Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pharmacological Management of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

Second-Line Options and Beyond

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Drugs & Aging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Glaucoma is one of the leading causes of blindness worldwide. Increased intraocular pressure (IOP) is considered to be the most important risk factor. Major outcome studies from recent years have shown that lowering IOP is beneficial in primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. The introduction of new classes of IOP-lowering drugs (α2-adrenoceptor agonists, topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors and hypotensive lipids) in the last decade has contributed to a change in the drug prescription pattern. Together with β-adrenoceptor antagonists (β-blockers), these drugs are now considered to be first-choice classes, giving ophthalmologists ample opportunities to choose from a broad spectrum of IOP-lowering drugs. The number of possible medical treatment combinations has increased likewise.

We review medical treatment combinations of two, three or four drugs from the four major first-choice glaucoma drug classes and provide an overview of the scientific evidence for IOP efficacy of second-line medical options when first-line therapy has been effective but additional IOP lowering is necessary. A systematic search of the literature initially revealed 2729 publications. After a thorough selection process, 42 studies were found to be eligible for inclusion in the review. Publications were excluded if the primary endpoint of the study was not IOP or if glaucoma topics other than IOP lowering of drugs were studied. In addition, studies that reported results for monotherapies only were excluded. The vast majority of study arms reported on combinations of a β-blocker with either a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor or a hypotensive lipid. For a number of treatment combinations no eligible studies were available or could be included.

This review shows that combining drugs from the different first-choice classes results in an additional IOP decrease. The exact magnitude of this additional decrease and the patients to whom it applies remain unclear. In many studies, no information on IOP before the run-in phase was available. However, such data are important in order to determine whether patients with high untreated IOP or patients non-responsive to the run-in drug(s) were preferentially included. Another issue that hampers interpretation is the fact that the timepoints of measurements of IOP before and after adding a drug should be related to the peak and trough times of the drugs. Finally, differences between concomitant use and fixed combined use of drugs may have consequences for the interpretation of results.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Table V
Table VI
Table VII
Table VIII
Table IX

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The use of trade names is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.

References

  1. Quigley HA. Number of people with glaucoma worldwide. Br J Ophthalmol 1996 May; 80(5): 389–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Dielemans I, Vingerling JR, Wolfs RC, et al. The prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma in a population-based study in the Netherlands: the Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology 1994 Nov; 101(11): 1851–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Tielsch JM, Sommer A, Katz J, et al. Racial variations in the prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma: the Baltimore Eye Survey. JAMA 1991 Jul 17; 266(3): 369–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Mukesh BN, McCarty CA, Rait JL, et al. Five-year incidence of open-angle glaucoma: the visual impairment project. Ophthalmology 2002 Jun; 109(6): 1047–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Klein BE, Klein R, Sponsel WE, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology 1992 Oct; 99(10): 1499–504

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Leske MC, Connell AM, Schachat AP, et al. The Barbados Eye Study: prevalence of open angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1994 Jun; 112(6): 821–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sommer A, Tielsch JM, Katz J, et al. Relationship between intraocular pressure and primary open angle glaucoma among white and black Americans: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Arch Ophthalmol 1991 Aug; 109(8): 1090–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. European Glaucoma Society. Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma. 2nd ed. Savona: European Glaucoma Society, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  9. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Preferred practice pattern: primary open-angle glaucoma [online]. Available from URL: http://www.aao.org/ppp [Accessed 2007 Aug 10]

  10. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Preferred practice pattern: primary open-angle glaucoma suspect [online]. Available from URL: http://www.aao.org/ppp [Accessed 2007 Aug 10]

  11. Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K, et al. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology 1996 Oct; 103(10): 1661–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Quigley HA, West SK, Rodriguez J, et al. The prevalence of glaucoma in a population-based study of Hispanic subjects: Proyecto VER. Arch Ophthalmol 2001 Dec; 119(12): 1819–26

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tielsch JM, Katz J, Sommer A, et al. Family history and risk of primary open angle glaucoma: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Arch Ophthalmol 1994 Jan; 112(1): 69–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Wolfs RC, Klaver CC, Ramrattan RS, et al. Genetic risk of primary open-angle glaucoma: population-based familial aggregation study. Arch Ophthalmol 1998 Dec; 116(12): 1640–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Martin MJ, Sommer A, Gold EB, et al. Race and primary open-angle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1985 Apr 15; 99(4): 383–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Wilensky JT, Gandhi N, Pan T. Racial influences in open-angle glaucoma. Ann Ophthalmol 1978 Oct; 10(10): 1398–402

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Brandt JD, Beiser JA, Kass MA, et al. Central corneal thickness in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS). Ophthalmology 2001 Oct; 108(10): 1779–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002 Jun; 120(6): 714–20, discussion 829-30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Shah S, Chatterjee A, Mathai M, et al. Relationship between corneal thickness and measured intraocular pressure in a general ophthalmology clinic. Ophthalmology 1999 Nov; 106(11): 2154–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mitchell P, Hourihan F, Sandbach J, et al. The relationship between glaucoma and myopia: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology 1999 Oct; 106(10): 2010–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Dielemans I, de Jong PT, Stolk R, et al. Primary open-angle glaucoma, intraocular pressure, and diabetes mellitus in the general elderly population: the Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology 1996 Aug; 103(8): 1271–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Klein BE, Klein R, Jensen SC. Open-angle glaucoma and older-onset diabetes: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology 1994 Jul; 101(7): 1173–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Leske MC, Connell AM, Wu SY, et al. Risk factors for open-angle glaucoma: the Barbados Eye Study. Arch Ophthalmol 1995 Jul; 113(7): 918–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mitchell P, Smith W, Chey T, et al. Open-angle glaucoma and diabetes: the Blue Mountains Eye Study, Australia. Ophthalmology 1997 Apr; 104(4): 712–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tielsch JM, Katz J, Quigley HA, et al. Diabetes, intraocular pressure, and primary open-angle glaucoma in the Baltimore Eye Survey. Ophthalmology 1995 Jan; 102(1): 48–53

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Bonomi L, Marchini G, Marraffa M, et al. Vascular risk factors for primary open angle glaucoma: the Egna-Neumarkt Study. Ophthalmology 2000 Jul; 107(7): 1287–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Tielsch JM, Katz J, Sommer A, et al. Hypertension, perfusion pressure, and primary open-angle glaucoma: a population-based assessment. Arch Ophthalmol 1995 Feb; 113(2): 216–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Dielemans I, Vingerling JR, Algra D, et al. Primary open-angle glaucoma, intraocular pressure, and systemic blood pressure in the general elderly population: the Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology 1995 Jan; 102(1): 54–60

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kahn HA, Leibowitz HM, Ganley JP, et al. The Framingham Eye Study: II. Association of ophthalmic pathology with single variables previously measured in the Framingham Heart Study. Am J Epidemiol 1977 Jul; 106(1): 33–41

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Peeters A, Schouten JS, Webers CA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of early detection and treatment of ocular hypertension and primary open-angle glaucoma by the ophthalmologist. Eye 2008 Mar; 22(3): 354–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. David R, Zangwill L, Stone D, et al. Epidemiology of intraocular pressure in a population screened for glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1987 Oct; 71(10): 766–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Klein BE, Klein R, Linton KL. Intraocular pressure in an American community: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992 Jun; 33(7): 2224–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Konstas AG, Mantziris DA, Stewart WC. Diurnal intraocular pressure in untreated exfoliation and primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1997 Feb; 115(2): 182–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Allingham RR, Damji KF, Freedman S, et al.; Bruce Shields M, emeritus senior author. Shields’ textbook of glaucoma. 5th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005: 36–58

    Google Scholar 

  35. Asrani S, Zeimer R, Wilensky J, et al. Large diurnal fluctuations in intraocular pressure are an independent risk factor in patients with glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2000 Apr; 9(2): 134–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Bergea B, Bodin L, Svedbergh B. Impact of intraocular pressure regulation on visual fields in open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1999 May; 106(5): 997–1004, discussion 5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Hoffman D, Coleman AL, et al. Predictive factors for glaucomatous visual field progression in the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. Ophthalmology 2004 Sep; 111(9): 1627–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Webers CA, van der Valk R, Schouten JS, et al. Intraocular pressure-lowering effect of adding dorzolamide or latanoprost to timolol: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Ophthalmology 2007 Jan; 114(1): 40–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, et al. 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 2002 Jun; 120(6): 701–13; discussion 829-30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, et al. Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology 2001 Nov; 108(11): 1943–53

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1998 Oct; 126(4): 498–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. Comparison of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with normal-tension glaucoma and patients with thera-peutically reduced intraocular pressures. Am J Ophthalmol 1998 Oct; 126(4): 487–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. AGIS Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 7. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol 2000 Oct; 130(4): 429–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, et al. Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 2003 Jan; 121(1): 48–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hyman L, et al. Predictors of long-term progression in the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Ophthalmology 2007 Nov; 114(11): 1965–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Maier PC, Funk J, Schwarzer G, et al. Treatment of ocular hypertension and open angle glaucoma: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2005; 331(7509): 134–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. van der Valk R, Webers CA, Schouten JS, et al. Intraocular pressure-lowering effects of all commonly used glaucoma drugs: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Ophthalmology 2005 Jul; 112(7): 1177–85

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Baudouin C. Le traitement medical initial: betabloquants ou prostaglandines. Les prostaglandines: un traitement moderne du glaucome. J Fr Ophtalmol 2004; 27 (6 Pt 2): 718–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. McKee HDR, Gupta MS, Ahad MA, et al. First-choice treatment preferences for primary open-angle glaucoma in the United Kingdom. Eye 2005; 19(8): 923–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Owen CG, Carey IM, De Wilde S, et al. The epidemiology of medical treatment for glaucoma and ocular hypertension in the United Kingdom: 1994 to 2003. Br J Ophthalmol 2006; 90(7): 861–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Neelakantan A, Vaishnav HD, Iyer SA, et al. Is addition of a third or fourth antiglaucoma medication effective? J Glaucoma 2004 Apr; 13(2): 130–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Konstas AG, Mantziris DA, Maltezos A, et al. Comparison of 24 hour control with Timoptic 0.5% and Timoptic-XE 0.5% in exfoliation and primary open-angle glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1999 Oct; 77(5): 541–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Kumar H, Sudan R, Sethi HS, et al. Timolol maleate 0.5% versus timolol maleate in gel forming solution 0.5% (Timolol GFS) in open angle glaucoma in India: preliminary safety and efficacy study. Indian J Ophthalmol 2002 Mar; 50(1): 21–3

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Shedden A, Laurence J, Tipping R. 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 2001 Mar; 23(3): 440–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Basic and clinical science course: glaucoma, section 10. San Francisco (CA): American Academy of Ophthalmology, 2006: 157–77

    Google Scholar 

  56. Boger 3rd WP. Short-term ‘escape’ and long-term ‘drift’: the dissipation effects of the beta adrenergic blocking agents. Surv Ophthalmol 1983 Dec; 28 Suppl.: 235–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Kahle G, Kaulen P, Scherer V, et al. Increase in beta-adrenergic receptors in rabbits in long-term local administration of beta-blockers. Ophthalmology 1993 Dec; 90(6): 626–30

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Schuman JS. Effects of systemic beta-blocker therapy on the efficacy and safety of topical brimonidine and timolol: Brimonidine Study Groups 1 and 2. Ophthalmology 2000 Jun; 107(6): 1171–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Sugrue MF. Pharmacological and ocular hypotensive properties of topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. Prog Retin Eye Res 2000 Jan; 19(1): 87–112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Kaur IP, Smitha R, Aggarwal D, et al. Acetazolamide: future perspective in topical glaucoma therapeutics. Int J Pharm 2002 Nov 6; 248(1–2): 1–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Allingham RR, Damji KF, Freedman S, et al.; Bruce Shields M, emeritus senior author. Shields’ textbook of glaucoma. 5th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005: 484–92

    Google Scholar 

  62. Toris CB, Camras CB, Yablonski ME. Acute versus chronic effects of brimonidine on aqueous humor dynamics in ocular hypertensive patients. Am J Ophthalmol 1999 Jul; 128(1): 8–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Holmwood PC, Chase RD, Krupin T, et al. Apraclonidine and argon laser trabeculoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 1992 Jul 15; 114(1): 19–22

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Silverstone DE, Brint SF, Olander KW, et al. Prophylactic use of apraclonidine for intraocular pressure increase after Nd:YAG capsulotomies. Am J Ophthalmol 1992 Apr 15; 113(4): 401–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Robin AL, Ritch R, Shin DH, et al. Short-term efficacy of apraclonidine hydrochloride added to maximum-tolerated medical therapy for glaucoma: Apraclonidine Maximum-Tolerated Medical Therapy Study Group. Am J Ophthalmol 1995 Oct; 120(4): 423–32

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Hylton C, Robin AL. Update on prostaglandin analogs. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2003 Apr; 14(2): 65–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Aung T, Chew PT, Yip CC, et al. A randomized double-masked crossover study comparing latanoprost 0.005% with unoprostone 0.12% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Am J Ophthalmol 2001 May; 131(5): 636–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Jampel HD, Bacharach J, Sheu WP, et al. Randomized clinical trial of latanoprost and unoprostone in patients with elevated intraocular pressure. Am J Ophthalmol 2002 Dec; 134(6): 863–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Fechtner RD, Realini T. Fixed combinations of topical glaucoma medications. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2004; 15(2): 132–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Realini T, Fechtner RD. 56,000 ways to treat glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2002 Nov; 109(11): 1955–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. van der Valk R, Schouten JS, Webers CA, et al. Changes in glaucoma treatment and achieved IOP after introduction of new glaucoma medication. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2006 Oct; 244(10): 1267–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Italian Multicentric Open Randomized Study under the aegis of A. I.S.G.: final results and official report. Hypotensive efficacy in primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: latanoprost in monotherapy vs timolol and dorzolamide in association. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000; (232): 49–50

  73. Adamsons I, Clineschmidt C, Polis A, et al. The efficacy and safety of dorzolamide as adjunctive therapy to timolol maleate gellan solution in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: Additivity Study Group. J Glaucoma 1998; 7(4): 253–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Akman A, Cetinkaya A, Akova YA, et al. Comparison of additional intraocular pressure-lowering effects of latanoprost vs brimonidine in primary open-angle glaucoma patients with intraocular pressure uncontrolled by timolol-dorzolamide combination. Eye 2005; 19(2): 145–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Day DG, Schacknow PN, Wand M, et al. Timolol 0.5%/dorzolamide 2% fixed combination vs timolol maleate 0.5% and unoprostone 0.15% given twice daily to patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Am J Ophthalmol 2003; 135(2): 138–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Bron AM, Denis P, Nordmann JP, et al. Additive IOP-reducing effect of latanoprost in patients insufficiently controlled on timolol. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2001; 79(3): 289–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Hartenbaum D, Maloney S, Vaccarelli L, et al. Comparison of dorzolamide and pilocarpine as adjunctive therapy in patients with open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Clin Ther 1999; 21(9): 1533–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Bucci MG. Intraocular pressure-lowering effects of latanoprost monotherapy versus latanoprost or pilocarpine in combination with timolol: a randomized, observer-masked multicenter study in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Italian Latanoprost Study Group. J Glaucoma 1999; 8(1): 24–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Kaluzny JJ, Szaflik J, Czechowicz Janicka K, et al. Timolol 0.5%/dorzolamide 2% fixed combination versus timolol 0.5%/pilocarpine 2% fixed combination in primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertensive patients. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2003; 81(4): 349–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Konstas AGP, Nakos E, Tersis I, et al. A comparison of once-daily morning vs evening dosing of concomitant latanoprost/timolol. Am J Ophthalmol 2002; 133(6): 753–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Clineschmidt CM, Williams RD, Snyder E, et al. A randomized trial in patients inadequately controlled with timolol alone comparing the dorzolamide-timolol combination to monotherapy with timolol or dorzolamide: Dorzolamide-Timolol Combination Study Group. Ophthalmology 1998; 105(10): 1952–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Stewart WC, Stewart JA, Day D, et al. Efficacy and safety of timolol maleate/latanoprost fixed combination versus timolol maleate and brimonidine given twice daily. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2003; 81(3): 242–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Coleman AL, Lerner F, Bernstein P, et al. A 3-month randomized controlled trial of bimatoprost (LUMIGAN) versus combined timolol and dorzolamide (Cosopt) in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Ophthalmology 2003; 110(12): 2362–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Diestelhorst M. The additive intraocular pressure-lowering effect of latanoprost 0.005% daily once and pilocarpine 2% t.i.d. in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a 6-month, randomized, multicenter study. German Latanoprost Study Group. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2000; 238(5): 433–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Emmerich KH. Comparison of latanoprost monotherapy to dorzolamide combined with timolol in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a 3-month randomised study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2000; 238(1): 19–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Franks WA, Renard JP, Cunliffe IA, et al. A 6-week, double-masked, parallel-group study of the efficacy and safety of travoprost 0.004% compared with latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Clin Ther 2006; 28(3): 332–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Gandolfi SA, Rossetti L, Cimino L, et al. Replacing maximum-tolerated medications with latanoprost versus adding latanoprost to maximum-tolerated medications: a two-center randomized prospective trial. J Glaucoma 2003; 12(4): 347–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Goni FJ. 12-week study comparing the fixed combination of brimonidine and timolol with concomitant use of the individual components in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Eur J Ophthalmol 2005; 15(5): 581–90

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Hommer A, Kapik B, Shams N. Unoprostone as adjunctive therapy to timolol: a double masked randomised study versus brimonidine and dorzolamide. Br J Ophthalmol 2003; 87(5): 592–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Higginbotham EJ, Feldman R, Stiles M, et al. Latanoprost and timolol combination therapy vs monotherapy: one-year randomized trial. Arch Ophthalmol 2002; 120(7): 915–22

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Honrubia FM, Larsson LI, Spiegel D. A comparison of the effects on intraocular pressure of latanoprost 0.005% and the fixed combination of dorzolamide 2% and timolol 0.5% in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2002; 80(6): 635–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Hutzelmann J, Owens S, Shedden A, et al. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of the fixed combination of dorzolamide/timolol and the concomitant administration of dorzolamide and timolol: a clinical equivalence study. International Clinical Equivalence Study Group. Br J Ophthalmol 1998; 82(11): 1249–53

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Konstas AG, Karabatsas CH, Lallos N, et al. 24-hour intraocular pressures with brimonidine purite versus dorzolamide added to latanoprost in primary open-angle glaucoma subjects. Ophthalmology 2005; 112(4): 603–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Konstas AG, Kozobolis VP, Lallos N, et al. Daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0.005%/timolol maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%/timolol maleate 0.5%. Eye 2004; 18(12): 1264–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Michaud JE, Friren B. Comparison of topical brinzolamide 1% and dorzolamide 2% eye drops given twice daily in addition to timolol 0.5% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Am J Ophthalmol 2001; 132(2): 235–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Orengo Nania S, Landry T, Von Tress M, et al. Evaluation of travoprost as adjunctive therapy in patients with uncontrolled intraocular pressure while using timolol 0.5%. Am J Ophthalmol 2001; 132(6): 860–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Ozturk F, Ermis SS, Inan UU, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of dorzolamide 2% when added to brimonidine 0.2% or timolol maleate 0.5% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2005; 21(1): 68–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Pfeiffer N. A comparison of the fixed combination of latano-prost and timolol with its individual components. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2002; 240(11): 893–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Polo V, Larrosa JM, Ferreras A, et al. Latanoprost vs combined therapy with timolol plus dorzolamide in open-angle glaucoma: a 24-month study. Ann Ophthalmol 2005; 37(1): 33–6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Polo V, Larrosa JM, Gomez ML, et al. Latanoprost versus combined therapy with timolol plus dorzolamide: IOP-lowering effect in open-angle glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2001; 79(1): 6–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Reis R, Queiroz CF, Santos LC, et al. A randomized, investigator-masked, 4-week study comparing timolol maleate 0.5%, brinzolamide 1%, and brimonidine tartrate 0.2% as adjunctive therapies to travoprost 0.004% in adults with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Clin Ther 2006; 28(4): 552–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Sall KN, Greff LJ, Johnson Pratt LR, et al. Dorzolamide/timolol combination versus concomitant administration of brimonidine and timolol: six-month comparison of efficacy and tolerability. Ophthalmology 2003; 110(3): 615–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Sharpe ED, Henry CJ, Mundorf TK, et al. Brimonidine 0.2% vs unoprostone 0.15% both added to timolol maleate 0.5% given twice daily to patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Eye 2005; 19(1): 35–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Shin D. Adjunctive therapy with brinzolamide 1% ophthalmic suspension (Azopt) in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension maintained on timolol therapy. Surv Ophthalmol 2000; 44Suppl. 2: S163–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Simmons ST. Efficacy of brimonidine 0.2% and dorzolamide 2% as adjunctive therapy to beta-blockers in adult patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Clin Ther 2001; 23(4): 604–19

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Simmons ST, Earl ML. Three-month comparison of brimonidine and latanoprost as adjunctive therapy in glaucoma and ocular hypertension patients uncontrolled on beta-blockers: tolerance and peak intraocular pressure lowering. Ophthalmology 2002; 109(2): 307–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Simmons ST, Samuelson TW. Comparison of brimonidine with latanoprost in the adjunctive treatment of glaucoma: ALPHA-GAN/XALATAN Study Group. Clin Ther 2000; 22(4): 388–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Solish AM, DeLucca PT, Cassel DA, et al. Dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination versus concomitant administration of brimonidine and timolol in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 3-month comparison of efficacy, tolerability, and patient-reported measures. J Glaucoma 2004; 13(2): 149–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Stewart WC, Day DG, Sharpe ED, et al. Efficacy and safety of timolol solution once daily vs timolol gel added to latanoprost. Am J Ophthalmol 1999; 128(6): 692–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Strohmaier K, Snyder E, DuBiner H, et al. The efficacy and safety of the dorzolamide-timolol combination versus the concomitant administration of its components: Dorzolamide-Timolol Study Group. Ophthalmology 1998; 105(10): 1936–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Tamer C, Oksuz H. Circadian intraocular pressure control with dorzolamide versus timolol maleate add-on treatments in primary open-angle glaucoma patients using latanoprost. Ophthalmic Res 2007; 39(1): 24–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Tsukamoto H, Noma H, Matsuyama S, et al. The efficacy and safety of topical brinzolamide and dorzolamide when added to the combination therapy of latanoprost and a beta-blocker in patients with glaucoma. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2005; 21(2): 170–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Hollo G, Chiselita D, Petkova N, et al. The efficacy and safety of timolol maleate versus brinzolamide each given twice daily added to travoprost in patients with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma. Eur J Ophthalmol 2006; 16(6): 816–23

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med 2002 Aug 30; 21(16): 2313–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. van der Valk R, Schouten JSAG, Webers CAB, et al. A network meta-analysis combined direct and indirect comparisons between glaucoma drugs to rank effectiveness in lowering intraocular pressure. J Clin Epidemiol. In press

Download references

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review.

Carroll Webers has acted as a consultant for and received honoraria from Alcon, Allergan, Merck and Pfizer, and has received grants from Alcon and Merck. Henny Beckers has acted as a consultant for and received honoraria from Alcon, Allergan and Merck, and has received grants from Alcon. The other authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Maastricht University Hospital, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands

    Carroll A. B. Webers, Henny J. M. Beckers, Rudy M. M. A. Nuijts & Jan S. A. G. Schouten

Authors
  1. Carroll A. B. Webers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henny J. M. Beckers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rudy M. M. A. Nuijts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan S. A. G. Schouten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carroll A. B. Webers.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Webers, C.A.B., Beckers, H.J.M., Nuijts, R.M.M.A. et al. Pharmacological Management of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma. Drugs Aging 25, 729–759 (2008). https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200825090-00002

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200825090-00002

Keywords

Search

Navigation