Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2008 Apr-May;17(3):211-6.
doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181507313.

Bimatoprost/timolol fixed combination: a 3-month double-masked, randomized parallel comparison to its individual components in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension

Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Bimatoprost/timolol fixed combination: a 3-month double-masked, randomized parallel comparison to its individual components in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension

James D Brandt et al. J Glaucoma. 2008 Apr-May.

Erratum in

  • J Glaucoma. 2010 Aug;19(6):423

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a fixed combination (FC) of bimatoprost (BIM) and timolol (TIM) compared with each of the active components for 3 months.

Patients and methods: Two double-masked, randomized, multicenter parallel studies of FC (once-daily, mornings), BIM (once-daily, evenings), or TIM (twice-daily) were conducted in 1061 patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Results: Mean diurnal decreases from baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) at month 3 were 8.1, 7.9, and 6.4 mm Hg for the FC, BIM, and TIM groups, respectively. The proportion of patients with a mean diurnal percent reduction from baseline in IOP of more than 20% across all visits was 81.8% (436/533), 72.1% (191/265), and 49.8% (131/263) for the FC, BIM, and TIM groups, respectively (P<0.001 for FC vs. BIM and FC vs. TIM). The proportion of patients achieving an IOP of less than 18 mm Hg at all time points was 39.2% (209/533), 28.7% (76/265), and 12.2% (32/263) for the FC, BIM, and TIM groups, respectively (P=0.003 for FC vs. BIM, and P<0.001 for FC vs. TIM). The most commonly reported treatment-related adverse event was conjunctival hyperemia, with the greatest incidence in BIM (38.5%, 102/265), followed by FC (22.7%, 121/533, P<0.0001 vs. BIM) and TIM (6.8%, 18/263; P<0.001 vs. FC).

Conclusions: FC was statistically significantly more effective than BIM or TIM for most comparisons, and safer than BIM with respect to common ocular adverse events. FC represents a convenient, therapeutic advantage over separate bottles.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms