Figures & data
Table 1. Patient disposition.
Table 2. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics (mITT population).
Table 3. Ophthalmic medical history (mITT population).
Figure 1. Percentages of netarsudil monotherapy patients who achieved intraocular pressure thresholds in the study eye at week 12 (mITT population). (A) All netarsudil monotherapy patients; (B) netarsudil monotherapy replaced prostaglandin analog therapy; (C) treatment-naïve netarsudil monotherapy patients.
![Figure 1. Percentages of netarsudil monotherapy patients who achieved intraocular pressure thresholds in the study eye at week 12 (mITT population). (A) All netarsudil monotherapy patients; (B) netarsudil monotherapy replaced prostaglandin analog therapy; (C) treatment-naïve netarsudil monotherapy patients.](/cms/asset/81e63613-fcb9-4b25-b776-405a346e0990/icmo_a_1901222_f0001_b.jpg)
Figure 2. Percentages of patients receiving concomitant therapy who achieved intraocular pressure thresholds in the study eye at week 12 (mITT population). (A) all concomitant therapy patients; (B) netarsudil added to a prostaglandin analog; (C) netarsudil added to multiple drug classes; (D) netarsudil replaced 1 drug class or multiple drug classes (i.e. 2-agent fixed dose combinations) as concomitant therapy.
![Figure 2. Percentages of patients receiving concomitant therapy who achieved intraocular pressure thresholds in the study eye at week 12 (mITT population). (A) all concomitant therapy patients; (B) netarsudil added to a prostaglandin analog; (C) netarsudil added to multiple drug classes; (D) netarsudil replaced 1 drug class or multiple drug classes (i.e. 2-agent fixed dose combinations) as concomitant therapy.](/cms/asset/4b6dac20-4c6d-40d8-aaee-802e006fae60/icmo_a_1901222_f0002_b.jpg)
Table 4. Intraocular pressure of the study eye in patients receiving concomitant therapy (mITT population).
Table 5. Summary of adverse events.