OBJECTIVES: Many patients suffering from glaucoma find it necessary to use a second adjunctive topical agent to adequately reduce the intraocular pressure (IOP). New more convenient fixed combination products containing two active anti-glaucoma medications have been developed. The objective of this analysis is to compare the cost of brimonidine/timolol fixed combination (Combigan®) with concomitant administration of brimonidine (Alphagan®) and timolol, dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination (Cosopt®), and concomitant administration of dorzolamide (Trusopt®) and timolol. METHODS: RCT's have documented equivalent safety and efficacy in terms of IOP control of combination products in comparison with their individual components (Sall et al, 2003; Solish et al., 2004). A cost-minimization analysis including drug costs and visits at the ophthalmologist was carried out for United Kingdom and other European counties with both a health care and drug alone perspective. An RCT (Simmons et al., 2001) has shown that Alphagan+timolol was more effective than Trusopt+timolol in terms of patients achieving target IOP, therefore a cost-effectiveness analysis was constructed for this comparison. RESULTS: The 3-months health care costs analysis (drug alone) in the UK using Combigan was £264.00 (£30.00) compared with £268.11 (£34.11) for Alphagan+timolol and £264.15 (£ 30.15) for Cosopt. With a 12-months perspective, including additional drug and visits, the health care costs (drug alone) rose to £510.00 (£120.00) for Combigan compared with £526.44 (£136.44) for Alphagan+timolol and £510.60 (£120.60) for Cosopt. The cost-effectiveness analysis documented that Alphagan was more cost-effective than Trusopt adjunctively. CONCLUSION: Combigan provided better cost value than Alphagan+timolol adjunctively. The use of Combigan instead of Alphagan+timolol would result in annual societal savings of around £728,000 in the UK. Combigan resulted in slightly lower health care costs when modelling equal effectiveness compared with Cosopt.