ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Retrospective Analysis of Switching Bimatoprost 0.01% to Bimatoprost 0.03% in Patients with Various Types of Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety reporting in trials on glaucoma interventions registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and corresponding publications.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- From Eye Care to Hair Growth: Bimatoprost.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Aqueous Prostaglandin Eye Drop Formulations.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Studies comparing the two different formulations of bimatoprost, 0.03% and 0.01%, have shown similar efficacy, but a better adverse effect profile for bimatoprost 0.01% in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT). This study assesses the efficacy and tolerability of switching from bimatoprost 0.01% to 0.03% in a patient population with broader spectrum of diagnoses in a real-world clinical setting. Design: Single-centre retrospective observational switch study. Methods: Selected patients were on initial topical therapy with bimatoprost 0.01% prior to switching to bimatoprost 0.03%. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was collected from their pre-switch visit, 6- and 12-week after switch. Paired two-sample Results: The study population consisted of 248 eyes (143 patients). There was a significant mean IOP reduction of 1.0 ± 3.7 mmHg (p < 0.001, n = 248) from baseline to week-6 and 1.6 ± 4.0 mmHg (p < 0.001, n = 142) from baseline to week-12 after switch. The IOP reduction was statistically significant in patients with POAG and OHT (6-week: 1.0 ± 3.8 mmHg, n = 76; 12-week: 1.5 ± 4.1 mmHg, n = 49), ACG (6-week: 1.5 ± 4.1 mmHg, n = 72; 12-week: 2.3 ± 4.5 mmHg, n = 46), and NTG (6-week: 0.83 ± 2.5 mmHg, n = 42; 12-week: 1.12 ± 2.1 mmHg, n = 25). Patients with SOAG did not show statistically significant reduction in IOP at 6- or 12-week after switch. Forty-two (29%) of 143 patients experienced adverse events, with the most common being hyperemia (16%). Conclusion: Significant reduction in IOP could be seen after switching from bimatoprost 0.01% to bimatoprost 0.03% in various types of glaucoma except SOAG. Intolerance after switch may be experienced, though not in the majority of cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.