. 2010 Jul 30;4:741–764. doi: 10.2147/opth.s10441

Table 1.

Summary of meta-analyses of randomized control trials of prostaglandin analog use as monotherapy in ocular hypertension and open-angle glaucoma

Author/year/sponsor	PGA randomized	No. of trials	N	Cross-over studies	Single-blind studies	Quality scores	Duration (months)	%Without OAG or OH	Summary of IOP-lowering efficacy
Cheng⁸⁹/2008/Nil	Lat, Bim	13	1302	Yes	Yes	Jadad	1–6	17.0^a	WMD %IOPR: Bim vs Lat = 5.60%, P <0.001 in favor of Bim
Zhang¹¹⁵/2001/Nil	Lat, Tim	11	1256	Yes	Yes	Jadad	1–12	10.9	%IOPR: Lat 30.2% >Tim 26.9%. %IOP-lowering difference = 5% (1.6 mmHg), P <0.001
Fung¹⁴⁶/2007/Nil	Lat, Brim	14	1784	Yes	Yes	No	1–12	3.4	WMD %IOPR: Lat vs Tim = 1.10 mmHg, CI 0.57–1.63, P = 0.001 in favor of Lat
Einarson¹⁴⁵/2000/Pharmacia	Lat, Brim	9	1168	NR	No	Jadad	Up to 6	NR	IOPR: Lat 8.0 mmHg > Brim 6.2 mmHg, P =0.045
Aptel⁸⁸/2008/Nil	Lat, Bim, Trav	8	1610	No	No	Jadad	1–6	0	IOPR: Bim > Trav (at 0800 and 1200 h) >Lat (all time points)
Eyawo⁹⁰/2008/Pfizer	Lat, Bim, Trav	16	2664(IR)	No	Yes	No	3–12	8.7	WMD %IOPR: Trav vs Lat = −0.24 mmHg, CI −0.87–0.38, P = 0.45, Trav vs Bim = 0.88 mmHg, CI 0.13–1.63, P = 0.02, Lat vs Bim = 0.73 mmHg, CI 0.10–1.37, P = 0.02. Authors state similar efficacy effects
Denis⁹¹/2007/Alcon	Lat, Bim, Trav	9	1318	No	Yes	No	0.5–12	0.9	Difference %IOPR: Trav vs Lat = −0.98 mmHg, CI −2.08–0.13, P = 0.08. Bim vs Lat = −1.04 mmHg, CI −2.11; 0.04, P = 0.06. Pooled Trav or Bim vs Lat = −1.0 mmHg, CI −1.91, −0.10, P = 0.03 in favor of pooled Trav or Bim
Holmstrom¹²⁸/2005/Allergan	Lat, Bim, Trav, Tim	42	9295	Yes	Yes	No	0–6	NR	WM %IOPR: Bim 30.3% > Trav 28.7% > Lat 26.7% > Tim 22.2%
Li¹⁰⁵/2006/Nil	Lat, Bim, Trav, Tim	12	3048	NR	Yes	No	0.5–12	3.8	WMD %IOPR: Trav vs Tim = −0.81 mmHg, P = 0.00001 in favor of Trav, Trav vs Bim = 0.08 mmHg, P = 0.8. Trav vs Lat = −0.57 mmHg, P =0.07 in favor of Trav
Hodge¹⁵⁸/2008/Nil	Lat, Brim, Dorz	8	1722	Yes	NR	Jadad	3–6	5.8	WMD in IOPR: Lat vs Brim = −1.04 mmHg, P = 0.30. Lat vs Dorz = −2.64 mmHg, P < 0.00001 in favor of Lat
Cheng¹⁸⁶/2009/Nil	Lat, Dorz + Tim	14	2149	Yes	Yes	Jadad	1–12	14.3 (IR)	WMD %IOPR: Subjects uncontrolled on timolol treatment: Lat vs Dorz/Tim = 3.12%, CI 0.47– 5.78, Significant. Subjects not on baseline timolol treatment: Lat is as effective as Dorz/Tim
Stewart¹⁶²/2008/Nil	Lat, Bim, Trav, Tim, Brim, Dorz	11	386	Yes	Yes	Delphi	1–2	NR	24-Hour %IOPR: Bim 29% > Trav 27% > Lat 24%, >Tim 19% > Dorz 19% > Brim 14%
van der Valk⁸⁴/2005/Nil	Lat, Bim, Trav, Btx, Tim, Dorz, Brinz, Brim	28	6953(trough) 6841(peak)	NR	Yes	Delphi	1–6	2.8 (IR)	%IOPR: At peak: Bim 33% > Lat 31% = Trav 31% > Tim 27% > Brim 25% > Btx 23% > Dorz 22% >Brinz 17% At trough: Trav 29% > Bim 28% = Lat 28% > Tim 26% > Btx 20% > Brim 18% > Brinz 17% = Dorz 17%

Abbreviations: Bim, bimatoprost 0.03%; Brim, brimonidine 0.2%; Brinz, brinzolamide 1.0%; Btx, betaxolol 0.5%; CI, 95% confidence intervals; IOP, intraocular pressure; IOPR, intraocular pressure reduction; IR, incompletely reported; Lat, latanoprost 0.005%; NR, not reported; OH, ocular hypertension; OAG, open-angle glaucoma; Trav, travoprost 0.004%; WM. weighted mean; WMD, weighted mean difference; Tim, timolol.

Excludes NTG subjects.