Diagourtas Andreas, Kagelaris Kostantinos, Oikonomakis Kostantinos, Droulias Andreas, Kokolakis Nikolaos, Papaconstantinou Dimitrios
1st Athens University Eye Clinic, G. Gennimatas General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2018 Jul;28(4):378-384. doi: 10.1177/1120672117747030. Epub 2018 Mar 19.
To evaluate the efficacy and safety between two generic prostaglandins Lataz-Xalaprost (Greece) and the corresponding original drops (Xalatan).
In this prospective randomized study, 60 patients diagnosed with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were enrolled, who had never received antiglaucoma treatment. Subjects were divided randomly into three groups (Xalatan, Lataz, and Xalaprost groups) and they were studied over 16 weeks. At each visit, the mean applanation tonometry values and tear break-up time were measured. The Ocular Surface Disease Index questionnaire was used to evaluate patient's symptoms.
There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in the mean values of the intraocular pressure between the baseline and the last visit (Xalatan group: from 23.11 ± 1.61 mmHg to 15.81 ± 1.22 mmHg, Lataz group: from 23.26 ± 1.33 mmHg to 15.80 ± 1.47 mmHg, and Xalaprost group: from 23.08 ± 1.45 mmHg to 16.08 ± 1.38 mmHg). Both generic eye drops showed mean percentage intraocular pressure reduction comparable to the standards of prostaglandin analogues (Xalatan: 31.57%, Lataz: 32.06%, and Xalaprost: 30.34%). Xalatan reduced the tear break-up time less, followed by Lataz and then by Xalaprost (Xalatan: from 8.5 to 8 s, Lataz: from 8.2 to 7.4 s, and Xalaprost: from 8.7 to 7.7 s). Xalatan presented the best safety profile, followed by Lataz and least was Xalaprost, according to Ocular Surface Disease Index questionnaire's results.
No significant difference was recorded in the effectiveness of each generic prostaglandin compared to the original. Furthermore, no patient had to change medication. The differences that arose in the safety profile of the three eye drops suggest a prompt closer initial monitoring of patients who are administered generic eye drops.
评估两种通用型前列腺素Lataz-Xalaprost(希腊)与相应的原研滴眼液(适利达)之间的疗效和安全性。
在这项前瞻性随机研究中,纳入了60例被诊断为开角型青光眼或高眼压症且从未接受过抗青光眼治疗的患者。受试者被随机分为三组(适利达组、Lataz组和Xalaprost组),并进行了16周的研究。每次就诊时,测量平均压平眼压值和泪膜破裂时间。使用眼表疾病指数问卷评估患者症状。
基线与最后一次就诊时眼压平均值存在统计学显著差异(p < 0.001)(适利达组:从23.11±1.61 mmHg降至15.81±1.22 mmHg,Lataz组:从23.26±1.33 mmHg降至15.80±1.47 mmHg,Xalaprost组:从23.08±1.45 mmHg降至16.08±1.38 mmHg)。两种通用型滴眼液的眼压平均降低百分比均与前列腺素类似物标准相当(适利达:31.57%,Lataz:32.06%,Xalaprost:30.34%)。适利达对泪膜破裂时间的缩短作用较小,其次是Lataz,然后是Xalaprost(适利达:从8.5秒降至8秒,Lataz:从8.2秒降至7.4秒,Xalaprost:从8.7秒降至7.7秒)。根据眼表疾病指数问卷结果,适利达的安全性最佳,其次是Lataz,Xalaprost最差。
与原研药相比,每种通用型前列腺素的有效性无显著差异。此外,没有患者需要更换药物。三种滴眼液安全性方面出现的差异表明,对于使用通用型滴眼液的患者,应在初始阶段进行更密切的监测。