Search

English Summary: Glaucoma is a leading cause of the global prevalence of irreversible blindness. The pathogenesis of glaucoma is not entirely known, but the major risk factors include advancing age, genetic predisposition, and increased intraocular pressure (IOP). The only evidence-based treatment is a lowering of IOP through the use of eye drops, laser procedures, or surgical interventions. Although laser treatment is gaining recognition as a first-choice treatment option, the most common approach for managing glaucoma is IOP-lowering eye drops. A major challenge in the treatment is the occurrence of adverse events and poor adherence. In this context, the ocular surface is an area of great concern, as most glaucoma patients have dry eye disease (DED), which is largely caused by eye drops. Preservation with benzalkonium chloride (BAK) is a controversial topic due to its potential role as a significant cause of DED. A systematic review and meta-analyses investigate potential differences in efficacy and safety between BAK-preserved and BAK-free anti-glaucomatous eye drops (I). Many of the included studies report on ocular surface damage caused by the application of BAK-preserved eye drops. However, the meta-analyses addressing hyperemia, number of ocular adverse events, and tear break-up time did not identify any significant differences. The latter is likely due to varying measurement methods, different endpoints, and study durations. It is, therefore, possible that the large variations between the studies conceal differences in the safety profiles. The efficacy meta-analysis finds that there are no differences in the IOP-lowering effect between BAK-preserved and BAK-free eye drops, indicating that BAK is not necessary for the effectiveness of eye drops. To promote more homogeneous choices of endpoints and methods when evaluating BAK-preserved and BAK-free glaucoma treatments, a Delphi consensus statement was performed. In this study, glaucoma experts and ocular surface disease experts reached consensus on the key factors to consider when designing such studies (II). The hope is to have more studies with comparable endpoints that can systematically show the potentially adverse effects of BAK. The preclinical studies in the current Ph.D. research focus on conjunctival goblet cells (GCs). GCs are important for the ocular surface because they release the mucin MUC5AC, which is an essential component of the inner layer of the tear film. BAK preservation may damage the GCs and result in a low GC density, leading to an unstable tear film and DED. The most commonly used IOP-lowering drugs are prostaglandin analogs (PGAs). Thus, the conducted studies investigate the effect of PGAs preserved in different ways on GCs. BAK-preserved latanoprost is cytotoxic to primary cultured human conjunctival GCs and results in a scattered expression of MUC5AC, in contrast to negative controls, where MUC5AC is localized around the cell nucleus (III). Preservative-free (PF) latanoprost is not cytotoxic and does not affect the MUC5AC expression pattern. Furthermore, BAK-preserved travoprost is found to be cytotoxic in a time-dependent manner, while Polyquad®-preserved travoprost does not affect GC survival at any measured time point (IV). Both Polyquad and BAK induce scattered expression of MUC5AC. The cytotoxicity of BAK-preserved PGA eye drops is higher compared to the safer profile of PF and Polyquad-preserved PGA eye drops (V). Additionally, PF latanoprost does not increase the release of the inflammatory markers interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8, unlike BAK-preserved latanoprost. A review highlights the active and inactive components of IOP-lowering eye drops (VI). Several preclinical and clinical studies have identified adverse effects of BAK. Although other components, such as the active drug and phosphates, can also cause adverse events, the review clearly states that BAK alone is a major source of decreased tolerability. The conclusion of this thesis is that BAK preservation is unnecessary and harmful to the ocular surface. The preclinical studies demonstrate that GCs die when exposed to BAK. Furthermore, they find that BAK induces a pro-inflammatory response. The review included in the thesis concludes that BAK should be phased out of eye drops for chronic use. Overall, the inclusion of BAK poses a risk of developing DED and poor adherence, which can ultimately lead to disease progression and blindness., (© 2023 Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Abstract: The distribution of prostaglandin-associated periorbitopathy (PAP) graded using the Shimane University PAP Grading System (SU-PAP) among glaucoma/ocular hypertension subjects using a topical FP or EP2 receptor agonist was reported. A 460 consecutive 460 Japanese subjects (211 men, 249 women; mean age ± standard deviation, 69.9 ± 14.5 years) who had used either a FP agonist (0.005% latanoprost, 0.0015% tafluprost, 0.004% travoprost, 0.03% bimatoprost, or fixed combinations of these) or EP2-agonist (0.002% omidenepag isopropyl) for more than 3 months in at least 1 eye were retrospectively enrolled. Age, sex, prostaglandin, intraocular pressure (IOP) measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry (IOPGAT) and iCare rebound tonometry (IOPRBT), difference between IOPGAT and IOPRBT (IOPGAT-RBT), PAP grade, and PAP grading items were compared among groups stratified by PAP grade or prostaglandins. Of the study patients, 114 (25%) had grade 0 (no PAP), 174 (38%) grade 1 (superficial cosmetic PAP), 141 (31%) grade 2 (deep cosmetic PAP), and 31 (7%) grade 3 (tonometric PAP). The IOPGAT was significantly higher in grade 3 (17.5 ± 5.4 mm Hg) than grades 0 (15.0 ± 5.1 mm Hg, P = .032) and 1 (14.5 ± 4.2 mm Hg, P = .008), and the IOPGAT-RBT was significantly higher in grade 3 (5.8 ± 3.2 mm Hg) than the other 3 grades (1.3-1.9 mm Hg, P < .001 for all comparisons); the IOPRBT was equivalent among the 4 grades. The PAP grade was significantly higher associated with travoprost (2.0 ± 0.8) and bimatoprost (2.0 ± 0.7) than latanoprost (1.0 ± 0.8, P < .001 for both comparisons) and tafluprost (1.0 ± 0.7, P < .001 for both comparisons), but significantly lower associated with omidenepag (0.0 ± 0.0, P < .001 for all comparisons) than the other 4 prostaglandins. Multivariate analyses showed older age (standard β = 0.11), travoprost (0.53, referenced by latanoprost) and bimatoprost (0.65) were associated with higher PAP grades, while tafluprost (-0.18) and omidenepag (-0.73) were associated with lower PAP grades. The PAP graded using SU-PAP reflects the degree of overestimation of the IOPGAT and different severities of PAP among the different prostaglandins. SU-PAP, the grade system constructed based on the underlining mechanisms of PAP, is a simple grading system for PAP that is feasible for use in a real-world clinical situation., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interests to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: This study will evaluate the efficacy of travoprost for patients with glaucoma systematically., Methods: A comprehensive literature search will be carried from following literature sources from inception to the present: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google scholar, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. We will only consider randomized controlled trials on assessing the efficacy and safety of travoprost for glaucoma for inclusion. We will use Cochrane risk of bias tool for the methodological quality assessment for each qualified study. If it is possible, we will pool the outcome data, and will perform meta-analysis., Results: This study will systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of travoprost for glaucoma. Primary outcomes include intraocular pressure (IOP), mean IOP, and mean reduction of IOP. Secondary outcomes consist of diastolic ocular perfusion pressure, central corneal thickness, and quality of life, as measured by 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and treatment-related adverse events included hyperemia, eye pain, and eye pruritus., Conclusion: The findings of the present study will summarize the updated evidence of travoprost for patients with glaucoma.PROSPERO registration number: PROSPERO CRD42019126956.

Purpose: To assess ocular surface changes in participants using latanoprost with benzalkonium chloride (Xalatan) and travoprost with SofZia (Travatan Z)., Methods: In this prospective, open-label, nonrandomized cohort study, participants were classified into two groups: group 1 (n=28) naive to glaucoma therapy, group 2 (n=27) on previous Xalatan monotherapy in both eyes. Both groups started (or continued) Xalatan in the right eye and Travatan Z in the left eye. Baseline, 1-, and 2-month measurements of tear breakup time (TBUT), corneal staining score, conjunctival staining score, conjunctival hyperemia score, tear production, and intraocular pressure were obtained. The Ocular Surface Disease Index questionnaire measured participants' comfort and dryness symptoms. Medication preference was recorded., Results: Data were collected from 55 participants. Tear breakup time at baseline and 1-month follow-up in group 1 was significantly longer than that of group 2 (P=0.005). At 2 months, there was no significant difference in TBUT between the two groups (P=0.779). Tear production in group 1 at all three time points was significantly higher than group 2 (P<0.05). Conjunctival staining score at 2 months in group 1 was significantly higher than group 2 (P=0.031). There was no significant difference in other parameters between the groups at any other time point. No significant difference in any parameter was found between Xalatan and Travatan Z (intragroup comparison)., Conclusions: Significant differences in ocular surface characteristics were detected between groups, but no significant difference was detected between participants treated with Xalatan and Travatan Z.

Purpose: To investigate, using in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM), the Meibomian gland (MG) features and conjunctival goblet cell density (GCD) in glaucomatous patients controlled with prostaglandin/timolol fixed combinations (PTFCs)., Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 60 white patients were treated with PTFCs, 15 with latanoprost+timolol (L+T) unfixed combination, and 15 controls were enrolled. Patients underwent the Ocular Surface Disease Index questionnaire, tear film breakup time, corneal staining, Schirmer test I, and IVCM of MGs and goblet cells. The main outcome measures were: mean Meibomian acinar density (MMAD) and area (MMAA), inhomogeneity of glandular interstice (InI) and acinar wall (InAW), and GCD., Results: PTFCs were: latanoprost/timolol (LTFC, 15 eyes), travoprost/timolol (TTFC, 15), bimatoprost/timolol (BTFC, 15), and preservative-free bimatoprost/timolol (PF-BTFC, 15) fixed combinations. Mean time on therapy did not differ among treatments. IVCM documented lower GCD, MMAD, and MMAA (P<0.001), and greater InI and InAW (P<0.05) in glaucoma patients compared with controls. L+T showed worse values compared with PTFCs and PF-BTFC (P<0.05). Preserved PTFCs showed lower MMAD, MMAA, GCD, and greater InI and InAW compared with PF-BTFC (P<0.05) and controls (P<0.001). Differences were not found among PTFCs. InI and InAW significantly correlated with Ocular Surface Disease Index and breakup time (P<0.001), corneal staining (P<0.05), and GCD (P<0.001); GCD correlated with MMAD (P<0.05)., Conclusions: PTFCs were less toxic towards MGs and goblet cells compared with the L+T unfixed combination, with PF-BTFC presenting the most tolerated profile. These findings should be carefully considered given the role of these structures in the induction of the glaucoma-related ocular surface disease.

Purpose: To evaluate efficacy and safety of travoprost in pediatric patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma and demonstrate its noninferiority to timolol., Methods: Patients aged 2 months to <18 years with glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized to receive travoprost (0.004%) or timolol eye drops (0.25% for patients aged 2 months to <3 years and 0.5% for patients ≥3 years old) for 3 months in this double-masked, parallel-group study. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured and patients were evaluated at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months after treatment. Change in IOP from baseline to 3 months was the primary endpoint, and the test of noninferiority was based on a margin of +3.0 mm Hg using the 95% 2-sided confidence interval of the mean change., Results: Of 157 patients included (mean age, 9.6 years), 77 received travoprost and 75 timolol. All patients experienced a significant reduction in IOP in the study eye at 3 months: the mean IOP change from baseline was -5.4 mm Hg for travoprost; -5.3 mm Hg, for timolol. The mean difference between travoprost and timolol at month 3 was -0.1 mm Hg (95% CI, -1.5 to 1.4 mm Hg). The most common treatment-related adverse events for the travoprost group were ocular hyperemia and eyelash growth. No serious adverse events were reported., Conclusions: This study found travoprost to be noninferior to timolol in lowering IOP in patients with pediatric glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Travoprost was well-tolerated, and no treatment-related systemic adverse events were reported., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the systemic pharmacokinetics (PKs) of travoprost 0.004% preserved with Polyquad ® (TRAVATAN ® ) in pediatric patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension., Methods: This was a phase 1, open-label, multicenter clinical study of patients aged ≥2 months to <18 years. Patients received daily administration of travoprost 0.004% preserved with Polyquad in both eyes for 7 days. Plasma samples were collected 30 min before the final dose and at 10, 20, 40, and 80 min postdose. The main outcome measure was maximum concentration of travoprost free acid in plasma (C max )., Results: Included in the PK analysis were 24 patients (average age 9.6 ± 4.9 years). At least 1 sample with quantifiable levels of travoprost free acid was collected for 11 patients. The mean C max was 0.0471 ± 0.0105 ng/mL for patients aged 2 months to <3 years; 0.0258 ± 0.0128 ng/mL for ages 3 to <12 years; and 0.0109 ± 0.0005 ng/mL for ages 12 to <18 years. Travoprost was undetectable in samples collected predose from pediatric patients. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) included hyperemia, eye pain, and eye pruritus (n = 1 each). There were no discontinuations or drug-related serious AEs., Conclusions: Travoprost free acid concentration in plasma was low in pediatric patients, detectable in only 11 of 24 patients. There was no accumulation of travoprost over the course of treatment. No clear relationship was observed between age/body surface area and C max . No increased risk was identified for the use of travoprost 0.004% preserved with Polyquad in patients <18 years of age.

Purpose: To determine factors related to prostaglandin-associated periorbitopathy (PAP) and its prevalence in glaucoma or ocular hypertension (OHT) patients using prostaglandins analogs (PGAs)., Design: A cross-sectional study., Methods: A study of glaucoma or OHT patients, using topical PGAs for at least 3 months, was performed. Eyes treated with PGAs were photoraphed and independently evaluated for PAP by 2 glaucoma specialists using at least 4 out of 7 clinical appearances. The factors of interest were sex, age, body mass index (BMI), types of glaucoma, types of PGAs, duration of PGA use, and concurrent 0.5% timolol. Univariate (χ2 test) and multivariate (multiple logistic regression) analyses assessing risk factors for PAP were performed to estimate the odds ratios (OR) with 95% conidence intervals (CIs)., Results: One hundred thirty-four eyes from 134 patients were included. Seventy (52.2%), 21 (15.7%), and 43 (32%) eyes received components of latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost, respectively. Prevalence of PAP was 44.8% (95% CI, 36.3 to 53.3). Older age >60 years (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2 to 7.8), bimatoprost (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.6 to 9.5), travoprost (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 10.1), and timolol (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.3 to 6.8) were at risk of PAP development. In addition, BMI ≥23 kg/㎡ (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.7) was reversely associated with PAP., Conclusions: Older age, bimatoprost, or travoprost were associated with PAP, whereas high BMI was found as a protective factor. Interestingly, timolol possibly precipitated periorbital change when in use with prostaglandins., (Copyright 2017 Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology.)

Background: Prostaglandin-timolol fixed combinations (PG-timolol FCs) are now widely used to reduce intraocular pressure in patients with glaucoma. The efficacy and tolerability of these drugs are worthy of further exploration. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the clinical efficacy and tolerability of the three PG-timolol FCs., Methods: Pertinent randomized, controlled trials were identified through systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials and the Chinese Biomedicine Database. The main efficacy measures were the weighted mean differences (WMDs) for the reduction from baseline to end of treatment in IOP at 9 am, 12 pm and 4 pm and diurnal curve. The main tolerability measures were the odds ratios (ORs) for the incidence of conjunctival hyperemia., Results: Nine studies involving 991 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Latanoprost-timolol FC (LTFC) and travoprost-timolol FC (TTFC) were not significantly different in lowering IOP at diurnal mean, 9 am, 12 pm and 4 pm. Bimatoprost-timolol FC (BTFC) provided significantly greater efficacy in lowering IOP at the three measurement time points and over the mean diurnal curve than LTFC (diurnal curve: WMD = 0.88 mmHg [95% CI, 0.42 to 1.33]; 9 am: WMD = 1.27 mmHg [0.68 to 1.86]; 12 pm: WMD = 1.16 mmHg [0.85 to 1.46]; 4 pm: WMD = 0.61 mmHg [0.51 to 0.70]) and TTFC (diurnal curve: WMD = 1.94 mmHg [0.19 to 3.68]; 9 am: WMD = 0.68 mmHg [0.15 to 1.21]; 12 pm: WMD = 0.90 mmHg [0.41 to 1.39]; 4 pm: WMD = 1.06 mmHg [0.61 to 1.51]). The incidence of hyperemia was significantly higher with BTFC than LTFC (pooled ORs: 1.85 [1.09 to 3.13]). The incidence of hyperemia was not significantly higher with TTFC than LTFC (pooled ORs: 2.52 [0.85 to 7.46]), and was not significantly higher with BTFC than TTFC (pooled OR: 1.65 [0.48 to 5.70])., Conclusions: BTFC provided significantly greater efficacy in lowering IOP at diurnal mean, 9 am, 12 pm and 4 pm than LTFC and TTFC. LTFC was as effective as TTFC in lowering IOP at the four measurement time points and BTFC caused conjunctival hyperemia in more patients than LTFC. Further clinical trials are needed because of the limited number of studies.