Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A 6-month randomized clinical trial of bimatoprost 0.03% versus the association of timolol 0.5% and latanoprost 0.005% in glaucomatous patients

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

New effective hypotensive agents have been recently introduced into clinical practice, but often more than one drug has to be used to prevent further visual field loss. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of bimatoprost 0.03% compared with the association of timolol 0.5% and latanoprost 0.005% in open-angle glaucoma patients.

Methods

In this 6-month, prospective, parallel, randomised, investigator-masked clinical trial, 61 glaucomatous patients treated with timolol 0.5% twice in both eyes were enrolled. The timolol 0.5% was replaced by bimatoprost 0.03% once daily (group I) or by latanoprost 0.005% plus timolol 0.5% (group II). IOP measurements were performed at the baseline visit and at days 15, 30, 60, 90, 120 and 180. Digital colour photography was used to evaluate topical side effects.

Results

Fifty-six of the 61 patients were included for the intent-to-treat analysis (28 in group I and 28 in group II). Baseline mean IOP was similar in the two groups (p=0.5). Both treatments lowered the mean IOP at every visit significantly compared with the baseline (p<0.01). Comparing the IOP reductions obtained by the two treatments, no significant differences were found at any time during the study. Conjunctival hyperaemia, skin pigmentation and eyelash growth in group I and headache in group II were the most common side effects observed during the study.

Conclusions

Bimatoprost and the association of latanoprost plus timolol were equally effective in lowering the IOP in glaucomatous patients previously treated with timolol. Latanoprost plus timolol showed a better ocular safety profile.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Batterbury M, Harding SP (1992) Long-term drift and timolol therapy: possible role for pulsed therapy. Int Ophthalmol 16(4–5):321–324

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brandt JD, VanDenburgh AM (2001) Comparison of once or twice daily bimatoprost with twice daily timolol in patients with elevated IOP. Ophthalmol 108(6):1023–1032

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bron AM, Denis P (2001) Additive IOP-reducing effect of latanoprost in patients insufficiently controlled on timolol. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 79(3):289–293

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brubaker RF (2001) Mechanism of action of bimatoprost (Lumigan). Surv Ophthalmol 45 [Suppl 4]:S347–351. Review

  5. Brubaker RF, Schoff EO (2001) Effects of AGN 192024, a new ocular hypotensive agent, on aqueous dynamics. Am J Ophthalmol 131:19–24

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Camras CB (2002) Bimatoprost vs. timolol. Ophthalmology 109(4):627–628; discussion 628–629

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Collaborative Normal Tension Glaucoma Study Group (1998) Comparison of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with normal-tension glaucoma and patients with therapeutically reduced intraocular pressures. Am J Ophthalmol 126:487–497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gandolfi S, Simmons ST (2001) Three-month comparison of bimatoprost and latanoprost in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Adv Ther 18:3

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gordon MO, Beiser JA (2002) The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 120:701–713

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Heijl A, Leske MC for the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Group (2002) Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 120:1268–1279

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Higginbotham EJ, Schuman JS (2002) One-year, randomized study comparing bimatoprost and timolol in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Arch Ophthalmol 120:10

    Google Scholar 

  12. Laibovitz RA, VanDenburgh AM (2001) Comparison of the ocular hypotensive lipid AGN 192024 with timolol. Arch Ophthalmol 119(7):994–1000

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lama PJ (2002) Systemic adverse effects of beta-adrenergic blockers: an evidence based assessment. Am J Ophthalmol 134(5):749–760

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lichter PR (2002) Expectation of clinical trials. Results of Early Manifest Clinical Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 120:10

    Google Scholar 

  15. Noecker RS, Dirks MS (2003) A six-month randomized clinical trial comparing the intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy of bimatoprost and latanoprost in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 135(1):55–63

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. O’Connor DJ, Martone JF (2002) Additive intraocular pressure lowering effect of various medications with latanoprost. Am J Ophthalmol 133(6):836–837

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pisella PJ, Pouliquen P (2002) Prevalence of ocular symptoms and signs with preserved and preservative free glaucoma medication. Br J Ophthalmol 86(4):418–423

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sharif NA, Williams GW (2001) Bimatoprost and its free acid are prostaglandin FP receptor agonists. Eur J Pharmacol 432(2–3):211–213

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shedden A, Laurence J (2001) Efficacy and tolerability of timolol maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution versus timolol ophthalmic solution in adults with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a six-month, double-masked, multicenter study. Clin Ther 23(3):440–450

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sherwood M, Brandt J (2001) Six-month comparison of bimatoprost once-daily and twice-daily with timolol twice-daily in patients with elevated intraocular pressure.Surv Ophthalmol 45 [Suppl 4] May

  21. Soltau JB, Zimmerman TJ (2002) Changing paradigms in the medical treatment of glaucoma. Surv Ophthalmol 47 [Suppl 1]:S2–5

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sugimoto M, Sugimoto M (2002) Quantitative analysis of eyelash lengthening following topical latanoprost therapy. Can J Ophthalmol 37(6):342–345

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. The AGIS Investigators (2000) The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS). VII. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol 130:429–440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. The Pharmacology of Bimatoprost (Lumigan) (2001) Surv Ophthalmol 45 [Suppl 4]

  25. Zhang WY, Po AL (2001) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing latanoprost with timolol in the treatment of patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Br J Ophthalmol 85:983–990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Centofanti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Manni, G., Centofanti, M., Parravano, M. et al. A 6-month randomized clinical trial of bimatoprost 0.03% versus the association of timolol 0.5% and latanoprost 0.005% in glaucomatous patients. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 242, 767–770 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-004-0866-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-004-0866-2

Keywords

Navigation