Retrospective Chart Review on Real-World Use of Latanoprostene Bunod 0.024% in Treatment-Naïve Patients with Open-Angle Glaucoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to evaluate real-world effectiveness of latanoprostene bunod (LBN) ophthalmic solution 0.024% in treatment-naïve patients newly diagnosed with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or ocular hypertension. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective chart review included patients aged ≥ 18 years, with no history of medical, laser, or surgical intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering intervention and at least two follow-up visits (spanning ≥ 2 months) following initiation of LBN treatment. Extracted data included age, sex, race, cup-to-disk ratio, central corneal thickness, IOP, visual acuity (VA), concomitant medications, and adverse events. In patients treated bilaterally, the eye with the higher baseline IOP was the study eye. RESULTS: Medical charts for 65 patients (mean [SD] age, 59 [14] years; 53.8% female) encompassing 125 eyes treated with LBN were reviewed across nine clinical sites. Mean (SD) IOP at baseline was 21.7 (5.9) mmHg. Mean days to first and second follow-up visit were 43 and 141, respectively. LBN use resulted in a mean (SD) reduction from baseline of 7.1 (4.7) and 7.3 (5.1) mmHg at the first and second follow-up visits, respectively (P < 0.0001 for both). Reductions among patients with IOP > 21 mmHg (n = 30) at baseline were 10.0 (4.5) and 11.1 (4.6) mmHg at the first and second follow-up visits (P < 0.0001 for both). There were no meaningful changes in VA. Adverse events appeared infrequent, with only one report of ocular redness. CONCLUSION: In this real-world, retrospective chart review, LBN 0.024% use resulted in robust IOP lowering in newly diagnosed OAG patients new to treatment, and appeared well tolerated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".