Theresa A. Landry

Travoprost compared with latanoprost and timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

PURPOSE This study evaluated the safety and intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy of two concentrations of travoprost (0.0015% and 0.004%) compared with latanoprost 0.005% and timolol 0.5% in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS Eight hundred one patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomly assigned to travoprost 0.0015%, travoprost 0.004%, latanoprost 0.005%, or timolol 0.5%. The efficacy and safety of travoprost (0.0015% and 0.004%) daily was compared with latanoprost daily and timolol twice daily for a period of 12 months. RESULTS Travoprost was equal or superior to latanoprost and superior to timolol with mean intraocular pressure over visits and time of day ranging from 17.9 to 19.1 mm Hg (travoprost 0.0015%), 17.7 to 19.1 mm Hg (travoprost 0.004%), 18.5 to 19.2 mm Hg (latanoprost), and 19.4 to 20.3 mm Hg (timolol). For all visits pooled, the mean intraocular pressure at 4 PM for travoprost was 0.7 mm Hg (0.0015%, P =.0502) and 0.8 mm Hg (0.004%, P =.0191) lower than for latanoprost. Travoprost 0.004% was more effective than latanoprost and timolol in reducing intraocular pressure in black patients by up to 2.4 mm Hg (versus latanoprost) and 4.6 mm Hg (versus timolol). Based on a criterion of 30% or greater intraocular pressure reduction from diurnal baseline or intraocular pressure 17 mm Hg or less, travoprost 0.0015% and 0.004% had an overall response to treatment of 49.3% and 54.7%, respectively, compared with 49.6% for latanoprost and 39.0% for timolol. Iris pigmentation change was observed in 10 of 201 of patients (5.0%) receiving travoprost 0.0015%, six of 196 of patients (3.1%) receiving travoprost 0.004%, 10 of 194 of patients (5.2%) receiving latanoprost, and none of the patients receiving timolol (0 of 196). The average ocular hyperemia score was less than 1 on a scale of 0 to 3, indicating that on average patients experienced between none/trace and mild for all treatment groups. There were no serious, unexpected, related adverse events reported for any therapy. CONCLUSIONS Travoprost (0.0015% and 0.004%), a highly selective, potent prostaglandin F (FP) receptor agonist, is equal or superior to latanoprost and superior to timolol in lowering intraocular pressure in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. In addition, travoprost 0.004% is significantly better than either latanoprost or timolol in lowering intraocular pressure in black patients. Travoprost is safe and generally well tolerated in the studied patient population.

Travoprost 0.004% with and without benzalkonium chloride: a comparison of safety and efficacy.

PurposeTo compare the safety and efficacy of travoprost 0.004% without benzalkonium chloride (BAC) to that of the marketed formulation of travoprost 0.004% in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. MethodsThe study was a double-masked, randomized, parallel group, multicenter, noninferiority design. Adult patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension with qualifying intraocular pressure (IOP) on 2 eligibility visits received either travoprost 0.004% with BAC (n=346), or travoprost 0.004% without BAC (n=344) dosed once-daily each evening. Patients were followed for a period of 3 months. IOP measurements at 8 AM, 10 AM, and 4 PM were taken at study visits on week 2, week 6, and month 3. ResultsMean IOP reductions, across all 9 study visits and times ranged from 7.3 to 8.5 mm Hg for travoprost 0.004% without BAC and from 7.4 to 8.4 mm Hg for travoprost 0.004% with BAC. Statistical equivalence was also demonstrated for the comparison of mean IOP changes; 95% confidence limits were within ±0.8 mm Hg at 9 of 9 study visits and times in both the per protocol and intent-to-treat data sets. Adverse events and the number of patients discontinued owing to adverse events were similar for both treatment groups. Adverse events due to hyperemia occurred in 6.4% and 9.0% of patients treated with travoprost 0.004% without BAC and travoprost 0.004% with BAC, respectively. ConclusionTravoprost 0.004% without BAC is equivalent to travoprost 0.004% with BAC in both safety and efficacy.

Comparison of the diurnal ocular hypotensive efficacy of travoprost and latanoprost over a 44-hour period in patients with elevated intraocular pressure

BACKGROUND Prostaglandin analogues are effective ocular hypotensive agents and are being used increasingly in the treatment of elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). These agents are typically dosed once daily. OBJECTIVES A pilot study was conducted to evaluate the duration of travoprosts IOP-lowering efficacy up to 84 hours after the final dose in patients with open-angle glaucoma. A follow-up study was conducted to compare diurnal IOP control with travoprost and latanoprost over a 44-hour period. METHODS In the open label pilot study, patients received 0.004% travoprost in both eyes at 8 pm daily for 2 weeks. After 2 weeks, IOP was measured before administration of the last daily dose, every 4 hours thereafter for 36 hours, and 60 and 84 hours after the last dose, with no additional ocular hypotensive medication given. In the controlled, double-masked, parallel-group, follow-up study, patients were randomized to self-administer 1 drop of the marketed doses of 0.004% travoprost or 0.005% latanoprost in both eyes at 8 pm daily for 2 weeks. At the end of this period, patients returned to the facility at approximately 8 pm for IOP measurement and administration of the final dose of study medication. IOP was then measured at 4-hour intervals for 44 hours after the last dose, with no additional ocular hypotensive medication given. RESULTS The pilot study included 21 patients (67% female, 33% male; age range, 35-81 years) with open-angle glaucoma. IOP values were significantly below baseline at all time points up to 84 hours after the final dose of travoprost ( P<0.001). The follow-up study enrolled 35 patients, 1 of whom was excluded for missing data; thus, the intent-to-treat analysis included 34 patients (68% female, 32% male; age range, 36-72 years). At the unmedicated eligibility visit, mean IOP over 24 hours ranged from 21 to 26 mm Hg in each treatment group. After 2 weeks of treatment and 24 hours after the last dose, mean (SD) IOP was 13.1 (2.1) mm Hg (change from eligibility visit, -10.4 [2.7] mm Hg) in the travoprost group and 16.0 (3.1) mm Hg (change from eligibility visit, -7.1 [2.4] mm Hg) in the latanoprost group. The difference in change from baseline was statistically significant between treatment groups (P=0.006). Travoprost lowered IOP significantly at all time points throughout the 44-hour period after the last dose (mean IOP, <or=18 mm Hg; [P<0.001) and was statistically superior to latanoprost at 8 pm before the last dose (P=0.041) and 24 hours after the last dose (P=0.006). Latanoprost showed greater IOP-lowering efficacy compared with travoprost 4 hours after the last dose (P=0.040). IOP reductions were significantly different from zero at all time points with both treatments (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS The results of the pilot study suggest that travoprost produces reductions in IOP that may be sustained for up to 84 hours after dosing. The results of the follow-up study suggest that both prostaglandin analogues significantly lower IOP from baseline in patients with open-angle glaucoma and provide excellent diurnal IOP control throughout a 24-hour period.

A three-month, multicenter, double-masked study of the safety and efficacy of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution compared to travoprost 0.004% ophthalmic solution and timolol 0.5% dosed concomitantly in subjects with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Purpose:The primary objective of this study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination to the concomitant administration of travoprost 0.004% (TRAVATAN®) and timolol 0.5% in subjects with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Methods:This was a randomized, multicenter, double-masked, active-controlled, parallel group study. Three hundred sixteen patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomly assigned to travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution fixed combination once daily in the morning or concomitant administration of timolol 0.5% once daily in the morning and travoprost 0.004% ophthalmic solution once daily in the evening. The efficacy and safety of the fixed combination were compared with concomitant therapy over three months. The primary efficacy outcome measure was mean intraocular pressure. Results:Both travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination and the concomitant administration of travoprost 0.004% and timolol 0.5% produced statistically significant reductions from baseline in IOP, with mean IOP ranging from 15.2 to 16.5 mm Hg in the patients using travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination compared with 14.7 to 16.1 mm Hg in the concomitant group. The upper 95.1% confidence limit for the differences in mean IOP (fixed combination minus concomitant) was ≤1.5 mm Hg at 7 of 9 visits, including all three 8 AM time points, 24-hours post-dose. Mean IOP reductions from baseline ranged from 7.4 to 9.4 mm Hg in the fixed combination group compared with 8.4 to 9.4 mm Hg with concomitant therapy. Safety analysis demonstrated equivalent safety between the two treatment groups. Conclusions:A fixed combination of travoprost 0.004% and timolol 0.5% produced clinically relevant IOP reductions in patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension that were comparable to concomitant therapy with its components. Safety and tolerability of the fixed combination were also equivalent to concomitant therapy. Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination offers IOP reduction equivalent to concomitant therapy, with potential benefits that include convenience (fewer bottles and drops per day), improved compliance, cost savings (based on fewer co-payments), and elimination of potential washout effects.

Identification and characterization of the ocular hypotensive efficacy of travoprost, a potent and selective FP prostaglandin receptor agonist, and AL-6598, a DP prostaglandin receptor agonist

The structure-activity studies that led to the identification of travoprost, a highly selective and potent FP prostaglandin analog, and AL-6598, a DP prostaglandin analog, are detailed. In both series, the 1-alcohol analogs are very effective and are thought to be acting as prodrugs for the biologically active carboxylic acids. The efficacy of amide prodrugs depends on the degree of substitution and the size of the substituents. Selected compounds are profiled in vitro and in vivo preclinically. Clinical studies show that travoprost 0.004% (isopropyl ester) provided intraocular pressure control superior to timolol 0.5% when used as monotherapy in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. In clinical studies, AL-6598 0.01% provided a sustained intraocular pressure reduction with q.d. application; b.i.d. provided greater intraocular pressure control. The acute and, apparently, conjunctival hyperemia associated with topical ocular AL-6598 can be attenuated while maintaining intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy by formulating with brimonidine.

Evaluation of travoprost as adjunctive therapy in patients with uncontrolled intraocular pressure while using timolol 0.5

PURPOSE To evaluate the intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy and safety of travoprost 0.0015% and 0.004%, dosed daily in the evening compared with vehicle, in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension, whose intraocular pressure was not adequately controlled on timolol 0.5% twice daily (twice daily). METHODS Subjects who qualified at screening began a run-in period dosing timolol twice daily for 3 weeks. If the subjects had an intraocular pressure of 24 to 36 mm Hg at 8 AM and 21 to 36 mm Hg at 10 AM and 4 pm in at least one eye on timolol, they were randomized to one of two concentrations of travoprost (0.0015% or 0.004%) or vehicle solution every day and were followed for 6 months. Four hundred twenty-six subjects were randomized. The mean intraocular pressure at 8 AM, 10 AM, and 4 PM in the patients eye with the higher intraocular pressure was used for the analysis. RESULTS Mean baseline values (25 mm Hg) for subjects at eligibility (while maintained on timolol) were not significantly different (P <.0001) among the treatment groups. The intraocular pressure was lowered an additional -5.7 to -7.2 mm Hg and -5.1 to -6.7 mm Hg in the travoprost 0.004% and 0.0015% concentrations, respectively. These changes were significantly (P < or =.0001) different from the vehicle group (-1.3 to -2.8 mm Hg). The intraocular pressure range on treatment at all visit times over the 6-month treatment period ranged from 17.9 to 19.2 mm Hg for travoprost 0.004% and 18.3 to 20.1 mm Hg for travoprost 0.0015% compared with 22.4 to 24.1 mm Hg for vehicle. Average hyperemia scores ranged from trace to mild (mean 0.5 on a scale of 0 = none/trace; 1= mild; 2 = moderate; 3 = severe) for all treatment groups. No iris pigmentation changes were observed in any patient during this study. There were no clinically or statistically significant changes from baseline in visual acuity, ocular cells and flare, fundus parameter, cup-to-disk ratio and visual field between the treatment groups. There were no serious adverse events reported for any treatment group. CONCLUSIONS Travoprost produced clinically relevant and statistically significant additional intraocular pressure reductions from baseline when used adjunctively with timolol in subjects with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Effects of travoprost on aqueous humor dynamics in patients with elevated intraocular pressure.

PurposeTo determine the mechanism by which travoprost 0.004% reduces intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with ocular hypertension or primary open angle glaucoma. DesignThis is a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, single center study of 26 patients scheduled for 3 visits (baseline, day 15, and days 17 to 18) following screening. MethodsAfter appropriate washout of all ocular medications, baseline IOPs were taken and travoprost 0.004% was administered once-daily in the evening for 17 consecutive doses to 1 eye and its vehicle to the fellow eye in a randomized, masked fashion. On day 15, beginning 12 hours after the 14th consecutive dose, IOP was measured by pneumatonometry, aqueous flow and outflow facility by fluorophotometry, and episcleral venous pressure by venomanometry. Uveoscleral outflow was determined by mathematical calculation. Two days later, the last drop of drug/vehicle was given at 2000 hours. Fluorophotometry and tonometry measurements were repeated between 2200 and 0600 hours. Treated eyes were compared with contralateral control eyes or baseline measurements, and daytime measurements were compared with nighttime measurements using paired t tests. ResultsTravoprost-treated eyes showed a significant (P<0.001) decrease in daytime IOP compared with baseline (26%) or to vehicle-treated eyes (22%), and an increase in daytime outflow facility (P=0.001; 64%). The increase in uveoscleral outflow was not statistically significant. At night, the IOPs of travoprost-treated eyes remained 21% to 24% below baseline daytime values. Seated and supine IOPs in control eyes were significantly (P<0.04) lower at 2200 hours than 1700 hours (P<0.04). Supine IOPs were higher than seated IOPs in both control and treated eyes (P<0.001). Aqueous flow was significantly (P<0.001) reduced at night in both travoprost (30%) and vehicle-treated (25%) eyes when compared with daytime values. No other comparisons were statistically significant. ConclusionsTravoprost seems to lower IOP by increasing trabecular outflow facility. An effect on uveoscleral outflow cannot be ruled out.

Intraocular Pressure-Lowering Efficacy of Brinzolamide 1%/Timolol 0.5% Fixed Combination Compared with Brinzolamide 1% and Timolol 0.5%

PURPOSE To compare the safety and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy of brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination with brinzolamide 1% or timolol 0.5% alone in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OHT). DESIGN Randomized, double-masked, parallel group, multicenter study. PARTICIPANTS Five hundred twenty-three patients were randomized to the study treatments. METHODS Patients with OAG or OHT were recruited to the study. Qualifying eyes had IOPs of 24 to 36 mmHg at 8 am and 21 to 36 mmHg at 10 am on 2 eligibility visits after an appropriate washout period from previous treatment. Patients were assigned randomly to either brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5%, brinzolamide 1% (Azopt; Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX), or timolol 0.5%, dosed twice daily and were followed up while receiving therapy for 6 months. At selected sites, additional IOP measurements were performed at 12 pm, 4 pm, and 8 pm during the 2 eligibility visits, at month 3, and at month 6. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Mean IOP. RESULTS Brinzolamide 1%/timolol 0.5% produced statistically significant and clinically relevant reductions from baseline ranging from 8.0 to 8.7 mmHg, which were statistically and clinically superior to that of either brinzolamide 1% (5.1-5.6 mmHg) or timolol 0.5% (5.7-6.9 mmHg). No safety concerns were identified based on an assessment of ocular and cardiovascular parameters and a review of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Brinzolamide 1%/timolol 05% is superior in IOP-lowering efficacy to either brinzolamide 1% or timolol 0.5%.

Anterior Juxtascleral Delivery of Anecortave Acetate in Eyes with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: A Pilot Investigation

PURPOSE To describe the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effects in eyes with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) after treatment with an anterior juxtascleral depot of anecortave acetate. DESIGN Prospective, interventional case series. METHODS Seven eyes of six subjects with OAG, with uncontrolled IOP while being administered one or more topical medications, received 24 mg anecortave acetate delivered by anterior juxtascleral depot. IOP was assessed at baseline and regularly after treatment for up to 24 months. RESULTS Mean IOP before anecortave acetate treatment was 31.3 +/- 11.3 mm Hg and dropped by 9.5 +/- 4.5 mm Hg (32.7% +/- 16.8%) within one week after treatment. This IOP reduction was sustained through six months (8.4 +/- 5.4 mm Hg [29.6% +/- 12.4%]) and 12 months (9.5 +/- 5.7 mm Hg [34.0% +/- 15.9%]) after a single anecortave acetate treatment. The injection process was well tolerated, and no eyes experienced any injection-related or drug-related serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Both the anterior juxtascleral depot of a drug and anecortave acetate may be promising candidates for IOP reduction in eyes with OAG. Additional studies are required to establish better their efficacy and safety, optimal dosing frequency, mechanism of action, and potential additivity to other IOP-lowering therapies.

Efficacy of brinzolamide and levobetaxolol in pediatric glaucomas: A randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE To describe the safety and clinical response on elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) of brinzolamide and levobetaxolol in pediatric patients under 6 years of age. METHODS A double-masked, randomized design. Pediatric patients were randomized to brinzolamide suspension, 1%, or levobetaxolol suspension, 0.5%, both dosed twice daily. IOPs at 9 AM were taken at screening, baseline, and weeks 2, 6, and 12. A descriptive study with mean change from baseline IOP, the primary efficacy parameter. RESULTS Seventy-eight evaluable patients (32 brinzolamide and 46 levobetaxolol). Patients on no prestudy IOP-lowering therapy randomized to brinzolamide had mean IOP change from baseline ranging from -4.1 mm Hg (week 2) to -5.0 mm Hg (week 6). When all brinzolamide patients are considered, there was little mean change from baseline IOP due to the large number of patients enrolled without a washout of prior IOP-lowering therapy. Levobetaxolol patients had mean change from baseline, ranging from -1.8 mm Hg (week 6) to -2.9 mm Hg (week 2). Levobetaxolol patients on no prestudy therapy had mean IOP change from baseline ranging from -2.9 mm Hg (week 12) to -4.0 mm Hg (week 2). Brinzolamide was more efficacious for glaucoma associated with systemic or ocular abnormalities and less efficacious for primary congenital glaucoma. Levobetaxolol was most efficacious for primary congenital glaucoma. Adverse events were predominantly nonserious and did not interrupt patient continuation in the study. CONCLUSIONS Both brinzolamide and levobetaxolol were well tolerated. Both drugs provided clinically relevant IOP reductions for patients not on a previous medication, although efficacy is, in part, contingent upon diagnosis.