Journal of ocular pharmacology and therapeutics : the official journal of the Association for Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics · 2003
Intraocular pressure, safety, and quality of life in glaucoma patients switching to latanoprost from monotherapy treatments.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zimmerman Thom J, Stewart William C, Latanoprost Axis Study Group
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and quality of life in ocular hypertensive or open-angle glaucoma patients who required alteration in previous therapy and were changed to latanoprost.
METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, active, historical controlled trial in which qualified patients had previous therapy substituted with latanoprost 0.005% and were followed for up to 6 months.
RESULTS: 3179 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. In all patients latanoprost reduced the intraocular pressure (IOP) from 20.1 +/- 3.9 to 17.1 +/- 3.5 mm Hg (p< 0.0001) and when compared to previous monotherapies: beta-blockers (-3.0 +/- 3.5, n = 1976), alpha-agonists (-3.6 +/- 3.7, n = 581), miotics (-2.8 +/- 3.0, n = 21), carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (-3.2 +/- 3.5, n = 198), and other prostaglandin analogs (-1.6 +/- 3.7, n = 402). The most common ocular adverse event with latanoprost was conjunctival hyperemia (n = 66, 2.0% incidence) and the most common systemic adverse event was headache (n = 9, 0.2%). Over the 6-month treatment interval 89.8% of patients were maintained on latanoprost. On the solicited symptom survey patients showed a preference for latanoprost compared to previous therapy for several reasons: (depending on the product) dryness, blurred vision, tearing, stinging on instillation, crusting, itching, fatigue, dizziness, despondency and dry mouth (p < 0.005).
CONCLUSION: Latanoprost generally provides reduced IOP, limited side-effects, improvement in many quality of life measures and is maintained in patients who required a substitution from previous monotherapy.
METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, active, historical controlled trial in which qualified patients had previous therapy substituted with latanoprost 0.005% and were followed for up to 6 months.
RESULTS: 3179 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. In all patients latanoprost reduced the intraocular pressure (IOP) from 20.1 +/- 3.9 to 17.1 +/- 3.5 mm Hg (p< 0.0001) and when compared to previous monotherapies: beta-blockers (-3.0 +/- 3.5, n = 1976), alpha-agonists (-3.6 +/- 3.7, n = 581), miotics (-2.8 +/- 3.0, n = 21), carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (-3.2 +/- 3.5, n = 198), and other prostaglandin analogs (-1.6 +/- 3.7, n = 402). The most common ocular adverse event with latanoprost was conjunctival hyperemia (n = 66, 2.0% incidence) and the most common systemic adverse event was headache (n = 9, 0.2%). Over the 6-month treatment interval 89.8% of patients were maintained on latanoprost. On the solicited symptom survey patients showed a preference for latanoprost compared to previous therapy for several reasons: (depending on the product) dryness, blurred vision, tearing, stinging on instillation, crusting, itching, fatigue, dizziness, despondency and dry mouth (p < 0.005).
CONCLUSION: Latanoprost generally provides reduced IOP, limited side-effects, improvement in many quality of life measures and is maintained in patients who required a substitution from previous monotherapy.