% versus prednisolone acetate 1% following trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of diclofenac 0.1% versus prednisolone acetate 1% following trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The authors prospectively randomized chronic open-angle glaucoma patients who underwent trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C to receive postoperatively either diclofenac 0.1% or prednisolone acetate 1% 4 times daily, to be tapered as inflammation resolved. RESULTS: In the diclofenac group (n = 14), the preoperative intraocular pressure of 30.4 +/- 13.1 decreased to 12.4 +/- 6.5 mm Hg at 6 months postoperatively. In the prednisolone acetate group (n = 12), the preoperative intraocular pressure decreased from 29.1 +/- 10.4 to 12.8 +/- 4.2 mm Hg at 6 months postoperatively (P = .85). The average number of medicines used 6 months postoperatively was 0.50 +/- 0.8 in the diclofenac group and 0.24 +/- 0.6 in the prednisolone acetate group (P = .36). Adverse events were similar between groups (P = .51). One patient in the diclofenac group underwent reoperation at 1 month due to uncontrolled intraocular pressure. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that following trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C, a similar intraocular pressure result may be expected when either diclofenac or prednisolone acetate is prescribed postoperatively for intraocular inflammation.

The safety and efficacy of switching timolol maleate 0.5% solution to timolol hemihydrate 0.5% solution given twice daily.

This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching patients treated with timolol maleate to timolol hemihydrate. In patients with ocular hypertension or chronic open-angle glaucoma treated with beta-blockers for at least three months, we prescribed timolol maleate solution 0.5% given twice daily for one month. We then switched each patient to timolol hemihydrate solution 0.5% (Betimol, Ciba Vision Ophthalmics) given twice daily for three months. This study found over the first three months in 30 completed subjects, using a worse eye analysis, that the intraocular pressure changed from 18.3+/-2.1 mm Hg on timolol maleate to 18.8+/-2.3 mm Hg on timolol hemihydrate (P=0.10) 12 hours after dosing. There was no difference in the overall incidence of unsolicited anterior segment side effects between timolol maleate (4 cases) versus timolol hemihydrate (3 cases) (P=0.69). One patient exited the study because of pain and burning in both eyes while on timolol maleate. No patient was discontinued due to loss of intraocular pressure control after switching to timolol hemihydrate. It was concluded that switching from timolol maleate to timolol hemihydrate is safe and effective in maintaining control of the intraocular pressure.

Timolol hemihydrate vs timolol maleate to treat ocular hypertension and open-angle glaucoma.

PURPOSE: We compared the therapeutic efficacy and safety of timolol hemihydrate to timolol maleate in patients with ocular hypertension and chronic open-angle glaucoma. METHODS: We conducted this three-month study as a multicentered, masked, parallel group comparison. Both the 0.25% and 0.5% concentrations were evaluated against similar concentrations of timolol maleate. Dosing was twice daily. An open-label, nine-month study followed the masked portion of the protocol, in which all patients received either 0.25% or 0.5% timolol hemihydrate. A total of 371 patients were included in both the 0.25% and 0.5% studies. RESULTS: We found statistically similar intraocular pressures with both the 0.25% (18.3 and 18.6 mm Hg for the hemihydrate and maleate groups, respectively) and 0.5% (19.9 and 19.5 mm Hg for the hemihydrate and maleate groups, respectively) concentrations of timolol hemihydrate and timolol maleate after three months of masked treatment. Likewise, peak intraocular effect at two hours after taking the medication was statistically similar between medicines at both concentrations. Likewise, both ocular and systemic safety were similar between the maleate and hemihydrate preparations at both concentrations. In the nine-month open-label protocol, therapeutic efficacy (19.9 and 19.1 mm Hg for the 0.25% and 0.5% concentrations, respectively) and safety of timolol hemihydrate were similar to effect and safety of the three-month protocol. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that timolol hemihydrate had an ocular hypotensive efficacy and safety profile statistically equivalent to that of timolol maleate for up to three months of therapy. Timolol hemihydrate showed efficacy and safety similar to that observed within the first three months, for up to one year of therapy.

Short-term efficacy of apraclonidine hydrochloride added to maximum-tolerated medical therapy for glaucoma. Apraclonidine Maximum-Tolerated Medical Therapy Study Group.

PURPOSE: We determined whether the addition of topical apraclonidine hydrochloride to eyes that are receiving maximal medical therapy but still have inadequate intraocular pressure control and that are scheduled to undergo surgery could adequately decrease intraocular pressure, postponing the need for further intervention. METHODS: We performed a prospective, 90-day, multicentered, placebo-controlled, double-masked parallel study. We enrolled one eye each of 174 glaucoma patients with inadequate intraocular pressure control who were on maximally tolerated medical therapy. We continued to administer maximum medical therapy for glaucoma. Study medications were either apraclonidine hydrochloride 0.5% or placebo (apraclonidine's vehicle). Patients were instructed to take the study medication every eight hours. We measured intraocular pressure, change in intraocular pressure from baseline, and the number of eyes requiring surgery after the addition of study medication. RESULTS: Fifty-two (60%) of 86 patients treated with apraclonidine maintained adequate intraocular pressure control throughout the study and avoided surgery, compared with 28 (32%) of 88 patients treated with placebo (P < .001). Apraclonidine treatment resulted in significantly more patients attaining an additional 20% reduction or more in intraocular pressure from baseline and an intraocular pressure less than or equal to 20 mm Hg (P < .05). The most common ocular complication was conjunctival hyperemia (11 of 86 patients, 12.8%). The most frequent nonocular problem was dry mouth (four patients, 4.7%). CONCLUSION: Apraclonidine appeared to be safe in all eyes and efficacious in some eyes. It significantly lowered intraocular pressure when used in combination with maximally tolerated medical therapy, which delayed or prevented further glaucoma surgery for at least 90 days in 52 (60%) of 86 treated patients.

Topical apraclonidine hydrochloride in eyes with poorly controlled glaucoma. The Apraclonidine Maximum Tolerated Medical Therapy Study Group.

OBJECT: We determined whether the addition of topical apraclonidine hydrochloride to eyes receiving maximal medical therapy, with inadequate intraocular pressure (IOP) control, and scheduled to undergo surgery, could adequately lower IOP, postponing the need for surgical intervention. DESIGN: A prospective 90 day, multi-centered, placebo-controlled, doublemasked parallel study. PATIENTS: We enrolled 174 glaucoma patients with inadequate IOP control on maximally tolerated medical therapy. All were candidates for either laser trabeculoplasty or invasive surgical intervention. We enrolled only one eye per patient. INTERVENTIONS: We continued to administer maximum-tolerated medical therapy for glaucoma. Patients took the study medication every eight hours. Study medications were either apraclonidine hydrochloride 0.5% or placebo (apraclonidine's vehicle). MAJOR OUTCOME MEASURES: We evaluated IOP, IOP change from baseline, and the number of eyes requiring surgery after the addition of study medication. RESULTS: Sixty one percent of patients treated with apraclonidine maintained adequate IOP control throughout the study, avoiding additional surgery compared to 33.9% patients treated with placebo (P < .001). Apraclonidine treatment resulted in significantly more patients achieving either an additional > or = 20% reduction in IOP from baseline (resulting in an IOP < or = 20 mm Hg) (P < 0.05). The most common ocular complications were conjunctival hyperemia (12.6%), itching and foreign body sensation (6.8%), and tearing (4.5%). The most frequent non-ocular adverse events related to apraclonidine were dry mouth (4.5%) and unusual taste perception (2.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Apraclonidine appears safe and efficacious. It significantly lowered IOP when used in combination with a patient's maximum tolerated medical therapy. This delayed or prevented further glaucoma surgery for at least 90 days in approximately 60% of treated patients.

Evaluation of once-daily levobunolol 0.25% and timolol 0.25% therapy for increased intraocular pressure.

In a three-month, double-masked, randomized clinical trial, we evaluated the once-daily ocular hypotensive efficacy of 0.25% levobunolol and 0.25% timolol in 80 patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Thirty-seven of the 39 patients (95%) in the 0.25% levobunolol group and 35 of the 41 patients (85%) in the 0.25% timolol group successfully completed the three-month study period. The overall mean decrease in intraocular pressure was 5.3 mm Hg (22%) in the 0.25% levobunolol group and 5.4 mm Hg (22%) in the 0.25% timolol group. This difference was not statistically significant. In both treatment groups, effects on mean heart rate and blood pressure were minimal. The data suggest that levobunolol 0.25% and timolol 0.25%, administered once daily, are equally effective in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension.

Automated perimetry, tonometry, and questionnaire in glaucoma screening.

To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of various portions of the glaucoma screening process, 145 participants underwent complete ophthalmic examinations. A weighted questionnaire was 20% (2 patients) and 36% (5 suspects) sensitive for the glaucoma patients and glaucoma suspects, respectively. Tonometry alone was 20% (2 patients) and 7% (1 suspect) sensitive for glaucoma patients and glaucoma suspects, respectively. Automated perimetry of the central 30 degrees and nasal periphery identified nine (90%) of the glaucoma patients and five (36%) of the glaucoma suspects. The presence of increased intraocular pressure was not by itself very useful, but when perimetry or tonometry was used, 10 (100%) of the glaucoma group was identified. We recommend that automated suprathreshold perimetry and tonometry be performed in glaucoma screening.

The spectrum of cavitary optic disc anomalies in a family.

The current classification of cavitary optic disc anomalies including the morphologically related entities--optic nerve pit, morning glory disc anomaly, coloboma of the optic nerve, and retinochoroidal coloboma involving the optic nerve--is inexact and confusing. Traditionally, these disc abnormalities have been regarded as distinct morphologic anomalies. Thirty-five members of a five-generation kindred with autosomal dominantly inherited optic disc anomalies were examined. Observed abnormalities in this pedigree comprised a spectrum of morphologic variants ranging from large anomalous discs to typical pits and colobomas. The findings in this family suggest a variable expression of a single autosomal dominant defect rather than the chance occurrence of three separate, distinct, but morphologically similar entities occurring in a single pedigree.

Tolerability of timolol and betaxolol in patients with chronic open-angle glaucoma.

Twenty-four patients with bilateral chronic open-angle glaucoma received three treatments: (1) artificial tears (control) in both eyes, (2) artificial tears in one eye and one drop of timolol (0.05%) in the other, and (3) artificial tears in one eye and one drop of betaxolol (0.05%) in the other. Twelve patients always received the test medication in the left eye and 12 in the right eye. The patients were examined and questioned about ocular symptoms at the time of drug administration and at 1, 5, 30, and 60 minutes. Irritation was noted in five treated eyes after artificial tears, in three after timolol, and in 11 after betaxolol. The incidence of irritation after initial treatment was significantly lower than expected for timolol than for artificial tears or betaxolol (P less than 0.01).