Abstract
Purpose
To assess real-world effectiveness and tolerability of fixed-dose combination netarsudil 0.02%/latanoprost 0.005% (FCNL) in management of glaucoma patients in a tertiary eye care center.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included glaucoma patients initiated on FCNL from January 2018 to July 2021 with at least 1-month follow-up. Demographic and clinical data were collected at baseline and at follow-up visits through 12 months. Patient-solicited side effects were recorded at each visit. Maximum glaucoma pharmacotherapy was defined as surgery/laser being the next treatment option following an intensive pharmacotherapy regimen, or when pharmacotherapy could not be increased due to allergy/intolerance or all pharmacologic mechanisms already being in use.
Results
Seventy-nine eyes of 47 patients were included. Mean age was 67.7 ± 14.7 years. Baseline IOP was 18.7 ± 4.9 mmHg; mean change in IOP (∆IOP) each study visit compared to baseline ranged from − 1.6 ± 3.5 to − 4.4 ± 4.1 mmHg (all p < 0.05). The eyes on maximum glaucoma pharmacotherapy (73.4%) had similar ∆IOP compared to those on non-maximal therapy at each visit (p > 0.2 for all). Forty-three (54.4%) eyes were switched from a prostaglandin analog alone, producing a 1-month IOP reduction of − 4.7 ± 3.9 mmHg at 1 month which remained significant at each visit for the 12-month study period (all p < 0.05). Across all study visits, conjunctival hyperemia was documented in 26 (32.9%) eyes. Subjective blurry vision was reported in 22 (27.8%) eyes without significant worsening of visual acuity at any visit (all p > 0.05). Six (7.6%) and 7 (8.9%) eyes required further medical or surgical/laser intervention, respectively. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed no significant difference in the need for subsequent medical or surgical intervention between those on maximum and non-maximal pharmacotherapy (p > 0.4).
Conclusion
FCNL was well-tolerated and demonstrated a significant and sustained reduction in IOP, even as last-line therapy before incisional or laser surgery in those on maximum glaucoma pharmacotherapy. FCNL is a viable treatment option for glaucomatous eyes before consideration of surgical intervention.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya’ale D et al (2004) Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Bull World Health Organ 82:844–851
Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M et al (2003) Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol (Chicago Ill: 1960) 121:48–56. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.121.1.48
Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ et al (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 (Chicago Ill: 1960) 120:701–713. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.120.6.701
Anderson DR (2003) Collaborative normal tension glaucoma study. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 14:86–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/00055735-200304000-00006
Sturdivant JM, Royalty SM, Lin CW et al (2016) Discovery of the ROCK inhibitor netarsudil for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 26:2475–2480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmcl.2016.03.104
Rao VP, Epstein DL (2007) Rho GTPase/Rho kinase inhibition as a novel target for the treatment of glaucoma. BioDrugs 21:167–177. https://doi.org/10.2165/00063030-200721030-00004
Rao PV, Deng PF, Kumar J, Epstein DL (2001) Modulation of aqueous humor outflow facility by the Rho kinase-specific inhibitor Y-27632. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 42:1029–1037
Tanna AP, Johnson M (2018) Rho kinase inhibitors as a novel treatment for glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Ophthalmology 125:1741–1756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.04.040
Serle JB, Katz LJ, McLaurin E et al (2018) Two phase 3 clinical trials comparing the safety and efficacy of netarsudil to timolol in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: rho kinase elevated IOP treatment trial 1 and 2 (ROCKET-1 and ROCKET-2). Am J Ophthalmol 186:116–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2017.11.019
Lewis RA, Levy B, Ramirez N et al (2016) Fixed-dose combination of AR-13324 and latanoprost: a double-masked, 28-day, randomised, controlled study in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Br J Ophthalmol 100:339–344. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-306778
Bacharach J, Dubiner HB, Levy B et al (2015) Double-masked, randomized, dose-response study of AR-13324 versus latanoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure. Ophthalmology 122:302–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.08.022
Asrani S, Bacharach J, Holland E et al (2020) Fixed-dose combination of netarsudil and latanoprost in ocular hypertension and open-angle glaucoma: pooled efficacy/safety analysis of phase 3 MERCURY-1 and -2. Adv Ther 37:1620–1631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-020-01277-2
Brubaker JW, Teymoorian S, Lewis RA et al (2020) One year of netarsudil and latanoprost fixed-dose combination for elevated intraocular pressure: phase 3, randomized MERCURY-1 study. Ophthalmol Glaucoma 3:327–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogla.2020.05.008
Asrani S, Robin AL, Serle JB et al (2019) Netarsudil/latanoprost fixed-dose combination for elevated intraocular pressure: Three-Month Data from a Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Am J Ophthalmol 207:248–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2019.06.016
Steven DW, Alaghband P, Lim KS (2018) Preservatives in glaucoma medication. Br J Ophthalmol 102:1497–1503. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311544
Wisely CE, Sheng H, Heah T, Kim T (2020) Effects of netarsudil and latanoprost alone and in fixed combination on corneal endothelium and corneal thickness: post-hoc analysis of MERCURY-2. Adv Ther 37:1114–1123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-020-01227-y
Shiuey EJ, Mehran NA, Ustaoglu M et al (2022) The effectiveness and safety profile of netarsudil 0.02% in glaucoma treatment: real-world 6-month outcomes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 260:967–974. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05410-x
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board at Wills Eye Hospital (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) and with the Declaration of Helsinki 1964 and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of interest
NNK received research support from AbbVie/Allergan, Guardion Health Services Inc., Equinox, Nicox, Olleyes, Santen, Glaukos, Diopsys, and Aerie, and consulting fees from AbbVie/Allergan (myself, spouse), Regeneron (spouse), Alimera (spouse), and Genentech (spouse). AGS has received research support from AbbVie, Inc., and consulting fees from AbbVie, Inc., and also participates on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for AbbVie, Inc. RR received research support from Olleyes, Equinox, and Allergan. DL has received research support from Allergan, Equinox, Glaukos, Mati, Nicox, Olleyes, and Santan, lecture fees from Glaukos, and consulting fees from Quidel Eye Health. JW, EJS, JSM, and MJP declare they have no financial disclosures.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Wong, JC., Shiuey, E.J., Razeghinejad, R. et al. The effectiveness and tolerability of fixed-dose combination netarsudil 0.02%/latanoprost 0.005% at a tertiary glaucoma center. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 261, 193–200 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05780-w
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05780-w