ライフサイエンスコーパス: timolol

1 -2) for timolol (P < .0001 for netarsudil vs timolol).

2 eta-adrenergic receptor-selective antagonist timolol.

3 entrations of the nonselective beta-blocker, timolol.

4 e increase of ocular perfusion pressure than timolol.

5 ryl triacylate) that contain a glaucoma drug timolol.

6 PF tafluprost and 17.9 to 18.5 mm Hg for PF timolol.

7 PF tafluprost was noninferior to that of PF timolol.

8 kers, including oral propranolol and topical timolol.

9 p38; these decreases were also reversed with timolol.

10 36 months with Tafluprost 0.0015% (27) or PF Timolol 0.1% (24) and 20 healthy age and sex-matched vol

11 uprost 0.0015% versus preservative free (PF) Timolol 0.1% eyedrops in ocular hypertensive (OH) and in

12 cept for an increased tear instability in PF Timolol 0.1% group.

13 Compared to PF Timolol 0.1%, Tafluprost 0.0015% showed similar safety w

14 separate containers of travoprost 0.004% and timolol 0.5% (TRAV+TIM; unfixed) using electronic dosing

15 ent with fixed-combination travoprost 0.004%/timolol 0.5% (TTFC) compared with separate containers of

16 1) to a 3-month regimen of LBN 0.024% qpm or timolol 0.5% 1 drop BID.

17 0.024% QD in the evening was noninferior to timolol 0.5% BID over 3 months of treatment, with signif

18 ated significantly greater IOP lowering than timolol 0.5% BID throughout the day over 3 months of tre

19 y assigned into either Group 1, who received timolol 0.5% eye drops, or Group 2, who received artific

20 ly higher in the LBN 0.024% group versus the timolol 0.5% group (mean IOP </=18 mmHg: 22.9% vs. 11.3%

21 ly lower in the LBN 0.024% group than in the timolol 0.5% group (P </= 0.002).

22 ts were randomized to topical treatment with timolol 0.5% or brimonidine 0.2%.

23 receive netarsudil 0.02% once daily (q.d.), timolol 0.5% twice a day (b.i.d.), and (ROCKET-2 only) n

24 brimonidine 0.2% was protective compared to timolol 0.5%, lower mean ocular perfusion pressure incre

25 87 completed the study (LBN 0.024%, n = 264; timolol 0.5%, n = 123).

26 ment with either PF tafluprost 0.0015% or PF timolol 0.5%.

27 l tears twice daily or a placebo insert plus timolol (0.5% solution) twice daily for 6 months after a

28 Hospital from 2014 to 2016 with only topical timolol, 0.5%, twice daily for a minimum of 21 days.

29 ow was 3.9 microliters/minute +/- 0.4; after timolol, 2.5 microliters/minute +/-0.1; after methazolam

30 (3.85; 5.24), tafluprost 4.37 (2.94; 5.83), timolol 3.70 (3.16; 4.24), brimonidine 3.59 (2.89; 4.29)

31 lateral, MS infusions of the beta-antagonist timolol (3.75 microg, 8.7 nmol) decreased EEG indices of

32 d and 618 completed (PF tafluprost = 306, PF timolol = 312).

33 ro data, warfarin (93%), indomethacin (98%), timolol (50%), and carbamazepine (70%) were assigned to

34 ltransferase expression, but pre-exposure to timolol, a beta-adrenergic receptor antagonist, delayed

35 ssure gradient [HVPG] of 6 mm Hg) to receive timolol, a nonselective beta-blocker (108 patients), or

36 ere both blocked by pretreatment with either timolol, a nonspecific beta adrenergic blocking agent, o

37 Timolol monotherapy and timolol add-on treatment to a prostaglandin analog does

38 lol and unoprostone concomitant therapy, and timolol and brimonidine concomitant therapy.

39 n provided greater efficacy than concomitant timolol and brimonidine.

40 The beta-adrenergic antagonists timolol and propranolol did not significantly inhibit st

41 qual in efficacy to latanoprost monotherapy, timolol and unoprostone concomitant therapy, and timolol

42 Topical timolol application for localized, superficial tumors ma

43 Timolol application is effective for the treatment of my

44 reatments of latanoprostene bunod at 8 PM or timolol at 8 AM and 8 PM.

45 but significantly greater (P </= .025) than timolol at all but the first time point in this study (w

46 private facility (P = 0.046) and the use of timolol at the end of the procedure (P = 0.007) were ass

47 A gel with 5% particle loading can deliver timolol at therapeutic doses for about a month at room t

48 olerability of fixed-combination bimatoprost/timolol (bim/tim) and dorz/brim/tim in Mexican patients

49 mine or the beta adrenergic receptor blocker timolol, blocked this increase, indicating that afferent

50 duction with LBN was not only noninferior to timolol but significantly greater (P </= .025) than timo

51 Dorzolamide and timolol caused a sustained reduction of intraocular pres

52 Systemic administration of brimonidine or timolol caused little decrease in IOP.

53 temic corticosteroid and topical dorzolamide/timolol combination therapy.

54 The efficacy of timolol delivered via extended wear contact lenses was t

55 6 months after treatment and 6 months after timolol discontinuation, respectively (P < .001).

56 , but triple-therapy dorzolamide/brimonidine/timolol (dorz/brim/tim) is only available in Latin and S

57 ntation, 47 cases (group 1) received topical timolol-dorzolamide fixed-combination drops twice daily

58 There were no adverse effects from the timolol during follow-up.

59 e events were consistent with bimatoprost or timolol exposure; no unexpected ocular AEs were observed

60 ocular insert was compared with twice-daily timolol eye drops in patients with open-angle glaucoma (

61 The latanoprost-timolol fixed combination is available in many countries

62 The latanoprost-timolol fixed combination provided greater efficacy than

63 omparison with newer agents, the dorzolamide-timolol fixed combination was equal in efficacy to latan

64 dern combination product was the dorzolamide-timolol fixed combination.

65 strated better efficacy than the dorzolamide-timolol fixed combination.

66 pic dermatitis and psoriasis, use of topical timolol for infantile hemangiomas and bone marrow transp

67 ocused on increasing the release duration of timolol from ACUVUE TruEye contact lenses by incorporati

68 changes in the intraocular pressure (IOP) of timolol from the ACUVUE TruEye contact lenses can be sig

69 int did not differ significantly between the timolol group and the placebo group (39 percent and 40 p

70 PF Timolol group had significantly higher OSDI score, basal

71 roup compared with -4.2 to -6.4 mmHg for the timolol group over 6 months.

72 vents were more common among patients in the timolol group than among those in the placebo group (18

73 sual field loss than those randomized to the timolol group, even though there was no significant diff

74 prost group and 23.5 to 26.0 mm Hg in the PF timolol group.

75 ort stimulated by isoproterenol in the order timolol > propranolol > betaxolol.

76 Systemic application of brimonidine or timolol had little effect on IOP.

77 Timolol had no effect.

78 stoperatively, diclofenac, flurbiprofen, and timolol have all been proven to be effective in reducing

79 y prevented by the beta-receptor antagonist (timolol), identifying a dominant role of sympatho-stimul

80 The particle loaded gels can release timolol in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) for about a m

81 pressure (P < .001), and was noninferior to timolol in the per-protocol population with maximum base

82 Treatment with the beta-AR antagonist (timolol) increased speed 33% and increased P-ERK 2.4-fol

83 cay duration to baseline was increased after timolol instillation in the subjects with myopia only.

84 with sympathetic access was increased after timolol instillation.

85 in subjects with emmetropia before and after timolol instillation.

86 in the evening and vehicle in the morning or timolol instilled twice a day (BID) for 3 months.

87 Pharmacologic effects of timolol, latanoprost, and Y-39983 were studied in hypert

88 oprost and the fixed combination latanoprost-timolol (LTFC) on 24-hour systolic (SBP) and diastolic (

89 objective of the present work was to implant timolol maleate (TM) loaded ethyl cellulose nanoparticle

90 bination products, consisting of dorzolamide/timolol maleate and pilocarpine/timolol maleate.

91 s (1 hour, 0.25-fold; 4 hours, 0.45-fold) of timolol maleate drug concentrations in intraocular tissu

92 ersal of the effect of Y-27632 on diminished timolol maleate intraocular penetration in NZW rabbits.

93 the intraocular penetration of administered timolol maleate presumably due to increased systemic eli

94 All subjects received timolol maleate to block the sympathetic nervous system

95 sympathetic inhibitory pharmacologic agent, timolol maleate, on the magnitude of nearwork-induced tr

96 Ex vivo porcine corneal penetration of timolol maleate, sotalol hydrochloride, or brinzolamide

97 dorzolamide/timolol maleate and pilocarpine/timolol maleate.

98 nhibition on the intraocular distribution of timolol maleate.

99 These data suggest that topical dorzolamide-timolol may reduce central subfield thickness and subret

100 (1)- (betaxolol) and mixed beta(1)/beta(2)- (timolol, metipranolol) adrenergic receptor antagonists w

101 Timolol monotherapy and timolol add-on treatment to a pr

102 A total of 387 subjects (LBN, n = 259; timolol, n = 128) completed the study.

103 n the unfixed combination of latanoprost and timolol or eligible for dual therapy being not being ful

104 Drugs that decrease inflow (acetazolamide, timolol) or increase outflow facility (pilocarpine, lata

105 hat PF tafluprost would be noninferior to PF timolol over 12 weeks with regard to change from baselin

106 208, ROCKET-1) to 11% (27/251, ROCKET-2) for timolol (P < .0001 for netarsudil vs timolol).

107 s of endophthalmitis occurring was higher if timolol (P = 0.0002) was used at the end of the procedur

108 Similar percentages of PF tafluprost and PF timolol patients reported ocular pain/stinging/irritatio

109 The percentages of PF tafluprost and PF timolol patients reporting conjunctival hyperemia were 4

110 Eyes randomized to timolol progressed faster than those randomized to brimo

111 The hypotensive adrenergic antagonist timolol, propranolol, and betaxolol also inhibited Na+,

112 We combine laboratory-based timolol release studies and in vivo pharmacodynamics stu

113 Incubation with the beta-AR antagonist timolol reversed the catecholamine-induced effects, indi

114 oc outcome measure). was also noninferior to timolol (ROCKET-2).

115 Brimonidine, but not timolol, showed significant protection of retinal gangli

116 Topical timolol shows promise for the treatment of certain types

117 ex vivo porcine corneal drug penetration of timolol, sotalol, or brinzolamide.

118 the BLA, the beta-adrenoreceptor antagonist, timolol, the D1/D5 dopamine receptor agonist, SKF38393,

119 onstrated an increase in decay duration with timolol, thus suggesting impaired sympathetic inhibition

120 m is hydrolysis of the ester bond that links timolol to the PGT matrix, but other mechanisms such as

121 In vehicle- or timolol-treated rats, ganglion cell loss continued to 33

122 Of LBN- and timolol-treated subjects, respectively, 31.0% and 18.5%

123 e (P = .002) and 2.3 +/- 3.0 mm Hg less than timolol treatment (P = .004).

124 rnal ocular perfusion pressure compared with timolol treatment (P = .010).

125 rface pyogenic granulomas respond to topical timolol treatment, which has a lower adverse-effect prof

126 healing by 79%, whereas beta-AR antagonist (timolol) treatment increased the rate of healing by 16%

127 es received a regimen of topical dorzolamide-timolol twice daily and continued to receive the same in

128 Conversely, timolol (two drops of 0.5% solution) had no effect on ki

129 ived one of the following: two drops of 0.5% timolol, two drops of 3.5% pilocarpine, or 25 mg/kg intr

130 Brimonidine or timolol was administered, either at the time of or 10 da

131 endophthalmitis was more likely to occur if timolol was used at the end of the procedure or if surge

132 hydro-2H-benzimidazol-2-o ne], pindolol, and timolol, which displayed agonistic properties toward the

133 Surprisingly, however timolol, which reduces flow, had no effect on Na+ entry.

134 ory potency is (s)(-)-propranolol>betaxolol>>timolol, with average IC(50) of 78.05, 235.7 and 2167.05