Selective laser trabeculoplasty versus eye drops for first-line treatment of ocular hypertension and glaucoma (LiGHT): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
Journal
Lancet (London, England)
ISSN: 1474-547X
Titre abrégé: Lancet
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2985213R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Apr 2019
13 Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
21
07
2018
revised:
28
08
2018
accepted:
04
09
2018
pubmed:
14
3
2019
medline:
7
5
2019
entrez:
14
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Primary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension are habitually treated with eye drops that lower intraocular pressure. Selective laser trabeculoplasty is a safe alternative but is rarely used as first-line treatment. We compared the two. In this observer-masked, randomised controlled trial treatment-naive patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and no ocular comorbidities were recruited between 2012 and 2014 at six UK hospitals. They were randomly allocated (web-based randomisation) to initial selective laser trabeculoplasty or to eye drops. An objective target intraocular pressure was set according to glaucoma severity. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 3 years (assessed by EQ-5D). Secondary outcomes were cost and cost-effectiveness, disease-specific HRQoL, clinical effectiveness, and safety. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN32038223). Of 718 patients enrolled, 356 were randomised to the selective laser trabeculoplasty and 362 to the eye drops group. 652 (91%) returned the primary outcome questionnaire at 36 months. Average EQ-5D score was 0·89 (SD 0·18) in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group versus 0·90 (SD 0·16) in the eye drops group, with no significant difference (difference 0·01, 95% CI -0·01 to 0·03; p=0·23). At 36 months, 74·2% (95% CI 69·3-78·6) of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group required no drops to maintain intraocular pressure at target. Eyes of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group were within target intracoluar pressure at more visits (93·0%) than in the eye drops group (91·3%), with glaucoma surgery to lower intraocular pressure required in none versus 11 patients. Over 36 months, from an ophthalmology cost perspective, there was a 97% probability of selective laser trabeculoplasty as first treatment being more cost-effective than eye drops first at a willingness to pay of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Selective laser trabeculoplasty should be offered as a first-line treatment for open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension, supporting a change in clinical practice. National Institute for Health Research, Health and Technology Assessment Programme.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Primary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension are habitually treated with eye drops that lower intraocular pressure. Selective laser trabeculoplasty is a safe alternative but is rarely used as first-line treatment. We compared the two.
METHODS
METHODS
In this observer-masked, randomised controlled trial treatment-naive patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and no ocular comorbidities were recruited between 2012 and 2014 at six UK hospitals. They were randomly allocated (web-based randomisation) to initial selective laser trabeculoplasty or to eye drops. An objective target intraocular pressure was set according to glaucoma severity. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 3 years (assessed by EQ-5D). Secondary outcomes were cost and cost-effectiveness, disease-specific HRQoL, clinical effectiveness, and safety. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN32038223).
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Of 718 patients enrolled, 356 were randomised to the selective laser trabeculoplasty and 362 to the eye drops group. 652 (91%) returned the primary outcome questionnaire at 36 months. Average EQ-5D score was 0·89 (SD 0·18) in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group versus 0·90 (SD 0·16) in the eye drops group, with no significant difference (difference 0·01, 95% CI -0·01 to 0·03; p=0·23). At 36 months, 74·2% (95% CI 69·3-78·6) of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group required no drops to maintain intraocular pressure at target. Eyes of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group were within target intracoluar pressure at more visits (93·0%) than in the eye drops group (91·3%), with glaucoma surgery to lower intraocular pressure required in none versus 11 patients. Over 36 months, from an ophthalmology cost perspective, there was a 97% probability of selective laser trabeculoplasty as first treatment being more cost-effective than eye drops first at a willingness to pay of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained.
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
Selective laser trabeculoplasty should be offered as a first-line treatment for open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension, supporting a change in clinical practice.
FUNDING
BACKGROUND
National Institute for Health Research, Health and Technology Assessment Programme.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30862377
pii: S0140-6736(18)32213-X
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32213-X
pmc: PMC6495367
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antihypertensive Agents
0
Ophthalmic Solutions
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1505-1516Subventions
Organisme : Marie Curie
ID : MCCC-FCO-11-U
Pays : United Kingdom
Investigateurs
Gareth Ambler
(G)
Keith Barton
(K)
Rupert Bourne
(R)
David Broadway
(D)
Catey Bunce
(C)
Marta Buszewicz
(M)
Amanda Davis
(A)
Anurag Garg
(A)
David Garway-Heath
(D)
Gus Gazzard
(G)
Rachael Hunter
(R)
Hari Jayaram
(H)
Yuzhen Jiang
(Y)
Evgenia Konstantakopoulou
(E)
Sheng Lim
(S)
Joanna Liput
(J)
Timothy Manners
(T)
Stephen Morris
(S)
Neil Nathwani
(N)
Gary Rubin
(G)
Nicholas Strouthidis
(N)
Victoria Vickerstaff
(V)
Sarah Wilson
(S)
Richard Wormald
(R)
Haogang Zhu
(H)
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Références
Curr Med Res Opin. 2008 Oct;24(10):2905-18
pubmed: 18768105
Can J Ophthalmol. 2003 Apr;38(3):189-97
pubmed: 12733686
Surv Ophthalmol. 2008 Nov;53 Suppl1:S57-68
pubmed: 19038625
Arch Ophthalmol. 1998 Jul;116(7):861-6
pubmed: 9682698
Ophthalmology. 1983 Jul;90(7):800-4
pubmed: 6684748
Br J Ophthalmol. 2009 Apr;93(4):497-501
pubmed: 19106150
Br J Ophthalmol. 2006 Mar;90(3):262-7
pubmed: 16488940
Eye (Lond). 2018 May;32(5):863-876
pubmed: 29303146
Surv Ophthalmol. 2015 Jan-Feb;60(1):36-50
pubmed: 25113610
Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Jun;120(6):701-13; discussion 829-30
pubmed: 12049574
Br J Ophthalmol. 2021 Jun;105(Suppl 1):1-169
pubmed: 34675001
Trials. 2015 Nov 11;16:517
pubmed: 26559142
Ophthalmology. 2015 Feb;122(2):293-301
pubmed: 25444345
BMC Public Health. 2006 Mar 08;6:58
pubmed: 16524463
Br J Ophthalmol. 2018 May;102(5):593-598
pubmed: 28903966
Br J Ophthalmol. 2012 Sep;96(9):1185-9
pubmed: 22797319
Arch Ophthalmol. 1994 Nov;112(11):1446-54
pubmed: 7980134
Br J Ophthalmol. 2018 May;102(5):599-603
pubmed: 28982956
BMJ. 2002 Dec 14;325(7377):1396-7
pubmed: 12480856
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 Jul;49(7):3035-41
pubmed: 18326696
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014 Jan 07;55(1):102-9
pubmed: 24282228
Can J Ophthalmol. 2006 Aug;41(4):449-56
pubmed: 16883360
Optom Vis Sci. 2007 Aug;84(8):797-808
pubmed: 17700343
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003 Dec 10;1:75
pubmed: 14667241
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007 Mar;48(3):1149-55
pubmed: 17325158
BMC Ophthalmol. 2015 Aug 19;15:107
pubmed: 26286384
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 May;49(5):1907-15
pubmed: 18436824
Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Nov;89(11):1413-7
pubmed: 16234442
Lancet. 2015 Apr 4;385(9975):1295-304
pubmed: 25533656
Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Oct;120(10):1268-79
pubmed: 12365904
Am J Ophthalmol. 2006 Jan;141(1):24-30
pubmed: 16386972
J Glaucoma. 2006 Apr;15(2):124-30
pubmed: 16633226