The Experts below are selected from a list of 297 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
William C Stewart - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Comfort Survey of Timolol Hemihydrate 0.5% Solution Once or Twice Daily vs Timolol Maleate in Sorbate.
Journal of current glaucoma practice, 2013Co-Authors: William C Stewart, Jeffrey C Oehler, Neil T Choplin, Joseph I Markoff, Marlene R. Moster, Parul Ichhpujani, Lindsay A. NelsonAbstract:Objective To evaluate by survey the comfort upon instillation of Timolol hemihydrate compared to Timolol Maleate with potassium sorbate. Design A prospective, multicenter, observational, non-interventional study. Participants One hundred and three patients of open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension who were ≥21 years old and were currently prescribed Timolol hemihydrate (once or twice daily) or Timolol Maleate with potassium sorbate once daily as monotherapy or as a part of two-drug therapy. Materials and methods Study was performed at seven clinical sites in the United States. Patients were surveyed on comfort upon instillation of Timolol hemihydrate compared to Timolol Maleate with potassium sorbate. Results A difference between Timolol hemihydrate and Timolol Maleate with potassium sorbate for questions 1 (burning/stinging on instillation, p 0.05). Conclusion This survey suggests that Timolol hemihydrate is associated with less stinging/burning and tearing than Timolol Maleate with potassium sorbate. How to cite this article: Stewart WC, Oehler JC, Choplin NT, Markoff JI, Moster MR, Ichhpujani P, Nelson LA. A Comfort Survey of Timolol Hemihydrate 0.5% Solution Once or Twice Daily vs Timolol Maleate in Sorbate. J Current Glau Prac 2013;7(1):11-16.
-
daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0 005 Timolol Maleate 0 5 and dorzolamide 2 Timolol Maleate 0 5
Eye, 2004Co-Authors: Anastasios G P Konstas, Jeanette A. Stewart, Vassilios P. Kozobolis, Nikolaos Lallos, E Christodoulakis, William C StewartAbstract:Daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0.005%/Timolol Maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%/Timolol Maleate 0.5%
-
Daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0.005%/Timolol Maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%/Timolol Maleate 0.5%.
Eye (London England), 2004Co-Authors: Anastasios G P Konstas, Jeanette A. Stewart, Vassilios P. Kozobolis, Nikolaos Lallos, E Christodoulakis, William C StewartAbstract:Daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0.005%/Timolol Maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%/Timolol Maleate 0.5%
-
Brimonidine 0.2% given two or three times daily versus Timolol Maleate 0.5% in primary open-angle glaucoma.
American journal of ophthalmology, 2001Co-Authors: Anastasios G P Konstas, William C Stewart, Keri T Holmes, Fotis Topouzis, Ioannis Tersis, Nikolaos T. StangosAbstract:PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of brimonidine 0.2% two or three times daily versus Timolol Maleate 0.5% solution twice daily. METHODS: Patients with primary open-angle glaucoma were randomized by Latin square technique to one of the three treatment sequences in this crossover, prospective double-masked trial. Each treatment period consisted of 6 weeks of chronic dosing followed by a diurnal curve for the intraocular pressure measured at 08:00, 10:00, 16:00, 18:00, 20:00, 22:00, and 24:00 hours. Intraocular pressure was measured by applanation tonometry. RESULTS: Thirty patients completed this trial. The average diurnal intraocular pressures in the trial were measured for Timolol Maleate (17.7 ± 2.7 mm Hg), brimonidine given three times daily (18.0 ± 2.2 mm Hg), and brimonidine given twice daily (19.2 ± 2.4 mm Hg). There was a statistical difference between groups (P < .005). When groups were compared by pairs, three times daily dosing with brimonidine and Timolol Maleate both reduced the pressure more than twice daily brimonidine at every time point past 10:00 hours and for the diurnal curve (P < .05). In contrast, three times daily brimonidine and Timolol Maleate were statistically similar for the diurnal pressure, and each time point, except Timolol Maleate, decreased the pressure more at 16:00 (P = .042). Safety was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that both Timolol Maleate twice daily and brimonidine three times daily provide a similar intraocular pressure reduction to each other. Timolol Maleate twice daily and brimonidine three times daily provide a greater decrease in pressure in the late afternoon and nighttime hours, compared with brimonidine twice daily.
-
twenty four hour control of intraocular pressure with dorzolamide and Timolol Maleate in exfoliation and primary open angle glaucoma
Eye, 2000Co-Authors: Anastasios G P Konstas, Athanasios Maltezos, Theodoros Bufidis, Alison C Hudgins, William C StewartAbstract:PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and safety of adding dorzolamide 2% twice daily to Timolol Maleate solution 0.5% twice daily when treating exfoliation glaucoma or primary open-angle glaucoma. METHODS: This was a single-centre, crossover intra-individually controlled comparison. Sixty-two consecutive patients (31 with exfoliation glaucoma and 31 with primary open angle glaucoma) chronically treated with Timolol Maleate twice daily were included in this trial. Patients then had added dorzolamide 2% twice daily (08:00 and 20:00), instilled approximately 10 min after Timolol Maleate. Patients underwent diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP) testing (six measurements over 24 h), first on Timolol Maleate monotherapy and 2 months later following the addition of dorzolamide 2% as adjunctive therapy. RESULTS: On Timolol monotherapy patients with exfoliation glaucoma had a higher mean IOP at 02:00, 06:00, 10:00, 14:00 and 22:00 hour time points as well as a higher maximum, minimum and range of IOP throughout the day compared with the primary open-angle glaucoma group (p < 0.05). Following the addition of dorzolamide as adjunctive therapy to Timolol Maleate there was a significant reduction in IOP (p < 0.05) at all time points in both glaucomas, but mean IOP at 10:00, 14:00, 18:00 and 22:00 hour time points, as well as the peak and range of IOP, remained higher in the exfoliation glaucoma group. No serious adverse events were noted with dorzolamide. Bitter taste, the most common symptom, was noted in 30% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that dorzolamide 2% used adjunctively with Timolol Maleate 0.5% solution is effective in reducing diurnal IOP in patients with primary open-angle and exfoliation glaucoma but does not alter the characteristics of higher IOP levels in the latter disease.
David Hartenbaum - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Patient preference, efficacy, and compliance with Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution versus Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution in patients with ocular hypertension or open-angle glaucoma.
Clinical therapeutics, 1999Co-Authors: Howard Schenker, I Susan Maloney, Charles Liss, Glenn J. Gormley, David HartenbaumAbstract:Abstract This study was designed to compare Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution 0.5% (Timolol gel) once daily with Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution 0.5% (Timolol solution) twice daily with respect to patient preference, intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect, and tolerability. A total of 202 patients with ocular hypertension or open-angle glaucoma and an IOP ≥22 mm Hg were enrolled in this 12-week, randomized, observer-masked, two-period crossover study. Significantly more patients preferred Timolol gel to Timolol solution ( P
-
Efficacy and tolerability of 0.5% Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution QD compared with 0.5% levobunolol hydrochloride BID in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension
Clinical therapeutics, 1998Co-Authors: Thomas R. Walters, Susan Maloney, Deborah Slater, Charlie Liss, Helene M. Wilson, David HartenbaumAbstract:We compared the efficacy of Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution 0.5% QD with that of levobunolol hydrochloride 0.5% BID, as measured by change in intraocular pressure (IOP), effect on heart rate, and ocular tolerability. The study had a positive-controlled, double-masked, randomized, multicenter, 12-week, two-period (6 weeks each), crossover design. One hundred fifty-two patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized to receive either Timolol Maleate gel-forming solution QD or levobunolol BID for 6 weeks, followed by a crossover to the alternate treatment. IOP and heart rate were measured at morning trough and peak during weeks 3, 6, 9, and 12. Timolol Maleate gel-forming solution QD was comparable to levobunolol BID in reducing IOP at peak and trough. Although the effects on peak heart rate were similar between the two medications, the effect on trough heart rate of Timolol Maleate gel-forming solution QD was significantly less than that of levobunolol BID (P = 0.001). The incidence of ocular burning and stinging was comparable between the two treatments. Patients experienced significantly more blurred vision when using Timolol Maleate gel-forming solution than when using levobunolol (P = 0.013). Overall, more patients experienced at least one adverse event when using Timolol Maleate gel-forming solution. Timolol Maleate gel-forming solution QD is as efficacious in reducing IOP as levobunolol BID.
Halil Ates - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The efficacy and safety of bimatoprost/Timolol Maleate, latanoprost/Timolol Maleate, and travoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combinations on 24-h IOP
International Ophthalmology, 2018Co-Authors: Suzan Guven Yilmaz, Cumali Degirmenci, Yunus Emre Karakoyun, Emil Yusifov, Halil AtesAbstract:Purpose To evaluate the effect of bimatoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combination (BTFC), latanoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combination (LTFC), and travoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combination (TTFC) on 24-h intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Methods This prospective, observer-masked, randomized study included 50 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. All patients were using hypotensive lipids and Timolol Maleate fixed combination treatment for ≥4 weeks and had an IOP ≤ 21 mmHg. Group 1 ( n = 18) received BTFC, group 2 ( n = 14) received LTFC, and group 3 ( n = 18) received TTFC. All patients were hospitalized, and IOP was monitored for 24-h (10:00, 14:00, 18:00, 22:00, 02:00, and 06:00). Mean diurnal IOP variation measurements were taken between 06:00 and 18:00, and mean nocturnal IOP variation measurements were taken between 22:00 and 02:00. Mean IOP and IOP variation in the three groups were compared. Results Mean 24-h IOP did not differ significantly between the three groups (group 1: 14.6 ± 2.9 mmHg; group 2: 14.1 ± 3.7 mmHg and group 3: 15.8 ± 2.0 mmHg; P > 0.05). Mean diurnal IOP variation was 4.6 ± 2.3 mmHg in group 1, 5.8 ± 2.4 mmHg in group 2, and 4.3 ± 1.7 mmHg in group 3, and mean nocturnal IOP variation was 3.2 ± 2.8 mmHg in group 1, 2.9 ± 1.9 mmHg in group 2, and 3.0 ± 1.6 mmHg group 3. There were not any significant differences in diurnal or nocturnal IOP variation between the three groups ( P
-
The efficacy and safety of bimatoprost/Timolol Maleate, latanoprost/Timolol Maleate, and travoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combinations on 24-h IOP.
International ophthalmology, 2017Co-Authors: Suzan Güven Yılmaz, Cumali Degirmenci, Yunus Emre Karakoyun, Emil Yusifov, Halil AtesAbstract:To evaluate the effect of bimatoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combination (BTFC), latanoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combination (LTFC), and travoprost/Timolol Maleate fixed combination (TTFC) on 24-h intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with open-angle glaucoma. This prospective, observer-masked, randomized study included 50 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. All patients were using hypotensive lipids and Timolol Maleate fixed combination treatment for ≥4 weeks and had an IOP ≤ 21 mmHg. Group 1 (n = 18) received BTFC, group 2 (n = 14) received LTFC, and group 3 (n = 18) received TTFC. All patients were hospitalized, and IOP was monitored for 24-h (10:00, 14:00, 18:00, 22:00, 02:00, and 06:00). Mean diurnal IOP variation measurements were taken between 06:00 and 18:00, and mean nocturnal IOP variation measurements were taken between 22:00 and 02:00. Mean IOP and IOP variation in the three groups were compared. Mean 24-h IOP did not differ significantly between the three groups (group 1: 14.6 ± 2.9 mmHg; group 2: 14.1 ± 3.7 mmHg and group 3: 15.8 ± 2.0 mmHg; P > 0.05). Mean diurnal IOP variation was 4.6 ± 2.3 mmHg in group 1, 5.8 ± 2.4 mmHg in group 2, and 4.3 ± 1.7 mmHg in group 3, and mean nocturnal IOP variation was 3.2 ± 2.8 mmHg in group 1, 2.9 ± 1.9 mmHg in group 2, and 3.0 ± 1.6 mmHg group 3. There were not any significant differences in diurnal or nocturnal IOP variation between the three groups (P
Jeanette A. Stewart - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0 005 Timolol Maleate 0 5 and dorzolamide 2 Timolol Maleate 0 5
Eye, 2004Co-Authors: Anastasios G P Konstas, Jeanette A. Stewart, Vassilios P. Kozobolis, Nikolaos Lallos, E Christodoulakis, William C StewartAbstract:Daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0.005%/Timolol Maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%/Timolol Maleate 0.5%
-
Daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0.005%/Timolol Maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%/Timolol Maleate 0.5%.
Eye (London England), 2004Co-Authors: Anastasios G P Konstas, Jeanette A. Stewart, Vassilios P. Kozobolis, Nikolaos Lallos, E Christodoulakis, William C StewartAbstract:Daytime diurnal curve comparison between the fixed combinations of latanoprost 0.005%/Timolol Maleate 0.5% and dorzolamide 2%/Timolol Maleate 0.5%
-
Differences in ocular surface irritation between Timolol hemihydrate and Timolol Maleate
American journal of ophthalmology, 2000Co-Authors: William C Stewart, Jeanette A. Stewart, Keri T Holmes, Jessica N. LeechAbstract:Abstract PURPOSE: We evaluated the anterior segment surface reaction findings between Timolol hemihydrate and Timolol Maleate. The only known difference between these preparations is the Maleate salt. METHODS: After a baseline examination, we randomized 28 healthy subjects (26 completed) to Timolol hemihydrate or Timolol Maleate given in both eyes twice daily, in a double masked fashion, for 1 week. Subjects then were evaluated at the morning trough (hour 0 examination), dosed, and re-evaluated in 1 hour (hour 1 examination). Subjects were left untreated for 1 week and then switched to the opposite medication for the second study period. RESULTS: Corneal staining (graded 0 to 4) for Timolol Maleate was worse between baseline (0.9) and hour 0 (1.4; P = .009) and baseline and hour 1 (1.4; P = .011). Also, mean punctate corneal staining for Timolol Maleate was increased from baseline (22.6) to hour 0 (31.7; P = .033) and showed borderline significance to hour 1 (33.4; P = .058), and for Timolol hemihydrate there was a borderline significant elevation from baseline (24.2) to hour 1 (29.8; P = .060). When treatment groups were compared, there was a greater change in corneal staining with Timolol Maleate than Timolol hemihydrate from baseline to hour 0 (P = .020) and greater staining with Timolol Maleate than Timolol hemihydrate at hour 0 (P = .032). Nasal conjunctiva showed increased mean staining with Timolol Maleate from baseline (23.6, P = .035) to hour 0 (29.5, P = .035) and to hour 1 (31.9 P = .038) but not with Timolol hemihydrate. There were increased symptoms of ocular dryness from baseline to hour 0 with Timolol Maleate (P = .012) but not with Timolol hemihydrate. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that Timolol Maleate potentially may have more of an irritant effect than Timolol hemihydrate on the corneal and nasal conjunctival epithelium.
-
The safety and efficacy of switching Timolol Maleate 0.5% solution to Timolol hemihydrate 0.5% solution given twice daily.
Journal of ocular pharmacology and therapeutics : the official journal of the Association for Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 1998Co-Authors: Thomas K. Mundorf, Jeanette A. Stewart, Elin A. Cate, Cheryl S. Sine, Donna W. Otero, William C StewartAbstract:This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching patients treated with Timolol Maleate to Timolol hemihydrate. In patients with ocular hypertension or chronic open-angle glaucoma treated with beta-blockers for at least three months, we prescribed Timolol Maleate solution 0.5% given twice daily for one month. We then switched each patient to Timolol hemihydrate solution 0.5% (Betimol, Ciba Vision Ophthalmics) given twice daily for three months. This study found over the first three months in 30 completed subjects, using a worse eye analysis, that the intraocular pressure changed from 18.3+/-2.1 mm Hg on Timolol Maleate to 18.8+/-2.3 mm Hg on Timolol hemihydrate (P=0.10) 12 hours after dosing. There was no difference in the overall incidence of unsolicited anterior segment side effects between Timolol Maleate (4 cases) versus Timolol hemihydrate (3 cases) (P=0.69). One patient exited the study because of pain and burning in both eyes while on Timolol Maleate. No patient was discontinued due to loss of intraocular pressure control after switching to Timolol hemihydrate. It was concluded that switching from Timolol Maleate to Timolol hemihydrate is safe and effective in maintaining control of the intraocular pressure.
-
The effects of unoprostone isopropyl 0.12% and Timolol Maleate 0.5% on diurnal intraocular pressure.
Journal of glaucoma, 1998Co-Authors: William C Stewart, Jeanette A. Stewart, Barry M. KapikAbstract:PURPOSE To compare the effect of unoprostone isopropyl 0.12% to that of Timolol Maleate 0.5% solution given twice daily on the diurnal curve of intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS In this investigator-masked, single-center, parallel-group comparison, 36 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either unoprostone isopropyl 0.12% or placebo/Timolol Maleate 0.5% solution, respectively. A placebo-controlled diurnal curve on day 0 and active-controlled diurnal curves at weeks 2 and 4 were performed at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours. At week 2, administration of unoprostone isopropyl twice daily was compared with administration of Timolol Maleate twice daily. At week 4, administration of unoprostone isopropyl three times daily was compared with administration of Timolol Maleate twice daily. RESULTS At the 24-hour 8:00 AM trough at week 2, administration of unoprostone isopropyl twice daily decreased IOP from 23.4 +/- 2.0 mmHg at baseline to 19.3 +/- 4.4 mmHg, and Timolol Maleate reduced IOP from 24.4 +/- 2.6 mmHg to 17.5 +/- 2.9 mmHg. At the 8:00 AM trough at week 4, unoprostone isopropyl given three times daily produced an IOP of 19.6 +/- 3.3 mmHg and Timolol Maleate resulted in an IOP of 19.4 +/- 3.0 mmHg. No statistical differences between groups were observed at any time point during either diurnal curve. Safety was similar in the two treatment groups, with no differences between groups in conjunctival hyperemia, anterior segment inflammation, or iris color change. CONCLUSION Results of this short-term pilot trial indicate that unoprostone isopropyl may be safe and effective in reducing IOP from baseline when given twice or three times daily.
Arthur Shedden - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
plasma Timolol concentrations of Timolol Maleate Timolol gel forming solution timoptic xe once daily versus Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution twice daily
Documenta Ophthalmologica, 2001Co-Authors: Arthur Shedden, Jean Laurence, A. Barrish, Timothy V. OlahAbstract:Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare plasma concentrations of Timolol following multiple dosing of the therapeutic regimens of Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution (Timolol GS; TIMOPTIC-XE®) and Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution. Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution is also referred to as Timolol GS, i.e. gel-forming solution. Methods: This was a masked observer, two-period crossover study in six normal male subjects randomized to receive either Timolol GS, 0.5% (TIMOPTIC-XE,) once daily (0530 hours) or Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution (0.5% TIMOPTIC®) twice daily (0530 and 1730 hours) for 8 days, in both eyes. On Day 8, a blood sample was obtained prior to treatment, as well as 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 24 hours following the morning instillation. After a 7-day inter-period washout interval, subjects received the opposite treatment. Results: Timolol GS (TIMOPTIC-XE): Plasma concentrations of Timolol rarely exceeded 0.375 ng/ml (the lower limit of assay quantification). For all subjects, peak plasma concentrations of Timolol averaged <0.3 ng/ml within 4 hours after the last dose. The highest single observation was 0.49 ng/ml in one subject (at hour 2). Timolol solution: For all subjects, peak plasma concentrations of Timolol averaged about 0.5 ng/ml and 0.3 ng/ml within 4 hours following the first and second dose, respectively, on Day 8. The highest single observation was 0.95 ng/ml in one subject (at hour 2). Conclusions: The data suggest that there is less systemic exposure to Timolol following once-daily therapy with Timolol GS 0.5% compared with twice daily therapy with Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution 0.5%.
-
Plasma Timolol concentrations of Timolol Maleate: Timolol gel-forming solution (TIMOPTIC-XE) once daily versus Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution twice daily.
Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2001Co-Authors: Arthur Shedden, Jean Laurence, A. Barrish, Timothy V. OlahAbstract:Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare plasma concentrations of Timolol following multiple dosing of the therapeutic regimens of Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution (Timolol GS; TIMOPTIC-XE®) and Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution. Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gel-forming solution is also referred to as Timolol GS, i.e. gel-forming solution. Methods: This was a masked observer, two-period crossover study in six normal male subjects randomized to receive either Timolol GS, 0.5% (TIMOPTIC-XE,) once daily (0530 hours) or Timolol Maleate ophthalmic solution (0.5% TIMOPTIC®) twice daily (0530 and 1730 hours) for 8 days, in both eyes. On Day 8, a blood sample was obtained prior to treatment, as well as 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 24 hours following the morning instillation. After a 7-day inter-period washout interval, subjects received the opposite treatment. Results: Timolol GS (TIMOPTIC-XE): Plasma concentrations of Timolol rarely exceeded 0.375 ng/ml (the lower limit of assay quantification). For all subjects, peak plasma concentrations of Timolol averaged
-
The Efficacy and Safety of Dorzolamide as Adjunctive Therapy to Timolol Maleate Gellan Solution in Patients with Elevated Intraocular Pressure
Journal of glaucoma, 1998Co-Authors: Ingrid Adamsons, Arthur Shedden, Coleen Clineschmidt, Adam B. Polis, Jennifer Taylor, Robert LaibovitzAbstract:PURPOSE Two parallel, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled studies were conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of 2% dorzolamide hydrochloride as adjunctive therapy to 0.5% Timolol Maleate ophthalmic gellan (gel-forming) solution in patients with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) that was inadequately controlled with 0.5% Timolol Maleate gellan solution alone. METHODS Both studies began with an open-label 2-week run-in period on 0.5% Timolol Maleate gellan solution once a day. The only variation in method between the two studies was the dosage of 2% dorzolamide. In one study, 202 patients received 0.5% Timolol Maleate gellan solution once daily plus either 2% dorzolamide or placebo three times daily. In the other study, 181 patients received 0.5% Timolol Maleate gellan solution once daily plus either 2% dorzolamide or placebo twice daily. RESULTS After 85 days, additional mean percent reductions in IOP from baseline at morning trough for the groups receiving 2% dorzolamide three times daily and placebo three times daily were 12.5% and 8.4%, respectively. Mean percent reductions for the groups receiving 2% dorzolamide twice daily and placebo twice daily were 13.1% and 6.5%, respectively. Burning and/or stinging on instillation were the only adverse experiences that affected significantly more of the patients receiving 2% dorzolamide twice or three times daily than those receiving placebo. CONCLUSION When administered concomitantly with 0.5% Timolol Maleate gellan solution, 2% dorzolamide three times daily or twice daily produced a statistically significant reduction in IOP at morning trough and peak and was generally well tolerated.