Pharmacotherapy of glaucoma in terms of evidence-based medicine

Glaucoma is a disease associated with increased intraocular pressure (IOP). Of the pharmacological agents for treating glaucoma, there are drugs of the first (most effective and safe) and second-line treatment. First-line treatment includes prostaglandin analogs and beta-blockers. The currently used prostaglandin analogs (latanoprost, bimatoprost, tafluprost and travoprost) are PG F2α analogs that act through stimulation of FP receptors. They are distinguished by the optimal ratio of effectiveness and risk of side effects. They are convenient for the patient because for the therapeutic effect, it is enough to prescribe 1 time per day. As a result, it is rational to start the treatment of glaucoma with a drug in this group. In terms of pharmacoeconomics, the most affordable prostaglandin drug is latanoprost, which is generally as effective as other prostaglandin analogs. β-adrenergic blockers reduce the production of intraocular fluid, the formation of which is controlled by β1- and β2-adrenergic receptors. Therefore, non-selective β-blockers (timolol, levobunolol, metipranolol, and carteolol) have a pharmacodynamic advantage over selective β1-adrenergic antagonists (betaxolol). Conducted clinical studies of β-blockers have shown that given the cost, efficacy and safety, timolol was the most preferable treatment for glaucoma. In the presence of medical contraindications to the use of first-line drugs or to enhance their effectiveness, α2-agonists (apraclonidine and brimonidine), carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (usually local action: dorzolamide and brinzolamide), M-cholinomimetics (pilocarpine, carbachol and echothiopate), and also Rho-kinase inhibitors (ripasudil)

1. Katzung B. G. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology, 15th Ed., McGraw-Hill, 2021. Р. 122, 170, 268.

2. Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Niziol LM, et al. Intraocular pressure control and long-term visual field loss in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study. Ophthalmology. 2011 Sep;118(9):1766-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.01.047.

3. Tham YC, Li X, Wong TY, et al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2014 Nov;121(11):2081-90. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013.

4. Miglior S, Zeyen T, Pfeiffer N, Cunha-Vaz J, et al. Results of the European Glaucoma Prevention Study. Ophthalmology. 2005 Mar;112(3):366-75. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.11.030.

5. Brunton, L. Laurence. Goodman & Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics / Laurence L. Bruce A. Chabner, Randa Hilal-Dandan, Bjőrn C. Kno llmann. 13th Ed, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill, 2018 Р. 171, 172, 681, 683t, 1259, 1261t.

6. Ederer F, Gaasterland DA, Dally LG, et al. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 13. Comparison of treatment outcomes within race: 10-year results. Ophthalmology. 2004 Apr;111(4):651-64. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.09.025.

7. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, et al. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Oct;120(10):1268-79. doi: 10.1001/archopht.120.10.1268.

8. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, 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 Jun;120(6):701-13; discussion 829-30. doi: 10.1001/archopht.120.6.701.

9. Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Preferred Practice Pattern 2020 (American Academy of Ophthalmology): electronic access: https://www.aao.org/preferred-practice-pattern/primary-open-angle-glaucoma-ppp

10. NICE guideline [NG81] Published: 01 November 2017: electronic access: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng81/chapter/Recommendations#treatment.

11. Ishida N, Odani-Kawabata N, Shimazaki A, Hara H. Prostanoids in the therapy of glaucoma. Cardiovasc Drug Rev. 2006 Spring;24(1):1-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1527-3466.2006.00001.x.

12. Angeli A, Supuran CT. Prostaglandin receptor agonists as antiglaucoma agents (a patent review 2013 — 2018). Expert Opin Ther Pat. 2019 Oct;29(10):793-803. doi: 10.1080/13543776.2019.1661992.

13. Doucette LP, Walter MA. Prostaglandins in the eye: Function, expression, and roles in glaucoma. Ophthalmic Genet. 2017 Mar-Apr;38(2):108-116. doi: 10.3109/13816810.2016.1164193.

14. Alm A. Latanoprost in the treatment of glaucoma. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014 Sep 26;8:1967-85. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S59162.

15. Camras CB, Alm A. Initial clinical studies with prostaglandins and their analogues. Surv Ophthalmol. 1997;41 Suppl 2:S61-S68. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6257(97)80009-4.

16. Parrish RK, Palmberg P, Sheu WP; XLT Study Group. 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;135:688-703. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(03)00098-9.

17. Yildirim N, Sahin A, Gultekin S. The effect of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost on circadian variation of intraocular pressure in patients with open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2008;17:36-39. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e318133fb70.

18. Orzalesi N, Rossetti L, Bottoli A, Fogagnolo P. Comparison of the effects of latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost on circadian intraocular pressure in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:239- 246. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.10.045.

19. DuBiner H, et al. Efficacy and safety of bimatoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 30-day comparison with latanoprost. Surv Ophthalmol. 2001;45 Suppl 4:S353-S360. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6257(01)00212-0.

20. How AC, Kumar RS, Chen YM, et al. A randomised crossover study comparing bimatoprost and latanoprost in subjects with primary angle closure glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009 Jun;93(6):782-6. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2008.144535.

21. Gandolfi S, Simmons ST, Sturm R, et al. Three-month comparison of bimatoprost and latanoprost in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Adv Ther. 2001 May-Jun;18(3):110-21. doi: 10.1007/BF02850299.

22. Konstas AG, Katsimbris JM, Lallos N, et al. Latanoprost 0.005% versus bimatoprost 0.03% in primary open-angle glaucoma patients. Ophthalmology. 2005 Feb;112(2):262-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.08.022.

23. Dirks MS, Noecker RJ, Earl M, et al. A 3-month clinical trial comparing the IOP-lowering efficacy of bimatoprost and latanoprost in patients with normal-tension glaucoma. Adv Ther. 2006 May-Jun;23(3):385-94. doi: 10.1007/BF02850159.

24. Noecker RS, Dirks MS, Choplin NT, 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 Jan;135(1):55-63. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(02)01827-5.

25. Patwardhan AA, Khan M, Mollan SP, Haigh P. The importance of central corneal thickness measurements and decision making in general ophthalmology clinics: a masked observational study. BMC Ophthalmology. 2008;8:1. doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-8-1.

26. Herndon LW, Weizer JS, Stinnett SS. Central corneal thickness as a risk factor for advanced glaucoma damage. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004 Jan;122(1):17- 21. doi: 10.1001/archopht.122.1.17.

27. Zhong Y, Shen X, Yu J, et al. The comparison of the effects of latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost on central corneal thickness. Cornea. 2011 Aug;30(8):861-4. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3182000c27.

28. Maul E, Carrasco FG, Costa VP, et al. A 6-week, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, parallel-group study comparing travoprost 0.004% to latanoprost 0.005% followed by 6-week, open-label treatment with travoprost 0.004%. Clin Ther. 2007 Sep;29(9):1915-23. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.09.006.

29. Uusitalo H, Pillunat LE, Ropo A; Phase III Study Investigators. Efficacy and safety of tafluprost 0.0015% versus latanoprost 0.005% eye drops in open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: 24-month results of a randomized, double-masked phase III study. Acta Ophthalmol. 2010 Feb;88(1):12-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2010.01862.x.

30. Cheng JW, Cai JP, Li Y, Wei RL. A meta-analysis of topical prostaglandin analogs in the treatment of chronic angle-closure glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2009 Dec;18(9):652-7. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31819c49d4.

31. Cheng JW, Cai JP, Wei RL. Meta-analysis of medical intervention for normal tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2009 Jul;116(7):1243-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.01.036.

32. Orme M, Collins S, Dakin H, et al. Mixed treatment comparison and meta- regression of the efficacy and safety of prostaglandin analogues and comparators for primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010 Mar;26(3):511-28. doi: 10.1185/03007990903498786.

33. Stewart WC, Konstas AG, Nelson LA, Kruft B. Meta-analysis of 24-hour intraocular pressure studies evaluating the efficacy of glaucoma medicines. Ophthalmology. 2008 Jul;115(7):1117-1122.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007. 10.004.

34. Denis P, Lafuma A, Khoshnood B, et al. A meta-analysis of topical prostaglandin analogues intra-ocular pressure lowering in glaucoma therapy. Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Mar;23(3):601-8. doi: 10.1185/030079907X178720.

35. van der Valk R, Webers CA, Schouten JS, et al. Intraocular pressure-lowering effects of all commonly used glaucoma drugs: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Ophthalmology. 2005 Jul;112(7):1177-85. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.01.042.

36. Yang XT, Zhao L, Wang LJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of 0.0015% tafluprost versus 0.005% latanoprost in primary open angle glaucoma, ocular hypertension: a Meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol. 2020 Mar 18;13(3):474-480. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2020.03.16.

37. Aptel F, Cucherat M, Denis P. Efficacy and tolerability of prostaglandin analogs: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. J Glaucoma. 2008 Dec;17(8):667-73. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181666557.

38. Cheng JW, Wei RL. Meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials comparing bimatoprost with latanoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure. Clin Ther. 2008 Apr;30(4):622-32. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2008.

39. Johnstone MA, Albert DM. Prostaglandin-induced hair growth. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002 Aug;47 Suppl 1:S185-202. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6257(02) 00307-7.

40. Day DG, Schacknow PN, Sharpe ED, et al. A persistency and economic analysis of latanoprost, bimatoprost, or beta-blockers in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2004 Oct;20(5):383-92. doi: 10.1089/jop.2004.20.383.

41. Haverkamp F, Wuensch S, Fuchs M, Stewart WC. Intraocular pressure, safety and quality of life in glaucoma patients switching to latanoprost from adjunctive and monotherapy treatments. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2004 Sep- Oct;14(5):407-15. doi: 10.1177/112067210401400508.

42. Reardon G, Schwartz GF, Mozaffari E. Patient persistency with topical ocular hypotensive therapy in a managed care population. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004 Jan;137(1 Suppl):S3-12. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2003.10.035.

43. Daull P, Buggage R, Lambert G, et al. A comparative study of a preservative- free latanoprost cationic emulsion (Catioprost) and a BAK-preserved latanoprost solution in animal models. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Oct;28(5):515- 23. doi: 10.1089/jop.2011.0245.

44. Rouland JF, Traverso CE, Stalmans I, et al. Efficacy and safety of preservative- free latanoprost eyedrops, compared with BAK-preserved latanoprost in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013 Feb;97(2):196-200. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-302121.

45. Sorensen SJ, Abel SR. Comparison of the ocular beta-blockers. Ann Pharmacother. 1996 Jan;30(1):43-54. doi: 10.1177/106002809603000109.

46. Brooks AM, Gillies WE. Ocular beta-blockers in glaucoma management. Clinical pharmacological aspects. Drugs Aging. 1992 May-Jun;2(3):208-21. doi: 10.2165/00002512-199202030-00005.

47. Lesar TS. Comparison of ophthalmic beta-blocking agents. Clin Pharm. 1987 Jun;6(6):451-63.

48. Sihota R, Saxena R, Agarwal HC, Gulati V. Crossover comparison of timolol and latanoprost in chronic primary angle-closure glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004 Feb;122(2):185-9. doi: 10.1001/archopht.122.2.185.

49. Chiseliţă D, Antohi I, Medvichi R, Danielescu C. Comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of latanoprost, travoprost and the fixed combination timolol-dorzolamide; a prospective, randomized, masked, cross-over design study. Oftalmologia. 2005;49(3):39-45.

50. Franks WA, Renard JP, Cunliffe IA, Rojanapongpun P. A 6-week, double- masked, parallel-group study of the efficacy and safety of travoprost 0.004% compared with latanoprost 0:005%/timolol 0.5% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Clin Ther. 2006 Mar;28(3):332- 9. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.03.001

51. Rossetti L, Karabatsas CH, Topouzis F, et al. Comparison of the effects of bimatoprost and a fixed combination of latanoprost and timolol on circadian intraocular pressure. Ophthalmology. 2007 Dec;114(12):2244-51. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.01.025.

52. Stewart WC. Wirkung und Nebenwirkungen von Apraclonidin [Effect and side effects of apraclonidine]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1996 Jul;209(1): A7-13. German.

53. Cantor LB. Brimonidine in the treatment of glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2006 Dec;2(4):337-46. doi: 10.2147/ tcrm.2006.2.4.337.

54. Schuman JS, Horwitz B, Choplin NT, et al. A 1-year study of brimonidine twice daily in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. A controlled, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. Chronic Brimonidine Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997 Jul;115(7):847-52. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1997.01100160017002.

55. LeBlanc RP. Twelve-month results of an ongoing randomized trial comparing brimonidine tartrate 0.2% and timolol 0.5% given twice daily in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Brimonidine Study Group 2. Ophthalmology. 1998 Oct;105(10):1960-7. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(98) 91048-x.

56. Cantor LB. The evolving pharmacotherapeutic profile of brimonidine, an alpha 2-adrenergic agonist, after four years of continuous use. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2000 May;1(4):815-34. doi: 10.1517/14656566.1.4.815.

57. Katz LJ. Brimonidine tartrate 0.2% twice daily vs timolol 0.5% twice daily: 1-year results in glaucoma patients. Brimonidine Study Group. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999 Jan;127(1):20-6. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(98)00286-4.

58. David R. Brimonidine (Alphagan): a clinical profile four years after launch. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2001 Jul-Sep;11 Suppl 2:S72-7. doi: 10.1177/112067 210101102s10.

59. Schuman JS. Effects of systemic beta-blocker therapy on the efficacy and safety of topical brimonidine and timolol. Brimonidine Study Groups 1 and 2. Ophthalmology. 2000 Jun;107(6):1171-7. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(00)00081-6.

60. Goñi FJ; Brimonidine/Timolol Fixed Combination Study Group. 12-week study comparing the fixed combination of brimonidine and timolol with concomitant use of the individual components in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2005 Sep-Oct;15(5):581-90.

61. Tsai JC, Chang HW. Comparison of the effects of brimonidine 0.2% and timolol 0.5% on retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in ocular hypertensive patients: a prospective, unmasked study. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Dec;21(6):475-82. doi: 10.1089/jop.2005.21.475.

62. Ferencz JR, Gilady G, Harel O, Belkin M, Assia EI. Topical brimonidine reduces collateral damage caused by laser photocoagulation for choroidal neovascularization. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005 Sep;243(9):877-80. doi: 10.1007/s00417-005-1160-7.

63. Курышева Н.И. Ингибиторы карбоангидразы в лечении глаукомы. Обзор. Часть 1. Офтальмология. 2020;17(3s):542-549. [Kurysheva NI. Carbonic Anhydrase Inhibitors in the Treatment of Glaucoma. Review. Part I. Ophthalmology in Russia. 2020;17(3s):542-549. (In Russ.)]. doi: 10.18008/1816-5095-2020-3S-542-549.

64. Stewart WC, Halper LK, Johnson-Pratt L, et al. Tolerability and efficacy of dorzolamide versus acetazolamide added to timolol. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2002 Jun;18(3):211-20. doi: 10.1089/108076802760116133.

65. Hutzelmann JE, Polis AB, Michael AJ, Adamsons IA. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of dorzolamide and acetazolamide as adjunctive therapy to timolol. Oral to Topical CAI Study Group. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998 Dec;76(6):717-22. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.1998.760618.x.

66. Epelde Gonzalo F, Llibre Bombardó J, Martínez Pérez J. Insuficiencia renal aguda por acetazolamida sin evidencia de obstrucción renal [Acetazolamide induced acute renal failure without evidence of renal obstruction]. An Med Interna. 1998 Aug;15(8):451. Spanish.

67. Kodjikian L, Durand B, Burillon C, et al. Acetazolamide-induced thrombocytopenia. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004 Oct;122(10):1543-4. doi: 10.1001/ archopht.122.10.1543.

68. Szawarski P, Hall-Thompson B. Acetazolamide-induced myopia at altitude. Wilderness Environ Med. 2009 Fall;20(3):300-1. doi: 10.1580/08-WEME-LE-259R1.1.

69. Batke M, Cappell MS. Adynamic ileus and acute colonic pseudo-obstruction. Med Clin North Am. 2008 May;92(3):649-70, ix. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2008.01.002.

70. Her Y, Kil MS, Park JH, et al. Stevens-Johnson syndrome induced by acetazolamide. J Dermatol. 2011 Mar;38(3):272-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1346-8138.2010.00921.x.

71. Bournias TE, Lai J. Brimonidine tartrate 0.15%, dorzolamide hydrochloride 2%, and brinzolamide 1% compared as adjunctive therapy to prostaglandin analogs. Ophthalmology. 2009 Sep;116(9):1719-24. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.03.050.

72. Miura K, Ito K, Okawa C, et al. Comparison of ocular hypotensive effect and safety of brinzolamide and timolol added to latanoprost. J Glaucoma. 2008 Apr-May;17(3):233-7. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31815072fe.

73. Liu Y, Zhao J, Zhong X, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Brinzolamide as Add-On to Prostaglandin Analogues or β-Blocker for Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Pharmacol. 2019 Jun 25;10:679. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00679.

74. Pharmacology Test Prep/1500 USMLE-Style Questions &Answers // M. Babbini, M.L. Tomas. — Thieme, 2015.

75. Archer M, Steinvoort C, Oderda G. Drug Class Review Ophthalmic Cholinergic Agonists Final Report November 2015. University of Utah College of Pharmacy.

76. Beasley H. Miotics in cataract surgery. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1971; 69:237-44.

77. Beasley H. Mitotics in cataract surgery. Arch Ophthalmol. 1972 Jul;88(1): 49-51. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1972.01000030051011

78. Shaikh MH, Mars JS. The acute effect of pilocarpine on pulsatile ocular blood flow in ocular hypertension. Eye (Lond). 2001 Feb;15(Pt 1):63-6. doi: 10.1038/eye.2001.15.

79. Wutthiphan S, Hanutsaha P, Jenchitr W. Intracameral pilocarpine in topical phacoemulsification. J Med Assoc Thai. 2000 Dec;83(12):1452-7. 80. Lexi-Comp’s Drug Information Handbook. Hudson, OH: Lexi-Comp; 2015.

80. McEvoy GK, Snow EK, Kester L, Litvak K, Miller J, Welsh OH, eds. AHFS 2015 Drug Information. Bethesda, MD: American Society of Health-System Pharmacists; 2015.

81. Salmon JF. Chapter 11. Glaucoma. In: Riordan-Eva P, Cunningham ET, eds. Vaughan & Asbury's General Ophthalmology. 18th ed. New York, NY: Mc- Graw-Hill; 2011.

82. Fiscella RG. Glaucoma medications: a drug-therapy review. Manag Care. 2002 Nov;11(11 Suppl):25-31.

83. Flach AJ, Fraunfelder FW. Chapter 22. Ophthalmic Therapeutics. In: Riordan- Eva P, Cunningham ET, eds.

84. Vaughan & Asbury's General Ophthalmology. 18th ed. New York, NY: Mc- Graw-Hill; 2011.

85. Abbhi V, Piplani P. Rho-kinase (ROCK) Inhibitors — A Neuroprotective Therapeutic Paradigm with a Focus on Ocular Utility. Curr Med Chem. 2020;27(14):2222-2256. doi: 10.2174/0929867325666181031102829.

86. Tanihara H, Kakuda T, Sano T, et al. Safety and efficacy of ripasudil in Japanese patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: 12-month interim analysis of ROCK-J, a post-marketing surveillance study. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020 Jul 9;20(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s12886-020-01490-1. Erratum in: BMC Ophthalmol. 2020 Sep 4;20(1):362.