DrugLib.com — Drug Information Portal

Rx drug information, pharmaceutical research, clinical trials, news, and more

Bimatoprost/timolol fixed combination: a 3-month double-masked, randomized parallel comparison to its individual components in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Author(s): Brandt JD, Cantor LB, Katz LJ, Batoosingh AL, Chou C, Bossowska I, Ganfort Investigators Group II

Affiliation(s): University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA 95817-2307, USA. jdbrandt@ucdavis.edu

Publication date & source: 2008-04, J Glaucoma., 17(3):211-6.

Publication type: Comparative Study; Multicenter Study; Randomized Controlled Trial; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a fixed combination (FC) of bimatoprost (BIM) and timolol (TIM) compared with each of the active components for 3 months. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two double-masked, randomized, multicenter parallel studies of FC (once-daily, mornings), BIM (once-daily, evenings), or TIM (twice-daily) were conducted in 1061 patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. RESULTS: Mean diurnal decreases from baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) at month 3 were 8.1, 7.9, and 6.4 mm Hg for the FC, BIM, and TIM groups, respectively. The proportion of patients with a mean diurnal percent reduction from baseline in IOP of more than 20% across all visits was 81.8% (436/533), 72.1% (191/265), and 49.8% (131/263) for the FC, BIM, and TIM groups, respectively (P<0.001 for FC vs. BIM and FC vs. TIM). The proportion of patients achieving an IOP of less than 18 mm Hg at all time points was 39.2% (209/533), 28.7% (76/265), and 12.2% (32/263) for the FC, BIM, and TIM groups, respectively (P=0.003 for FC vs. BIM, and P<0.001 for FC vs. TIM). The most commonly reported treatment-related adverse event was conjunctival hyperemia, with the greatest incidence in BIM (38.5%, 102/265), followed by FC (22.7%, 121/533, P<0.0001 vs. BIM) and TIM (6.8%, 18/263; P<0.001 vs. FC). CONCLUSIONS: FC was statistically significantly more effective than BIM or TIM for most comparisons, and safer than BIM with respect to common ocular adverse events. FC represents a convenient, therapeutic advantage over separate bottles.

Page last updated: 2008-06-22

-- advertisement -- The American Red Cross
Home | About Us | Contact Us | Site usage policy | Privacy policy

All Rights reserved - Copyright DrugLib.com, 2006-2017