Two-Year Experience With Latanoprostene Bunod in Clinical Practice
- PMID: 34172630
- DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001904
Two-Year Experience With Latanoprostene Bunod in Clinical Practice
Abstract
Precis: We retrospectively reviewed records of patients prescribed latanoprostene bunod 0.024% (LBN) to assess its efficacy and safety in a real-world clinical setting. LBN was efficacious in lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) and had a favorable safety profile.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the usage of LBN, the first topical nitric oxide-donating prostaglandin analog (PGA) for reducing IOP, in clinical practice.
Patients and methods: Retrospective review identified patients prescribed LBN by 5 glaucoma specialists at an academic center from January 2018 to November 2019. Fifty-six patients (102 eyes) met inclusion criteria of an IOP measured at the visit LBN was prescribed and at 2 visits ≥7 days after beginning treatment, with no surgeries, lasers or medication changes during follow-up. Main outcome measures were IOP, number of ocular medications, and adverse effects.
Results: IOP (mean±SD, mm Hg) at the visit LBN was prescribed was 16.2±4.3 on 3.2±1.5 glaucoma medications. IOP at most recent visit was 13.7±3.8 on 3.2±1.6 medications. Mean IOP reduction was 2.1±3.5 (P<0.0001) at first follow-up, after 38.7±36.5 days, and 2.5±3.3 (P<0.0001) at last follow-up, after 235.9±160.8 days. Pressure decreased ≥2 mm Hg in 60%, ≥3 mm Hg in 46%, and ≥4 mm Hg in 34% of eyes. All patients received LBN as replacement for a PGA or latanoprost/netarsudil fixed-dose combination. Forty-three patients remained on LBN throughout the follow-up period. Seven were discontinued for insufficient pressure control, 4 for adverse effects including pain and itching, and 2 for financial reasons.
Conclusions: In 2 years of clinical use of LBN, patients exhibited IOP reductions that were statistically significant overall and clinically meaningful in 60% of patients. LBN was well-tolerated and may be more efficacious than traditional PGAs.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosure: J.B.S.: Consultant—Aerie Pharmaceuticals, Allergan, Bausch and Lomb, Qlaris Bio; Speaker—Aerie Pharmaceuticals, Bausch and Lomb. J.C.T.: Consultant—Eyenovia, ReNetX Bio, Smartlens. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
-
- Quaranta L, Riva I, Gerardi C, et al. Quality of life in glaucoma: a review of the literature. Adv Ther. 2016;33:959–981.
-
- Tham Y-C, 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;121:2081–2090.
-
- Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Lichter PR, et al. CIGTS Study Investigators. Visual field progression in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study the impact of treatment and other baseline factors. Ophthalmology. 2008;116:200–207.
-
- The advanced glaucoma intervention study (AGIS): 7. the relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:429–440.
-
- De Moraes CG, Juthani VJ, Liebmann JM, et al. Risk factors for visual field progression in treated glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129:562–568.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
