Introduction: This multicenter, randomized, comparative, and investigator-masked crossover clinical trial sought to compare the efficacy and tolerability of fixed combinations of 0.1% brimonidine/0.5% timolol (BTFC) versus 1% dorzolamide/0.5% timolol (DTFC) as adjunctive therapies to prostaglandin analogues.
Methods: A total of 110 patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension previously treated with prostaglandin analogue monotherapy were randomized to receive either BTFC or DTFC as adjunctive therapy for 8 weeks. These patients were then crossed over to the alternative treatment arm for another 8 weeks. The reduction in intraocular pressure (IOP) (primary outcome), occurrence of adverse events, ocular discomfort after instillation, and patient preference (secondary outcomes) were recorded through patient interviews.
Results: BTFC instillation for 8 weeks reduced IOP by 3.55 mmHg, demonstrating non-inferiority to DTFC instillation (3.60 mmHg; P < 0.0001, mixed-effects model). Although adverse events were rare with both combinations, patients reported greater discomfort with DTFC than with BTFC (P < 0.0001). More patients preferred BTFC (P < 0.0001) over DTFC, as BTFC caused minimal or no eye irritation.
Conclusion: As BTFC offered better tolerability than DTFC with comparable reduction in IOP, we recommend it as an alternative for patients who experience ocular discomfort with DTFC-prostaglandin analogue combination therapy.
Trial registration number: jRCTs051190125.
Keywords: Aibeta; Brimonidine; Combigan; Cosopt; Crossover; Dorzolamide; Glaucoma; Intraocular pressure; Randomized clinical trial; Timolol.
Patients with glaucoma who require further reduction in intraocular pressure while undergoing monotherapy with prostaglandin analogue ophthalmic solution have been prescribed two enhanced treatment options: 0.1% brimonidine/0.5% timolol fixed combination ophthalmic solution (BTFC) and 1% dorzolamide/0.5% timolol fixed combination ophthalmic solution (DTFC). The Aibeta Crossover Study Group in Japan compared the efficacy and tolerability of fixed combinations of BTFC versus DTFC when an additional fixed combination ophthalmic solution was prescribed in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension who had been treated with prostaglandin analogue monotherapy. We recruited 110 patients previously treated with prostaglandin analogue monotherapy at 20 clinical centers in Japan, then randomly assigned them to two alternative treatment groups: the BTFC to DTFC group or the DTFC to BTFC group, as an adjunctive therapy to prostaglandin analogues for total of 16 weeks. We compared the reduction in intraocular pressure, occurrence of side effects, eye discomfort after instillation, and patient preference between BTFC versus DTFC instillations. The intraocular pressure reduction of BTFC instillation was comparable to that of DTFC instillation, showing non-inferiority to DTFC (3.55 mmHg vs. 3.60 mmHg; P < 0.0001, mixed-effects model). Both eye drops caused few side effects; however, patients felt greater eye discomfort with DTFC than with BTFC (P < 0.0001). Because of less eye irritation, more patients preferred BTFC (P < 0.0001) over DTFC. We can recommend using BTFC for patients who feel eye discomfort with DTFC–prostaglandin analogue combination therapy.
© 2023. The Author(s).