92
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Comparative Effectiveness of First-line Medications for Primary Open Angle Glaucoma – A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

      research-article
      , MD, MHS, PhD 1 , , MS 2 , , MHS 3 , , PhD 4 , , MHS 3 , , MD, PhD 5 , , FRCOphth 6 , , MA, PhD 7
      Ophthalmology

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Topic

          Primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) is a highly prevalent condition worldwide and the most common cause of irreversible sight loss. The objective is to assess the comparative effectiveness of first line medical treatments in patients with POAG or ocular hypertension through a systematic review and network meta-analysis, and to provide relative rankings of these treatments.

          Clinical Relevance

          Treatment for POAG currently relies completely on lowering the intraocular pressure (IOP). While topical drops, lasers, and surgeries can be considered in the initial treatment of glaucoma, most patients elect to start treatment with eye drops.

          Methods

          We included randomized controlled trials that compared a single active topical medication with no treatment/placebo or another single topical medication. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Food and Drug Administration's website. Two individuals independently assessed trial eligibility, abstracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed Bayesian network meta-analyses.

          Results

          We included 114 randomized controlled trials with data from 20,275 participants. The overall risk of bias of the included trials is mixed. The mean reductions (95% credible intervals) in IOP in mmHg at 3 months, ordered from the most to least effective drugs were: bimatoprost 5·61 (4·94; 6·29), latanoprost 4·85 (4·24; 5·46), travoprost 4·83 (4·12; 5·54), levobunolol 4·51 (3·85; 5·24), tafluprost 4·37 (2·94; 5·83), timolol 3·7 (3·16; 4·24), brimonidine 3·59 (2·89; 4·29), carteolol 3·44 (2·42; 4·46), levobetaxolol 2·56 (1·52; 3·62), apraclonidine 2·52 (0·94; 4·11), dorzolamide 2·49 (1·85; 3·13), brinzolamide 2·42 (1·62; 3·23), betaxolol 2·24 (1·59; 2·88), and unoprostone 1·91 (1·15; 2·67).

          Conclusions

          All active first-line drugs are effective compared to placebo in reducing IOP at 3 months. Bimatoprost, latanoprost, and travoprost are among the most efficacious drugs, although the within class differences were small and may not be clinically meaningful. All factors, including adverse effects, patient preferences, and cost should be considered in selecting a drug for a given patient.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          7802443
          6266
          Ophthalmology
          Ophthalmology
          Ophthalmology
          0161-6420
          1549-4713
          23 October 2015
          31 October 2015
          January 2016
          01 January 2017
          : 123
          : 1
          : 129-140
          Affiliations
          [1 ] Center for Clinical Trials and Evidence Synthesis, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, Room E6011, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA
          [2 ] Center for Clinical Trials and Evidence Synthesis, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, Room E6009, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA
          [3 ] Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA
          [4 ] Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, 8 th Floor, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA
          [5 ] The Dana Center for Preventive Ophthalmology, Wilmer Eye Institute, Wilmer 120, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, Maryland, 21287, USA
          [6 ] Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK
          [7 ] Center for Clinical Trials and Evidence Synthesis, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, Room E6152, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA
          Author notes
          Corresponding author: Tianjing Li, tli19@ 123456jhu.edu
          Article
          PMC4695285 PMC4695285 4695285 nihpa723611
          10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.09.005
          4695285
          26526633
          1bd3de25-7d3c-4d61-bf5d-fa21b83b0970
          History
          Categories
          Article

          Comments

          Comment on this article