American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 149, Issue 4 , Pages 661-671.e1, April 2010

Twelve-Month, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Bimatoprost 0.01%, 0.0125%, and 0.03% in Patients with Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension

  • L. Jay Katz

      Affiliations

    • Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    • Corresponding Author InformationInquiries to L. Jay Katz, Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Hospital, 840 Walnut Street, Suite 1110, Philadelphia, PA 19107
  • ,
  • John S. Cohen

      Affiliations

    • Cincinnati Eye Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio
  • ,
  • Amy L. Batoosingh

      Affiliations

    • Allergan, Inc, Irvine, California
  • ,
  • Carlos Felix

      Affiliations

    • Allergan, Inc, Irvine, California
  • ,
  • Vincent Shu

      Affiliations

    • Allergan, Inc, Irvine, California
  • ,
  • Rhett M. Schiffman

      Affiliations

    • Allergan, Inc, Irvine, California

Accepted 1 December 2009.

Purpose

To evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of ophthalmic formulations of bimatoprost 0.01% and 0.0125% compared with bimatoprost 0.03%.

Design

Prospective, randomized, double-masked, multicenter clinical trial.

Methods

Patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized to receive once-daily bimatoprost 0.01% (n = 186), bimatoprost 0.0125% (n = 188), or bimatoprost 0.03% (n = 187) for 12 months. The primary efficacy measure was IOP. Safety measures included adverse events and an objective assessment of conjunctival hyperemia.

Results

Baseline mean IOPs were similar among treatment groups. Differences in mean IOP between the bimatoprost 0.01% or 0.0125% groups and the bimatoprost 0.03% group were less than 0.9 mm Hg throughout follow-up. Bimatoprost 0.01%, but not bimatoprost 0.0125%, was equivalent in efficacy to bimatoprost 0.03% based on predetermined criteria (limits of the 95% confidence interval of the between-group difference in mean IOP within ± 1.5 mm Hg at all time points and within ± 1 mm Hg at most time points). The overall incidence of treatment-related adverse events was reduced significantly in the bimatoprost 0.01% and bimatoprost 0.0125% groups compared with the bimatoprost 0.03% group (P ≤ .034). The percentage of patients with a moderate to severe increase from the baseline macroscopic hyperemia score was: bimatoprost 0.01%, 3.2%; bimatoprost 0.0125%, 9.0%; bimatoprost 0.03%, 9.1% (P = .019 for bimatoprost 0.01% vs 0.03%).

Conclusions

Bimatoprost 0.01% was equivalent to bimatoprost 0.03% in lowering IOP throughout 12 months of treatment and demonstrated improved tolerability, including less frequent and severe conjunctival hyperemia. Bimatoprost 0.01% demonstrated a better benefit-to-risk ratio than bimatoprost 0.0125%.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0002-9394(09)00906-4

doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2009.12.003

American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 149, Issue 4 , Pages 661-671.e1, April 2010