Effect of Latanoprostene Bunod on Optic Nerve Head Blood Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SIGNIFICANCE: Topical latanoprostene bunod increases capillary oxygen saturation and blood volume at the optic nerve head in healthy individuals. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of topical latanoprostene bunod on optic nerve blood volume and oxygen saturation in a population of healthy participants. METHODS: In this prospective double-blind crossover study, 23 healthy participants aged from 21 to 62 years were recruited. Optic nerve head capillary blood volume (ONHvol) and oxygen saturation (ONHSaO2) baselines were measured over a period of 2 hours using multichannel spectroscopic reflectometry and were remeasured after a 7-day once-daily instillation regimen of either latanoprost 0.005% or latanoprostene bunod 0.024%. After a 30-day washout period, participants were crossed over to the alternate product, and measurements were repeated. Participants were used as their own baselines to calculate variation in ONHvol and ONHSaO2 across time and pharmacological agents. The Friedman test was used to establish significant differences in optic nerve head parameters from baseline values, and Conover post hoc analysis was carried for multiple between-group comparisons. RESULTS: Latanoprostene bunod 0.024% induced a significant increase of 4% in ONHSaO2 compared with latanoprost 0.005% (P < .001). Furthermore, latanoprostene bunod increased ONHvol levels by more than twofold at all time points (P < .001 at T60, T90, and T120). The increase in ONHvol was 66.2% higher than levels achieved with latanoprost at T60 (P = .001), 47% higher at T90 (P < .001), and 45% higher at T120 (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Latanoprostene bunod 0.024% induces a significant increase in optic nerve head blood volume and oxygen saturation in healthy subjects, when compared with latanoprost 0.005%. Future studies are needed to evaluate whether similar responses are elicited in patients suffering from glaucomatous optic neuropathy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".