Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice

Register      Login

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 4 ( October-December, 2023 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Ocular Surface Evaluation after Switch from Latanoprost 0.005% to Latanoprostene Bunod 0.024%

Virginia Zanutigh, Leila Galetto, Florencia Valvecchia, Celina Logioco

Keywords : Glaucoma, Latanoprost, Latanoprostene bunod, Ocular surface, Ocular surface disease index-score

Citation Information : Zanutigh V, Galetto L, Valvecchia F, Logioco C. Ocular Surface Evaluation after Switch from Latanoprost 0.005% to Latanoprostene Bunod 0.024%. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2023; 17 (4):205-209.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1422

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 17-01-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Aim and background: To evaluate the ocular surface of patients treated with latanoprost (LT) 0.005% who switched to latanoprostene bunod (LBN) 0.024%. Materials and methods: A prospective and nonrandomized clinical study of a case series was performed, including patients with chronic open-angle glaucoma who were on previous LT-only treatment and, after a washout period, switched to LBN, with a 3-month follow-up. The main parameter to be evaluated was the ocular surface disease index (OSDI) test. In addition, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), biomicroscopic aspect of the ocular surface, measuring tear breakup time, fluorescein staining (grading performed on Oxford scale) and Schirmer I test were evaluated. Results: A total of 36 patients (72 eyes) were included, 21 women (58.3%) and 15 men (41.7%, with a mean age of 65.6 ± 10.9 years (37–86). The initial OSDI score was 17.8 ± 12.1 and improved to 11.1 ± 10.5 (p < 0.01). From the data evaluated at biomicroscopy, an improvement was observed in the Oxford scale from 0.6 ± 0.7 to 0.2 ± 0.8 (p: 0.01), but no statistically significant changes were observed in the break-up time (BUT) and Schirmer. BCVA remained stable, as did IOP, which was initially 13.4 ± 2.1 mm Hg and, after performing the LBN treatment change, went to 13.1 ± 1.7 mm Hg. Conclusion: After the change of treatment from LT 0.005% to LBN 0.024%, the patients had an improvement in the ocular surface, maintaining control of their IOP. The need to investigate possible beneficial mechanisms on the ocular surface in glaucoma patients treated with LBN, potentially related to nitric oxide, is raised. Clinical significance: Patients treated with LT 0.005% who switched to LBN 0.024% had an improvement in ocular surface symptoms and signs, keeping IOP under control. Latanoprostene bunod (LBN) 0.024% may have beneficial effects on the ocular surface, which should be further studied.

  1. Scelfo C, ElSheikh RH, Shamim MM, et al. Ocular surface disease in glaucoma patients. Curr Eye Res 2023;48(3):219–230. DOI: 10.1080/02713683.2022.2041041
  2. Fineide F, Lagali N, Adil MY, et al. Topical glaucoma medications - clinical implications for the ocular surface. Ocul Surf 2022;26:19–49. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2022.07.007
  3. Li G, Akpek EK, Ahmad S. Glaucoma and ocular surface disease: more than meets the eye. Clin Ophthalmol 2022;16:3641–3649. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S388886
  4. Zhang X, Vadoothker S, Munir WM, et al. Ocular surface disease and glaucoma medications: a clinical approach. Eye Contact Lens 2019;45(1):11–18. DOI: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000544
  5. Okumura Y, Inomata T, Iwata N, et al. A Review of dry eye questionnaires: measuring patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life. Diagnostics (Basel) 2020;10(8). DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics10080559
  6. Recchioni A, Aiyegbusi OL, Cruz-Rivera S, et al. A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases. PLoS One 2021;16(8):e0253857. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253857
  7. Kaufman PL. Latanoprostene bunod ophthalmic solution 0.024% for IOP lowering in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2017;18(4):433–444. DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2017.1293654
  8. Weinreb RN, Scassellati Sforzolini B, Vittitow J, et al. Latanoprostene bunod 0.024% versus timolol maleate 0.5% in subjects with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: the APOLLO study. Ophthalmology 2016;123(5):965–973. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.01.019
  9. Medeiros FA, Martin KR, Peace J, et al. Comparison of latanoprostene bunod 0.024% and timolol maleate 0.5% in open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: the LUNAR study. Am J Ophthalmol 2016;168:250–259. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.05.012
  10. Weinreb RN, Liebmann JM, Martin KR, et al. Latanoprostene bunod 0.024% in subjects with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: pooled phase 3 study findings. J Glaucoma 2018;27(1):7–15. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000831
  11. Lo TC, Chen YY, Hung MC, et al. Latanoprostene bunod 0.024% in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a meta-analysis. J Clin Med 2022;11(15). DOI: 10.3390/jcm11154325
  12. Harasymowycz P, Royer C, Cui AX, et al. Short-term efficacy of latanoprostene bunod for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a systematic literature review and a network meta-analysis. Br J Ophthalmol 2022;106(5):640–647. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-317262
  13. Bron AJ, Evans VE, Smith JA. Grading of corneal and conjunctival staining in the context of other dry eye tests. Cornea 2003;22(7):640–650. DOI: 10.1097/00003226-200310000-00008
  14. Wallace S, Edmond J. In support of ophthalmology-specific patient-reported outcome measures. Ophthalmology 2019;126(5):690–691. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.12.007
  15. Grubbs JR Jr, Tolleson-Rinehart S, Huynh K, et al. A review of quality of life measures in dry eye questionnaires. Cornea 2014;33(2):215–218. DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000038
  16. Gomes JAP, Santo RM. The impact of dry eye disease treatment on patient satisfaction and quality of life: A review. Ocul Surf 2019;17(1):9–19. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2018.11.003
  17. Ozcura F, Aydin S, Helvaci MR. Ocular surface disease index for the diagnosis of dry eye syndrome. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2007;15(5):389–393. DOI: 10.1080/09273940701486803
  18. Saade CE, Lari HB, Berezina TL, et al. Topical glaucoma therapy and ocular surface disease: a prospective, controlled cohort study. Can J Ophthalmol 2015;50(2):132–136. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2014.11.006
  19. Guarnieri A, Carnero E, Bleau AM, et al. Relationship between OSDI questionnaire and ocular surface changes in glaucomatous patients. Int Ophthalmol 2020;40(3):741–751. DOI: 10.1007/s10792-019-01236-z
  20. Samuelson TW, Singh IP, Williamson BK, et al. Quality of life in primary open-angle glaucoma and cataract: an analysis of VFQ-25 and OSDI from the iStent inject® pivotal trial. Am J Ophthalmol 2021;229:220–229. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.03.007
  21. Muz OE, Dagdelen K, Pirdal T, et al. Comparison of BAK-preserved latanoprost and polyquad-preserved travoprost on ocular surface parameters in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Int Ophthalmol 2021;41(11):3825–3835. DOI: 10.1007/s10792-021-01947-2
  22. Romano D, De Ruvo V, Fogagnolo P, et al. Inter-eye comparison of the ocular surface of glaucoma patients receiving surgical and medical treatments. J Clin Med 2022;11(5). DOI: 10.3390/jcm11051238
  23. Wu JH, Wang TH, Huang JY, et al. Ocular surface disease in glaucoma patients randomized to benzalkonium chloride-containing latanoprost and preservative-free bimatoprost. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2021;37(10):556–564. DOI: 10.1089/jop.2021.0071
  24. Kim DW, Shin J, Lee CK, et al. Comparison of ocular surface assessment and adherence between preserved and preservative-free latanoprost in glaucoma: a parallel-grouped randomized trial. Sci Rep 2021;11(1):14971. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-94574-x
  25. Okeke CO, Burstein ES, Trubnik V, et al. Retrospective chart review on real-world use of latanoprostene bunod 0.024% in treatment-naïve patients with open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmol Ther 2020;9(4):1041–1053. DOI: 10.1007/s40123-020-00307-0
  26. Wang Y, Liao Y, Nie X. Comparative evaluation of latanoprostene bunod, timolol maleate, and latanoprost ophthalmic solutions to assess their safety and efficacy in lowering intraocular pressure for the management of open-angle glaucoma. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2020;75:e1874. DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2020/e1874
  27. Radell JE, Sharma HK, Auyeung KL, et al. Two-year experience with latanoprostene bunod in clinical practice. J Glaucoma 2021;30(9):776–780. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001904
  28. Tau J, Passerini MS, Del Papa M, et al. A novel ophthalmic latanoprost 0.005% nanoemulsion: a cytotoxicity study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2022;260(6):1941–1946. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-021-05536-y
  29. Casiraghi JF, Grigera D, Peyret JA, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of a new latanoprost 0.005% bak-free nanoemulsion: a nonrandomized open-label trial. Re:GEN Open 2021;1(1):110–116. DOI: 10.1089/regen.2021.0018
  30. Tummanapalli SS, Kuppusamy R, Yeo JH, et al. The role of nitric oxide in ocular surface physiology and pathophysiology. Ocul Surf 2021;21:37–51. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2021.04.007
  31. Bartlett JD, Keith MS, Sudharshan L, et al. Associations between signs and symptoms of dry eye disease: a systematic review. Clin Ophthalmol 2015;9:1719–1730. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S89700
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.