Research Article| Volume 22, ISSUE 1, P53-65, January 2000

Efficacy of brimonidine as replacement therapy in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension

  • David A. Lee
    Address correspondence to: David A. Lee, MD, Jules Stein Eye Institute, UCLA School of Medicine, 100 Stein Plaza, Room 2-235, Los Angeles, CA 90095-7004.
    Jules Stein Eye Institute, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA
    Search for articles by this author
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.


      Patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension may have inadequately controlled intraocular pressure (IOP) or experience adverse effects with their current medication regimens.


      This post hoc reanalysis determined the effectiveness and tolerability of brimonidine used as replacement therapy in a real-life clinical practice setting.


      In this multicenter, open-label, observational, 2-month study, 460 patients received brimonidine 0.2% as a 1:1 replacement for another antiglaucoma medication in their current regimen. Effectiveness was assessed by calculating the mean additional reduction in IOP from the treated baseline measurement (before the switch to brimonidine) to 2 months postbaseline, and by determining physicians' opinions of treatment effectiveness. Tolerability was determined based on quality-of-life assessments and recorded adverse events.


      Overall, brimonidine replacement significantly reduced mean (± SEM) IOP by an additional 2.33 ± 0.17 mm Hg (9.8% ± 0.9%; P < 0.001). Significant additional reductions in IOP were seen when brimonidine replaced an agent used either as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, regardless of the drug class of the agent replaced. However, particularly good hypotensive effectiveness and additional lowering of IOP were observed when brimonidine replaced certain medications, including latanoprost (12.44%; P < 0.003) and betaxolol (13.56%; P < 0.001) monotherapy, and latanoprost (16.08%; P < 0.010) adjunctive therapy. The effectiveness of brimonidine was rated as good or excellent by 92.4% of physicians. All quality-of-life variables remained favorable or improved throughout the study, and brimonidine treatment was well tolerated.


      Brimonidine 0.2% used as a 1:1 replacement for monotherapy or adjunctive therapy with other antiglaucoma drugs significantly lowered IOP from that produced by previous therapy and was well tolerated. Brimonidine offers a useful treatment option in patients who require replacement therapy.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Clinical Therapeutics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • David R.
        Changing therapeutic paradigms in glaucoma management.
        Expert Opin Invest Drugs. 1998; 7: 1063-1086
        • Yoles E
        • Wheeler LA
        • Schwartz M.
        α2-adrenoceptor agonists are neuroprotective in a rat model of optic nerve degeneration.
        Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999; 40: 65-73
        • Toris CB
        • Gleason ML
        • Camras CB
        • Yablonski ME.
        Effects of brimonidine on aqueous humor dynamics in human eyes.
        Arch Ophthalmol. 1995; 113: 1514-1517
        • Canfor LB
        • Burke J.
        Expert Opin Invest Drugs. 1997; 6: 1063-1083
        • Schuman JS
        • Horwitz B
        • Choplin NT
        • et al.
        • the Chronic Brimonidine Study Group
        A 1-year study of brimonidine twice daily in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. A controlled, randomized, multicenter clinical trial.
        Arch Ophthalmol. 1997; 115: 847-852
        • Serle JB
        • for the Brimonidine Study Group III
        A comparison of the safety efficacy of twice daily brimonidine 0.2% versus betaxolol 0.2 5% in subjects with elevated intraocular pressure.
        Surv Ophthalmol. 1996; 41: S39-S47
        • Javitt J
        • for the Brimonidine Outcome Study Group
        The clinical success rate quality-of-life assessment of brimonidine tartrate 0.2% compared with timolol 0.5 %, administered twice daily, in.
        Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997; 38 (Abstract 3363): S749
        • Katz LJ
        Brimonidine tartrate 0.2% twice daily vs timolol 0.5 % twice daily: 1-year results in glaucoma patients.
        Am J Ophthalmol. 1999; 127: 20-26
        • Traverso CE
        • for the Brimonidine Study Group I
        Additivity of brimonidine 0.2% BID or pilocarpine 2.0 % to beta-blocker monotherapy.
        Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998; 39 (Abstract 2199): S480
      1. Lee DA, Gornbein J, Abrams C. The effectiveness and safety of brimonidine as mono-, combination, or replacement therapy for patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: A posthoc analysis of an open-label community trial. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. In press.

        • Camras CB
        • Wax MB
        • Ritch R
        • et al.
        Latanoprost treatment for glaucoma: Effects of treating for 1 year and of switching from timolol.
        Am J Ophthalmol. 1998; 126: 390-399
        • Bucci MG.
        Intraocular pressure-lowering effects of latanoprost monotherapy versus latanoprost or pilocarpine in combination with timolol: A randomized,.
        J Glaucoma. 1999; 8: 24-30
        • Strohmaier K
        • Snyder E
        • Adamson I.
        A multicenter study comparing dorzolamide and pilocarpine as adjunctive therapy to timolol: Patient preference and impact on daily life.
        J Am Optom Assoc. 1998; 69: 441-451
        • Walters TR.
        Development and use of brimonidine in treating acute and chronic elevations of intraocular pressure: A review of safety, efficacy, dose response, and dosing studies.
        Surv Ophthalmol. 1996; 41: S19-S26