Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System
PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution (Trav/Tim) to latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution (Lat/Tim), dosed once daily in the morning, in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OH).
METHODS: This was a randomized, double-masked, multicenter, parallel group, active-controlled study conducted at 41 sites. At the eligibility visit the patients were randomized (1:1) to the assigned masked medication if they met inclusion/exclusion criteria, and the mean IOP values in the eligible eyes were > or =24 mmHg at 9 AM and > or =21 mmHg at 11 AM and 4 PM. Patients were excluded if the mean IOP in either eye was >36 mmHg. Patients were instructed to administer the assigned medication each morning at 9 AM. During the treatment phase of the study, IOP was measured at 9 AM at week 2, week 6, month 3, and month 9. At the month 6 and month 12 visits, IOP was measured at 9 AM, 11 AM, and 4 PM. Statistical methods included a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA); to test for noninferiority, a 95% confidence interval for the treatment group difference was constructed based on the ANOVA results for each time point at month 12.
RESULTS: Patients (n=408) with OAG or OH were enrolled at 41 sites. One patient withdrew prior to receiving medication so 207 in the Trav/Tim group and 200 in the Lat/Tim group were evaluable for safety. Baseline demographic characteristics as well as IOP values showed no statistical differences between the two groups. Trav/Tim provided lower mean IOP values than Lat/Tim that were statistically significant at the week 2 9 AM (p=0.0081), month 6 9 AM (p=0.0056), and month 6 11 AM (p=0.0128) time points and at 9 AM time point pooled across all visits (p=0.0235) when mean IOP was 0.6 mmHg lower in the Trav/Tim group. Treatment-related adverse events were mild in both groups. Although hyperemia was reported from a higher percentage of patients in Trav/Tim group, differences in average hyperemia scores between the two groups were not considered clinically relevant.
CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution produced mean IOP levels that are statistically noninferior to latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution. Furthermore, at 9:00 AM, 24 hours after dosing, IOP was statistically lower for travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% pooled across all visits. Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination ophthalmic solution is an effective treatment for reducing IOP and it is safe and well-tolerated in patients with OAG or OH.
A 1-year study to compare the efficacy and
safety of once-daily travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5%
to once-daily latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5%
in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular
hypertension
F. TOPOUZIS1;S. MELAMED2;H. DANESH MEYER3;A. P. WELLS4;V. KOZOBOLIS5;H. WIELAND6;R. ANDREW6;D. WELLS6;THE INTERNATIONAL TRAVOPROST/TIMOLOL STUDY GROUP University Hospital of Alexandroupolis;Ophthalmic Department;Greece: Vassilios P. Kozobolis*;George Maskaleris;Efstathios Detorakis • II Department of Ophthalmology;Aristotle University of Thessaloniki;Thessaloniki;Greece: Fotis Topouzis*;Eleftherios Anastasopoulos;Theofanis Pappas • Ophthalmiatrio Hospital of Athens;Greece: Artemios Kandarakis*;John Koutroumanos • Associate Professor of Ophthalmology;Eye Clinic of the General University Hospital of Ioannina;Greece: Miltiadis Aspiotis*;Chrisavgi Pappa • General Hospital of Nikaia “AG;Panteleimon;” Pireous;Greece: Emmanuel Vaikoussis*;Thrassyvoulos Paschalidis;Panagiotis Bournas;Nikos Kazatzis • Eye Associates;Sydney NSW;Australia: Ivan Goldberg*;Stuart Graham;Paul Healey • Eye Surgery Associates;East Melbourne VIC;Australia: Julian Lockhart Rait* • Suite 8;Lindfield NSW;Australia: Allan Bank* • Western Sydney Eye Hospital;University Clinic;Westmead Hospital;Westmead NSW;Australia: Paul R. Healey*;Jonathan Crowston;Magdalena Guzowski;Ranier Covar;Anne Lee;Jen Wan;Domit Azar • Quai des Tanneries 26;Belgium: Paul Stadion* • Marktplatz 3;Eupen;Belgium: François Lizin* • University Hospital Antwerp;Service of Ophthalmology;Belgium: Veva De Groot*;Patrick Schraepen;Bruno Reyntjens • University Hospital Ghent;Service of Ophthalmology;Ghent;Belgium: Anna Maria Kestelyn Stevens*;Fien Witters • Department of Ophthalmology;University of Tartu;Estonia: Pait Teesalu*;Imbi Kuus;Maris Oll • Ida Tallinna Keskhaigla Silmakliinik;Tallinn;Estonia: Ulle Aamer*;Elo Alas;Marko Pastak • Hopital Jean Minjoz;Service d’Ophtalmologie;Besancon Cedex;France: Bernard Y. C. Delbosc* • Augenarzt;Goeppingen;Germany: Albrecht Gerstenberger* • Augenarzt;Mannheim;Germany: Peter Jungmann* • Facharzt fuer Augenheilkunde;Starnberg;Germany: Ludwig T. Hamacher*;Ursula Hellmair • M.u.e.n.c.h.e.n.e.r.s.t.r. 3;Weilheim;Germany: Andreas U. M. Bayer*;Wolfgang Foerster • Marktplatz 34 36;Schorndorf;Germany: Thomas Christ* • Dipartimento di Specialità Medico Chirurgiche dell’Università di Catania;Azienda Ospedaliera “.S. Marta;V. Emanuele;Ferrarotto;” Catania;Italy: Alfredo Reibaldi*;Maurizio Uva;Antonio Longo;Daniela Lombardo • Policlinico San Matteo;Clinica Oculistica;Pavia;Italy: Fernando Trimarchi*;Giovanni Milano*;Antonella Clemente;M. Gemma Rossi;Ilaria Scatassi;Francesca Montemurro • Clinica Oculistica;Università di Torino;GRIGNOLO, Federico;Beatrice Brogliatti;ROLLE, Teresa;Cristina Favero;Elisabetta Giacosa;Angela Fornero • Goldschleger Eye Institute;Sheba Medical Center;Tel Hashomer;Israel: Shlomo Melamed*;Mordehai Goldenfeld;Hani Verbin;Zohar Vilner;Ran Knaan;Iris Moroz • Department of Ophthalmology;Carmel Medical Center;Haifa;Israel: Orna Geyer*;Eitan Segev • Department of Ophthalmology;Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center;Tel Aviv;Israel: Shimon Kurtz*;Meira Neudorfer;Gabi Shemesh;Shiri Zayit • Glaucoma Service;Outpatient Department;Clinical Hospital “Gailezers;” Riga;Latvia: Lasma Volksone*;Lija Karlsone • Department of Ophthalmology;Riga Stradins University Hospital;Riga;Latvia: Guna Laganovska*;Kristine Baumane;Ilze Egite • Eye Clinic;Kaunas University of Medicine;Kaunas;Lithuania: Ingrida Januleviciene*;Loreta Kuzmiene • Eye Institute;Remuera, Auckland;New Zealand: Helen Danesh Meyer* • Eye Department;Wellington Hospital;Wellington;New Zealand: Anthony P. Wells*;Andrew Riley;Anthony Bedggood;Helen Long;Nina Ashraff • Hospital Sao Jose;Servico de Oftalmologia;Lisbon;Portugal: Pedro A. L. Abrantes*;Maria Reina;Jose Pedro Silva;Joao Ilharco • Department of Ophthalmology;National University Hospital;Singapore: Paul Tec Kwan Chew*;Lennard Thean;Lim Boon Ang;Joseph Manuel;Loon Seng Chee;Clement Tan;Yeong Suet Ming • Singapore National Eye Centre;Singapore: Steve Kah Leng Seah*;Francis Oen;Lim Boon Ang;Rahat Husain;Hoh Sek Tian;Aung Tin • Hospital Clinico San Carlos;Madrid;Spain: Julián Garcia Sánchez*;Julián García Feijoo;José María Martínez de La Casa;Alfredo Castillo Gómez • Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet;Consulta de Ojos;Zaragoza;Spain: Francisco Manuel Honrubia López*;Vicente Polo Llorens;Luis Pablo Júlvez;Maria Luisa Gómez Martínez;José Manuel Larrosa Póvez • Fundación Hospital Alcorcón;Servicio de Oftalmología;Universidad Rey Juan Carlos;Alcorcon, Madrid;Spain: Alfonso Arias Puente*;Carmen Carrasco;Maria del Carmen;García, Yolanda;Andrés Alba • Hospital Universitario La Princesa;Servicio de Oftalmología;Madrid;Spain: Elena Gurdiel*;Emilio Dorronzoro;Maria Jesús Muniesa • Department of Ophthalmology;Tri Service General Hospital;Taipei;Taiwan: Da Wen Lu* • Consultant Ophthalmologist;Arrowe Park Hospital;Wirral, Merseyside;UK: Louis G. Clearkin*;Yogesh Patwala
2007-01-01
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering efficacy and safety of travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution (Trav/Tim) to latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution (Lat/Tim), dosed once daily in the morning, in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension (OH).
METHODS: This was a randomized, double-masked, multicenter, parallel group, active-controlled study conducted at 41 sites. At the eligibility visit the patients were randomized (1:1) to the assigned masked medication if they met inclusion/exclusion criteria, and the mean IOP values in the eligible eyes were > or =24 mmHg at 9 AM and > or =21 mmHg at 11 AM and 4 PM. Patients were excluded if the mean IOP in either eye was >36 mmHg. Patients were instructed to administer the assigned medication each morning at 9 AM. During the treatment phase of the study, IOP was measured at 9 AM at week 2, week 6, month 3, and month 9. At the month 6 and month 12 visits, IOP was measured at 9 AM, 11 AM, and 4 PM. Statistical methods included a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA); to test for noninferiority, a 95% confidence interval for the treatment group difference was constructed based on the ANOVA results for each time point at month 12.
RESULTS: Patients (n=408) with OAG or OH were enrolled at 41 sites. One patient withdrew prior to receiving medication so 207 in the Trav/Tim group and 200 in the Lat/Tim group were evaluable for safety. Baseline demographic characteristics as well as IOP values showed no statistical differences between the two groups. Trav/Tim provided lower mean IOP values than Lat/Tim that were statistically significant at the week 2 9 AM (p=0.0081), month 6 9 AM (p=0.0056), and month 6 11 AM (p=0.0128) time points and at 9 AM time point pooled across all visits (p=0.0235) when mean IOP was 0.6 mmHg lower in the Trav/Tim group. Treatment-related adverse events were mild in both groups. Although hyperemia was reported from a higher percentage of patients in Trav/Tim group, differences in average hyperemia scores between the two groups were not considered clinically relevant.
CONCLUSIONS: Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution produced mean IOP levels that are statistically noninferior to latanoprost 0.005%/timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution. Furthermore, at 9:00 AM, 24 hours after dosing, IOP was statistically lower for travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% pooled across all visits. Travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination ophthalmic solution is an effective treatment for reducing IOP and it is safe and well-tolerated in patients with OAG or OH.
F. TOPOUZIS1; S. MELAMED2; H. DANESH-MEYER3; A.P. WELLS4; V. KOZOBOLIS5; H. WIELAND6;
R. ANDREW6; D. WELLS6; THE INTERNATIONAL TRAVOPROST/TIMOLOL STU...espandi
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/125800
Citazioni
10
42
34
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2023-2025 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione.
La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e presenta gli indicatori calcolati alla data indicata sul report. Si ricorda che in sede di domanda ASN presso il MIUR gli indicatori saranno invece calcolati a partire dal 1° gennaio rispettivamente del quinto/decimo/quindicesimo anno precedente la scadenza del quadrimestre di presentazione della domanda (art 2 del DM 598/2018).
In questa simulazione pertanto il valore degli indicatori potrà differire da quello conteggiato all’atto della domanda ASN effettuata presso il MIUR a seguito di:
Correzioni imputabili a eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori.
Presenza di eventuali errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS
Variabilità nel tempo dei valori citazionali (per i settori bibliometrici)
Variabilità della finestra temporale considerata in funzione della sessione di domanda ASN a cui si partecipa.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle regole riportate nel DM 598/2018 e dell'allegata Tabella A e delle specifiche definite all'interno del Focus Group Cineca relativo al modulo IRIS ER. Il Cineca non si assume alcuna responsabilità in merito all'uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione.