The efficacy and safety of the timolol/dorzolamide fixed combination vs latanoprost in exfoliation glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the timolol/dorzolamide fixed combination vs latanoprost 0.005% in exfoliation glaucoma patients. METHODS: We randomized in an observer-masked fashion 65 newly diagnosed exfoliation glaucoma patients to either the timolol/dorzolamide twice daily or latanoprost daily treatment for 2 months and then crossed these over to the other treatment. RESULTS: A total of fifty-four patients completed the study. After 2 months of chronic dosing, the morning intraocular pressure (IOP) (10:00) was reduced from a baseline of 31.2+/-6.5 mmHg to 18.1+/-3.0 with the fixed combination and to 18.9+/-4.1 mmHg with latanoprost (P = 0.21). Six patients were discontinued early from both treatment periods owing to inadequate IOP control and two others were discontinued from latanoprost treatment only. The fixed combination showed a significantly greater incidence of taste perversion (P < 0.001) and stinging upon instillation (P = 0.036), while latanoprost showed a trend for increased conjunctival injection (P = 0.056). However, five patients demonstrated either bradycardia or asthmatic symptoms with initiation of the fixed combination therapy. One patient on latanoprost complained of dizziness. Patient preference was generally given to latanoprost (63 vs 20.3%) mainly because of its once daily dosing (P < 0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that both latanoprost and the timolol/dorzolamide fixed combination are efficacious in the treatment of newly diagnosed exfoliation glaucoma.

Brimonidine 0.2% given two or three times daily versus timolol maleate 0.5% in primary open-angle glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of brimonidine 0.2% two or three times daily versus timolol maleate 0.5% solution twice daily. METHODS: Patients with primary open-angle glaucoma were randomized by Latin square technique to one of the three treatment sequences in this crossover, prospective double-masked trial. Each treatment period consisted of 6 weeks of chronic dosing followed by a diurnal curve for the intraocular pressure measured at 08:00, 10:00, 16:00, 18:00, 20:00, 22:00, and 24:00 hours. Intraocular pressure was measured by applanation tonometry. RESULTS: Thirty patients completed this trial. The average diurnal intraocular pressures in the trial were measured for timolol maleate (17.7 +/- 2.7 mm Hg), brimonidine given three times daily (18.0 +/- 2.2 mm Hg), and brimonidine given twice daily (19.2 +/- 2.4 mm Hg). There was a statistical difference between groups (P <.005). When groups were compared by pairs, three times daily dosing with brimonidine and timolol maleate both reduced the pressure more than twice daily brimonidine at every time point past 10:00 hours and for the diurnal curve (P <.05). In contrast, three times daily brimonidine and timolol maleate were statistically similar for the diurnal pressure, and each time point, except timolol maleate, decreased the pressure more at 16:00 (P =.042). Safety was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that both timolol maleate twice daily and brimonidine three times daily provide a similar intraocular pressure reduction to each other. Timolol maleate twice daily and brimonidine three times daily provide a greater decrease in pressure in the late afternoon and nighttime hours, compared with brimonidine twice daily.