May 2003
Volume 44, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2003
2-Year Comparison of Bimatoprost with Timolol in Patients with Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • J.S. Cohen
    Glaucoma Department, Cincinnati Eye Institute, Cincinnati, OH, United States
  • R.L. Gross
    Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
  • M.B. Sherwood
    Dept. of Ophthalmology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, United States
  • J.K. Cheetham
    Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, United States
  • A. VanDenburgh
    Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, United States
  • P. Bernstein
    Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, United States
  • S.M. Whitcup
    Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, United States
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2003, Vol.44, 2177. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      J.S. Cohen, R.L. Gross, M.B. Sherwood, J.K. Cheetham, A. VanDenburgh, P. Bernstein, S.M. Whitcup; 2-Year Comparison of Bimatoprost with Timolol in Patients with Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2003;44(13):2177.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: To compare the long-term safety and efficacy of bimatoprost 0.03% (LUMIGAN® ) and timolol 0.5% in glaucoma and ocular hypertension patients Methods: Extension of a 1-year, randomized, double-masked trial to 2 years. After completion of the 1-year study, patients from selected sites were randomized to receive bimatoprost QD (n=167), bimatoprost BID (n=131), or timolol 0.5% BID (n=81) for an additional 12 months. Main outcome measures were mean IOP change from baseline (8 AM and 10 AM) and safety parameters. Results: IOP lowering efficacy with once or twice daily bimatoprost was maintained over 2 years. Mean IOP reductions were significantly greater with bimatoprost QD than with timolol at all visits (P<.001); from months 12 to 24, the 10 AM measurement was 7.4 – 8.2 mm Hg below baseline (month 0) in the bimatoprost QD group and 4.6 – 5.1 mm Hg below baseline in the timolol group. Mean IOPs among bimatoprost QD patients at 10 AM at months 12 and 24 were 17.1 mm Hg and 17.2 mm Hg, respectively. Mean IOPs among timolol patients at the same time points were 18.9 mm Hg and 19.1 mm Hg, respectively. There were no reports of increased iris pigmentation in any treatment group during this time period. Few patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events (bimatoprost QD, 3%; bimatoprost BID, 5.3%, and timolol, 4.9%). There was only 1 discontinuation due to hyperemia and that was from the bimatoprost BID group. Conclusions: Bimatoprost QD was consistently efficacious and well tolerated over 24 months of treatment with no evidence of decreased IOP-lowering efficacy. Bimatoprost QD was safe and well tolerated.

Keywords: intraocular pressure • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: tre 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.