Sightsavers Logo
Research centre
  • Home
  • About us
  • Research approach
  • Research studies and publications
  • Evidence gap maps
Join in:
  • Join in: Facebook
  • Join in: Twitter
  • Join in: Instagram
  • Join in: LinkedIn
  • Join in: YouTube
  • Global
  • Close search bar
    Donate
    • Home
    • About us
    • Research approach
    • Research studies and publications
    • Evidence gap maps

    Efficacy and safety of different regimes for primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

    Methodological quality of the review: Medium Confidence

     

    Authors: Li F, Huang W, Zhang X

     

    Region: Not specified

     

    Sector: Glaucoma

     

    Sub-sector: None specified

    Equity focus: None specified

    Review type: Other review

    Quantitative synthesis method, if applicable: meta-analysis

    Qualitative synthesis method, if applicable: Not applicable

    Background:

    Medical treatments act to decrease intraocular pressure (IOP) in three main ways: increase outflow of aqueous humour, decrease secretion of aqueous humour and decrease intra-ocular volume. Prostaglandins (PGA), adrenergic agonists (AA), beta‐blockers (BB), carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (CAI) and miotics (MIO) are the drugs most widely used to treat primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). Previous meta-analyses have compared the IOP lowering efficacy of drugs such as latanoprost and timolol, among others, but these comparisons have been carried out between only a limited number of regimens because data from randomized controlled trials involve limited types of drugs. A previous network meta-analysis compared the treatment effect of several PGAs, AAs, BBs and placebo, but its data focused on comparisons among the use of single drugs. To elucidate the IOP lowering effect of different categories and combinations of drugs, this study describes a network meta-analysis comparing and ranking all categories of medications for medical treatment of POAG.

    Objectives:

    To assess the efficacy and safety of different regimens, including monotherapy and double therapy, for primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) or ocular hypertension.

    Main findings:

    The authors’ meta-analysis showed that PGAs provide best IOP-lowering effect among all the monotherapy regimen. Combination of PGA and other category of drugs leads to better IOP decrease. Combination of BB and another non-PGA drug may have less ocular side-effects than PGA alone.

    This study includes 72 randomized trials. Data were available on 12 medical treatments of POAG or ocular hypertension. Of 66 possible comparisons of outcome efficacy, 15 treatments were compared directly.

    Considering the complex comparison network between all regimens, using meta-regression or subgroup analysis to check the bias may not be helpful. Future studies are needed to determine whether these factors have substantial influence on treatment outcomes.

    Methodology:

    Studies were included in this review based on the following criteria.

    • Studies must be randomized controlled trials.
    • Trials must compare the above-mentioned antiglaucoma regimens in glaucoma patients.
    • Duration of trials must be at least 3 months.
    • Different categories or combinations of medicines must be used in different groups of patients, and only one type of regimen can be used during the trial by one group of patients.
    • Trials must report on the outcomes of interest.

    The authors searched PubMed, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov for studies that fit our inclusion criteria in this network meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials that report data on efficacy and safety of medications for POAG or ocular hypertension are included. Data on IOP-lowering effect and incidence of adverse events including hyperaemia and ocular discomfort were extracted and used in mixed-comparison analysis.

    Applicability/external validity:

    In clinical practice, when considering regimens for IOP lowering, not only the IOP-lowering efficacy but also the incidence of adverse events should be considered.

    Geographic focus: None specified

    Summary of quality assessment:

    The authors here do not state whether they made attempts to contact the authors of the studies. They do however include all other information, albeit in the form of supplementary tables that can be accessed via the online version of the article, for this reason it is awarded Medium Confidence

    Publication source:

    Li F, Huang W, Zhang X (2018) Efficacy and safety of different regimes for primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Acta Ophthalmol. 2018 (96) pp. 277–284

    source

    Sightsavers Logo
    Research centre
    • Join in:
    • Join in: Facebook
    • Join in: X
    • Join in: Instagram
    • Join in: LinkedIn
    • Join in: YouTube

    Protecting sight, fighting disease and promoting equality for all

  • Accessibility
  • Sightsavers homepage
  • Our policies
  • Media centre
  • Contact us
  • Jobs
  • Cookies and privacy Terms and conditions Modern slavery statement Safeguarding

    © 2025 by Sightsavers, Inc., Business Address for all correspondence: One Boston Place, Suite 2600, Boston, MA 02108.

    Our website uses cookies

    To make sure you have a great experience on our site, we’d like your consent to use cookies. These will collect anonymous statistics to personalise your experience.

    Manage preferences

    You have the option to enable non-essential cookies, which will help us enhance your experience and improve our website.

    Essential cookiesAlways on

    These enable our site to work correctly, for example by storing page settings. You can disable these by changing your browser settings, but some parts of our website will not work as expected.

    Analytics cookies

    To improve our website, we’d like to collect anonymous data about how you use the site, such as which pages you read, the device you’re using, and whether your visit includes a donation. This is completely anonymous, and is never used to profile individual visitors.

    Advertising cookies

    To raise awareness about our work, we’d like to show you Sightsavers adverts as you browse the web. By accepting these cookies, our advertising partners may use anonymous information to show you our adverts on other websites you visit. If you do not enable advertising cookies, you will still see adverts on other websites, but they may be less relevant to you. For info, see the Google Ads privacy policy.