Hypotensive efficacy of bimatoprost in the treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma
https://doi.org/10.25700/NJG.2019.01.11
Abstract
Glaucoma is a group of chronic diseases leading to irreversible vision loss. The choice of treatment strategy for glaucoma is determined by the clinical manifestations of the disease, risk factors and rates of progression. Achieving "target pressure" helps slow the progression of the disease and improve the quality of life for patients. Efficiency, the low incidence of instillation per day, and the absence of systemic side effects are important factors for patient compliance. In the arsenal of doctors there are several groups of antihypertensive drugs, each of which has its own advantages and disadvantages. In the case of the ineffectiveness of starting monotherapy, it is possible to prescribe a combination of two or even three antihypertensive drugs. More often, prostaglandin analogue drugs are prescribed as starting monotherapy. Bimatoprost, being a prostamide, is included in this group, but differs in its pharmacochemical properties and effectiveness from typical prostaglandins. This review is devoted to the experience of using bimatoprost, in particular its pharmacochemical properties, efficacy and safety in comparison with other drugs and combinations.
About the Authors
A. A. Antonov
Scientific Research Institute of Eye Diseases
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ph.D., Leading research associate of Glaucoma Department;
11A Rossolimo st., Moscow, 119021
T. M. Agadzhanyan
Scientific Research Institute of Eye Diseases
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Postgraduate student.
11A Rossolimo st., Moscow, 119021А. А. Vitkov
Scientific Research Institute of Eye Diseases
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Resident.
11A Rossolimo st., Moscow, 119021
References
1. Nesterov A.P., Alekseev V.N., Alekseev I.B., Amirov A.N., Astakhov Yu.S., Balalin S.V., et al. National Guide to Glaucoma. Moscow; 2015. (In Russ.).
2. Kass M.A., Heuer D.K., Higginbotham E.J., Johnson C.A., Keltner J.L., Miller J.P. 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; 120(6):701-713; discussion 829-730.
3. Krauss A.H., Woodward D.F. Update on the mechanism of action of bimatoprost: a review and discussion of new evidence. Surv Ophthalmol. 2004; 49 Suppl 1:S5-11. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2003.12.014.
4. Woodward D.F., Krauss A.H., Chen J., Liang Y., Li C., Protzman C.E., et al. Pharmacological characterization of a novel antiglaucoma agent, Bimatoprost (AGN 192024). J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2003; 305(2):772-785. doi: 10.1124/jpet.102.047837.
5. Christiansen G.A., Nau C.B., McLaren J.W., Johnson D.H. Mechanism of ocular hypotensive action of bimatoprost (Lumigan) in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111(9):1658-1662. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.02.006.
6. Woodward D.F., Krauss A.H., Chen J., Lai R.K., Spada C.S., Burk R.M. et al. The pharmacology of bimatoprost (Lumigan). Surv Ophthalmol. 2001; 45 Suppl 4:S337-345.
7. Richter M., Krauss A.H., Woodward D.F., Lutjen-Drecoll E. Morphological changes in the anterior eye segment after long-term treatment with different receptor selective prostaglandin agonists and a prosta-mide. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003; 44(10):4419-4426.
8. Liang Y., Li C., Guzman V.M., Evinger A.J., 3rd, Protzman C.E., Krauss A.H. et al. Comparison of prostaglandin F2alpha, bimato-prost (prostamide), and butaprost (EP2 agonist) on Cyr61 and connective tissue growth factor gene expression. J Biol Chem. 2003; 278(29):27267-27277. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M301009200.
9. Laibovitz R.A., Van Denburgh A.M., Felix C., David R., Batoosingh A., Rosenthal A. et al. Comparison of the ocular hypotensive lipid AGN 192024 with timolol: dosing, efficacy, and safety evaluation of a novel compound for glaucoma management. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001; 119(7):994-1000.
10. Toris C.B., Yablonski M.E., Wang Y.L., Hayashi M. Prostaglandin A2 increases uveoscleral outflow and trabecular outflow facility in the cat. Exp Eye Res. 1995; 61(6):649-657.
11. Simmons S.T., Bernstein P., Hollander D.A. A comparison of longterm intraocular pressure fluctuation in patients treated with bima-toprost or latanoprost. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008; 146(3):473-477. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2008.04.030.
12. Lawrence M.S., Miller J.W. Ocular tissue permeabilities. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2004; 44(3):53-61.
13. Bhal S.K., Kassam K., Peirson I.G., Pearl G.M. The Rule of Five revisited: applying log D in place of log P in drug-likeness filters. Mol Pharm. 2007; 4(4):556-560. doi: 10.1021/mp0700209.
14. Schoenwald R.D., Deshpande G.S., Rethwisch D.G., Barfknecht C.F. Penetration into the anterior chamber via the conjunctival/scleral pathway. JOcul Pharmacol Ther. 1997; 13(1):41-59. doi:10.1089/jop.1997.13.41.
15. Ichhpujani P., Katz L.J., Hollo G., Shields C.L., Shields J.A., Marr B. et al. Comparison of human ocular distribution of bimatoprost and lata-noprost. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2012; 28(2):134-145. doi: 10.1089/jop.2011.0097.
16. Davies S.S., Ju W.K., Neufeld A.H., Abran D., Chemtob S., Roberts L.J., 2nd. Hydrolysis of bimatoprost (Lumigan) to its free acid by ocular tissue in vitro. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2003; 19(1):45-54. doi: 10.1089/108076803762718105.
17. Cantor L.B., Hoop J., Wudunn D., Yung C.W., Catoira Y., Valluri S. et al. Levels of bimatoprost acid in the aqueous humour after bima-toprost treatment of patients with cataract. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007; 91(5):629-632. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2006.110155.
18. Sjoquist B., Stjernschantz J. Ocular and systemic pharmacokinetics of latanoprost in humans. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002; 47 Suppl 1:S6-12.
19. Sjoquist B., Johansson A., Stjernschantz J. Pharmacokinetics of latano-prost in the cynomolgus monkey. 3rd communication: tissue distribution after topical administration on the eye studied by whole body autoradiography. Glaucoma Research Laboratories. Arzneimittelforschung. 1999; 49(3):240-249. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1300408.
20. Sjoquist B., Tajallaei S., Stjernschantz J. Pharmacokinetics of latanoprost in the cynomolgus monkey. 1st communication: single intravenous, oral or topical administration on the eye. Arzneimittelforschung. 1999; 49(3):225-233. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1300406.
21. Sjoquist B., Uhlin A., Byding P., Stjernschantz J. Pharmacokinetics of latanoprost in the cynomolgus monkey. 2nd communication: repeated topical administration on the eye. Arzneimittelforschung. 1999; 49(3):234-239. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1300407.
22. Cheng J.W., Wei R.L. Meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials comparing bimatoprost with latanoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure. Clin Ther. 2008; 30(4):622-632.
23. Noecker R.S., Dirks M.S., Choplin N.T., Bernstein P., Batoosingh A.L., Whitcup S.M. et al. A six-month randomized clinical trial comparing the intraocular pressure-lowering efficacy of bimatoprost and latanoprost in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003; 135(1):55-63.
24. Sawada A., Yamamoto T. Switching efficacy on intraocular pressure from latanoprost to bimatoprost in eyes with open angle glaucoma: implication to the changes of central corneal thickness. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2014; 58(5):423-428. Doi :10.1007/s10384-014-0336-2.
25. Brennan N., Dehabadi M.H., Nair S., Quartilho A., Bunce C., Reekie I. et al. Efficacy and safety of bimatoprost in glaucoma and ocular hypertension in non-responder patients. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017; 10(8):1251-1254. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2017.08.11.
26. DuBiner H., Cooke D., Dirks M., Stewart W.C., VanDenburgh A.M., Felix C. Efficacy and safety of bimatoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 30-day comparison with latanoprost. Surv Ophthalmol. 2001; 45 Suppl 4:S353-360.
27. Stalmans I., Oddone F., Cordeiro M.F., Hommer A., Montesano G., Ribeiro L. et al. Comparison of preservative-free latanoprost and preservative-free bimatoprost in a multicenter, randomized, investigator-masked cross-over clinical trial, the SPORT trial. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2016; 254(6):1151-1158. doi: 10.1007/s00417-016-3299-9.
28. Konstas A.G., Hollo G., Irkec M., Tsironi S., Durukan I., Goldenfeld M. et al. Diurnal IOP control with bimatoprost versus latanoprost in exfoliative glaucoma: a crossover, observer-masked, three-centre study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007; 91(6):757-760. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2006.106690.
29. Lin L., Zhao Y.J., Chew P.T., Sng C.C., Wong H.T., Yip L.W. et al. Comparative efficacy and tolerability of topical prostaglandin analogues for primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Ann Pharmacother. 2014; 48(12):1585-1593. doi: 10.1177/1060028014548569.
30. Aptel F., Cucherat M., Denis P. Efficacy and tolerability of prostaglandin analogs: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. J Glaucoma. 2008; 17(8):667-673. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181666557.
31. Eisenberg D.L., Toris C.B., Camras C.B. Bimatoprost and travoprost: a review of recent studies of two new glaucoma drugs. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002; 47 Suppl 1:S105-115.
32. El Hajj Moussa W.G., Farhat R.G., Nehme J.C., Sahyoun M.A., Schakal A.R., Jalkh A.E. et al. Comparison of efficacy and ocular surface disease index score between bimatoprost, latanoprost, travoprost, and taflu-prost in glaucoma patients. J Ophthalmol. 2018; 2018:1319628. doi:10.1155/2018/1319628.
33. Parrish R.K., Palmberg P., Sheu W.P., Group X.L.T.S. A comparison of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 12-week, randomized, masked-evaluator multicenter study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003; 135(5):688-703.
34. Maenpaa J., Pelkonen O. Cardiac safety of ophthalmic timolol. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2016; 15(11):1549-1561. doi: 10.1080/14740338.2016.1225718.
35. Nieminen T., Lehtimaki T., Maenpaa J., Ropo A., Uusitalo H., Kaho-nen M. Ophthalmic timolol: plasma concentration and systemic cardiopulmonary effects. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2007; 67(2):237-245. doi: 10.1080/00365510601034736.
36. Oddone F., Rossetti L., Tanga L., Berardo F., Ferrazza M., Michelessi M. et al. Effects of topical bimatoprost 0.01% and timolol 0.5% on circadian iop, blood pressure and perfusion pressure in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a randomized, double masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial. PLoS One 2015; 10(10):e0140601. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140601.
37. Higginbotham E.J., Schuman J.S., Goldberg I., Gross R.L., VanDenburgh A.M., Chen K. et al. One-year, randomized study comparing bimatoprost and timolol in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120(10):1286-1293.
38. Brandt J.D., VanDenburgh A.M., Chen K., Whitcup S.M., Bimatoprost Study G. Comparison of once- or twice-daily bimatoprost with twice-daily timolol in patients with elevated IOP : a 3-month clinical trial. Ophthalmology. 2001; 108(6):1023-1031; discussion 1032.
39. Sherwood M., Brandt J., Bimatoprost Study G. Six-month comparison of bimatoprost once-daily and twice-daily with timolol twice-daily in patients with elevated intraocular pressure. Surv Ophthalmol. 2001; 45 Suppl 4:S361-368.
40. Vetrugno M., Cardascia N., Cantatore F., Sborgia C. Comparison of the effects of bimatoprost and timolol on intraocular pressure and pulsatile ocular blood flow in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma: A prospective, open-label, randomized, two-arm, parallel-group study. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2004; 65(6):444-454. doi: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2005.01.004.
41. Cohen J.S., Gross R.L., Cheetham J.K., VanDenburgh A.M., Bernstein P., Whitcup S.M. Two-year double-masked comparison of bimatoprost with timolol in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Surv Ophthalmol. 2004; 49 Suppl 1:S45-52. doi: 10.1016/j.survoph-thal.2003.12.019
42. Olthoff C.M., Schouten J.S., van de Borne B.W., Webers C.A. Noncompliance with ocular hypotensive treatment in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension an evidence-based review. Ophthalmology. 2005; 112(6):953-961. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.12.035.
43. Alekseev V.N., Malevannaya O.A., Tubadzhi E., Nikitin D.N., Gazizova I.R. Progressive glaucoma is inevitable of a gap? National Journal of Glaucoma. 2012; (3): 26-31. (In Russ.).
44. Taylor S.A., Galbraith S.M., Mills R.P. Causes of non-compliance with drug regimens in glaucoma patients: a qualitative study. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2002; 18(5):401-409. doi: 10.1089/10807680260362687.
45. Osman E.A., Alqarni B.A., AlHasani S.S., Al Harbi S.S., Gikandi P.W., Mousa A. Compliance of glaucoma patients to ocular hypotensive medications among the Saudi population. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2016; 32(1):50-54. doi: 10.1089/jop.2015.0052.
46. Rajurkar K., Dubey S., Gupta P.P., John D., Chauhan L. Compliance to topical anti-glaucoma medications among patients at a tertiary hospital in North India. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2018; 30(2):125-129. doi: 10.1016/j.joco.2017.09.002.
47. Roughead E.E., Kalisch L.M., Pratt N.L., Killer G., Barnard A., Gilbert A.L. Managing glaucoma in those with co-morbidity: not as easy as it seems. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2012; 19(2):74-82. doi: 10.3109/09286586.2011.638743
48. Maruyama Y., Ikeda Y., Mori K., Ueno M., Yoshikawa H., Kinoshita S. Comparison between bimatoprost and latanoprost-timolol fixed combination for efficacy and safety after switching patients from latanoprost. Clin Ophthalmol. 2015; 9:1429-1436. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S87613.
49. Rossetti L., Sacchi M., Karabatsas C.H., Topouzis F., Vetrugno M., Centofanti M. et al. Comparison of the effects of bimatoprost and a fixed combination of latanoprost and timolol on 24-hour blood and ocular perfusion pressures: the results of a randomized trial. BMC Ophthalmol. 2015; 15:7. doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-15-7.
50. Facio A.C., Reis A.S., Vidal K.S., de Moraes C.G., Suzuki R., Hatanaka M. et al. A comparison of bimatoprost 0.03% versus the fixed-combination of latanoprost 0.005% and timolol 0.5% in adult patients with elevated intraocular pressure: an eight-week, randomized, open-label trial. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2009; 25(5):447-451. doi: 10.1089/jop.2009.0018.
51. Day D.G., Sharpe E.D., Beischel C.J., Jenkins J.N., Stewart J.A., Stewart W.C. Safety and efficacy of bimatoprost 0.03% versus timolol maleate 0.5%/dorzolamide 2% fixed combination. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2005; 15(3):336-342.
52. Sharpe E.D., Williams R.D., Stewart J.A., Nelson L.A., Stewart W.C. A comparison of dorzolamide/timolol-fixed combination versus bima-toprost in patients with open-angle glaucoma who are poorly controlled on latanoprost. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2008; 24(4):408-413. doi: 10.1089/jop.2008.0003.
Review
For citations:
Antonov A.A., Agadzhanyan T.M., Vitkov А.А. Hypotensive efficacy of bimatoprost in the treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma. National Journal glaucoma. 2019;18(1):95-104. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25700/NJG.2019.01.11
Views:
927
Email this article 