Table 5 |
||||
Percentage change in IOP (mmHg) from baseline to week 4 (ANCOVA, PP population) | ||||
Latanoprost concentration (μg/mL) | ||||
50 | 75 | 100 | 125 | |
N | 69 | 66 | 71 | 68 |
Worse eye | ||||
8 a.m. IOP | ||||
LS mean change (mmHg)* | −37.6 | −35.5 | −37.3 | −33.5 |
Difference in LS mean change ± SEM^{‡} | 2.2 ± 1.7 | 0.3 ± 1.7 | 4.1 ± 1.7 | |
(90% CI) | (−0.06, 5.0) | (−2.4, 3.1) | (1.3, 6.8) | |
p-value^{‡} | 0.899 | 0.581 | 0.992 | |
Study eye | ||||
8 a.m. IOP | ||||
LS mean change (mmHg)* | −37.2 | −35.0 | −36.4 | −33.3 |
Difference in LS mean change ± SEM^{‡} | 2.2 ± 1.7 | 0.8 ± 1.6 | 3.8 ± 1.6 | |
(90% CI) | (−0.6, 4.9) | (−1.9, 3.4) | (1.1, 6.5) | |
p-value^{‡} | 0.906 | 0.682 | 0.990 |
ANCOVA analysis of covariance, CI confidence interval, IOP intraocular pressure, LS least square, PP per protocol, SEM standard error of the mean.
*Adjusting for baseline IOP (covariate) with dose group and center as factors.
^{‡}Higher concentration minus latanoprost 50 μg/mL; a negative difference in LS mean indicates that the higher concentration has a greater effect than latanoprost 50 μg/mL.
^{‡}One-sided p-value.
Eveleth et al.
Eveleth et al. BMC Ophthalmology 2012 12:9 doi:10.1186/1471-2415-12-9