Steven R. Abel

Prostaglandin Analog Treatment of Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension

OBJECTIVE: To review available data related to the use of prostaglandin analogs (bimatoprost, latanoprost, travoprost, unoprostone) in the management of ocular hypertension and open-angle glaucoma. DATA SOURCES: Primary and review articles were identified from a MEDLINE search (1966–May 2001) and requested information from product manufacturers. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All available information, including that published in articles and abstracts, which was deemed relevant was included in this review. Limited data have been published to date. DATA SYNTHESIS: The prostaglandin analogs appear to be effective, well-tolerated agents for the reduction of intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. This drug class offers an alternative for patients who do not achieve control with another topical antiglaucoma agent or for those with a contraindication to first-line therapy with β-adrenergic antagonists. Based on preliminary clinical data, bimatoprost, latanoprost, and travoprost appear to be at least as effective as timolol, while the effectiveness of unoprostone is similar or slightly less. Prostaglandin analogs may be used in conjunction with other antiglaucoma medications, although further studies must establish the optimal combination. Whether clinical experience will yield outcomes in favor of one of the prostaglandin analogs remains to be determined. Patients should be educated on adverse events associated with prostaglandin analogs, particularly the potential for changes in the pigmentation of the iris and eyelashes. CONCLUSIONS: Bimatoprost, latanoprost, and travoprost appear to be equivalent to the current standard of therapy in the topical treatment of elevated IOP. Further clinical data published in article versus abstract format is required to better assess potential differences among these 3 agents.

Comparison Oftheocular Beta-Blockers

OBJECTIVE: To compare the similarities and differences among the ocular beta-blockers. Important considerations when comparing these agents are the differences in systemic adverse effects, local tolerability, and cost. DATA SOURCE: Information was retrieved from a MEDLINE search of the English-language literature and bibliographic reviews of review articles. Index terms included beta-blockers, glaucoma, timolol, levobunolol, betaxolol, metipranolol, and Carteolol. STUDY SELECTION: Emphasis was placed on eyedrop studies, as well as properly designed and executed clinical trials that assessed dosage, dosing interval, therapeutic response, adverse effects, and cost. DATA EXTRACTION: Data from several studies were evaluated according to the study design, therapeutic response, and adverse effects. DATA SYNTHESIS: Timolol maleate, levobunolol, metipranolol, and Carteolol have similar effectiveness in lowering intraocular pressure; however, levobunolol and timolol gel forming solution may have an advantage of once-daily dosing. Studies have not been published comparing the clinical efficacy of timolol hemihydrate with that of other ocular beta-blockers. Metipranolol is cost effective in treating primary open-angle glaucoma; however, it has been associated with more ocular burning, stinging, and granulomatous anterior uveitis than other agents. The intrinsic sympathomimetic activity of Carteolol has not yet displayed a definite advantage over the other agents in terms of optic disk perfusion and systemic adverse effects. The control of intraocular pressure with betaxolol has not always been as good as with timolol; however, betaxolol has some advantages over timolol and the other topical beta-blockers in terms of systemic adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Considering cost, efficacy, and safety, timolol maleate is the recommended formulary agent because the other agents cannot consistently show an outstanding advantage.

Impact of College of Pharmacy-Based Educational Services within the Hospital

Using a pharmacy intervention form, we measured the influence that university-based pharmacy educational personnel had on the pharmacy departments drug costs and on patient charges over a three-month period. A total of 278 interventions were made; 88.8 percent were implemented. Implemented interventions decreased drug costs by

Comparing the Efficacy of Ophthalmic NSAIDs in Common Indications A Literature Review to Support Cost-effective Prescribing

1661.99 and decreased patient charges by

Aflibercept: Newly Approved for the Treatment of Macular Edema Following Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

5938.37. The average implemented intervention decreased drug cost by

Patient-based pharmaceutical inventory management: a two-stage inventory and production model for perishable products with Markovian demand

6.73 and patient cost by

Evaluation of an Imipenem/Cilastatin Target Drug Program

24.04. Regardless of economic benefits, 218 of the 247 implemented interventions were considered to have positive clinical effects on patient care. Educational personnel were responsible for generating

Ranibizumab: The First Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitor Approved for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema

6028.27 of fee revenues to the pharmacy department through generation of pharmacokinetic drug dosing consults. We conclude that the educational programs provided by the pharmacy department through affiliation with a college of pharmacy directly contributed

Interdisciplinary Analysis of Chemotherapy Preparation at a Pediatric Hospital

7690.26 to the pharmacy department in the form of cost-avoided dollars and revenue generation over a three-month period. The provision of educational services by a hospital pharmacy department results in financial rewards as well as other benefits that have been previously described.

A simulation approach for evaluating medication supply chain structures

Objective: To review the commercially available ophthalmic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), identify opportunities for therapeutic substitutions within and outside of their Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved indications, and identify clinically superior drugs within the class for specific indications. Data Source: A PubMed search (1992 through January 2014) was performed on the terms diclofenac, ketorolac, flurbiprofen, bromfenac, and nepafenac. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Clinical trials, meta-analyses, and review articles were evaluated if they were written in English and pertained to human subjects. Studies were excluded if they were in vitro studies, solely evaluated pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic properties, did not relate to the topical ophthalmic route, did not evaluate the FDA-approved indications of any available ophthalmic NSAID, or compared a reviewed drug with a nonreviewed drug (without placebo comparison). Data Synthesis: A total of 67 articles met the criteria for evaluation. Article quality, study design, and dosing of the medications were assessed to determine the clinical applicability of the results. The quality of the article was determined using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence 1. Conclusions: Many formulations of the 5 reviewed NSAIDs have been studied across the 4 primary indications. These indications are (1) pain and inflammation associated with cataract surgery, (2) pain associated with corneal refractive surgery, (3) inhibition of intraoperative miosis, and (4) seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Several studies have directly compared drugs within this class and have identified instances in which certain selections are therapeutically superior or equivalent to another. This information provides practitioners with guidance in selecting an optimal medication.