• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Efficacy and safety of newly developed preservativefree latanoprost 0.005% eye drops versus preserved latanoprost 0.005% in open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: 12-week results of a randomized,multicenter, controlled phase III trial

    2021-11-08 01:45:48JoonMoKimKyungRimSungJiWoongLeeHaksuKyungSeungsooRhoChanYunKim
    International Journal of Ophthalmology 2021年10期

    Joon Mo Kim, Kyung Rim Sung, Ji Woong Lee, Haksu Kyung, Seungsoo Rho, Chan Yun Kim

    1Department of Ophthalmology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital,Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 03181,Republic of Korea

    2Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul Asan Medical Center,Ulsan University College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea

    3Department of Ophthalmology, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University Medical School, Busan 49241, Republic of Korea

    4Department of Ophthalmology, National Medical Center,Seoul 04564, Republic of Korea

    5Department of Ophthalmology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam 13496, Republic of Korea

    6Department of Ophthalmology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Republic of Korea

    Abstract

    ● KEYWORDS: latanoprost; benzalkonium chloride;intraocular pressure; preservative-free;

    INTRODUCTION

    Glaucoma is a major cause of irreversible blindness worldwide, and 111.8 million patients are expected globally by 2040[1]. Although many factors have been suggested as causes of glaucoma development, intraocular pressure (IOP)is still thought to be a major factor in the development and progression of glaucoma[2-3]. Many studies have reported that treatments that lower IOP decrease glaucoma progression[4-8].To date, control of IOP is the only proven way to suppress the progression of glaucoma. Therefore, IOP reduction remains the cornerstone of glaucoma management[9].

    Prostaglandin analogue (PGA) has been used more and more frequently as it is preferred as a first-time glaucoma drug,which is effective and has less severe systemic side effects and requires only one dose per day[10]. Among the various PGAs,latanoprost, which was first developed, is the most widely used in ocular hypertension (OHT) and primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) due to its good effect and less side effects such as conjunctival hyperemia compared to other PGAs[10-12].However, latanoprost eye drops currently commonly used have a high concentration of benzalkonium chloride (BAK)and contain sodium phosphate, which could cause side effects such as conjunctivitis and corneal surface epithelial toxicity when administered for a long time[13-14]. Ocular surface changes that occur using prostaglandin eye drops with BAK can be significantly related to the concentration-dependent cytotoxicity of these preservatives[15]. In addition, the side effects of BAK may have a greater impact on glaucoma patients who need to use their medicine for life. On the other hand, in the case of preservative-free (PF) latanoprost, few apoptosis cells were found in the superficial layer of the corneal epithelium in human and toxic animal models[15-16]. Therefore, in the 2009 EMA guideline, the European Glaucoma Society recommends PF products for patients with glaucoma who have dry eye or ocular surface diseases[17].

    Recently, a PF latanoprost generic eye drop was developed,TJO-002 (Xalost?S in Korea). TJO-002 has been formulated to have several presumed advantages over the conventional latanoprost preparation, which contains BAK. Polyoxyl 40 hydrogenated castor oil, carbomer (mucoadhesive polymer),and high-concentration sorbitol were used to promote substance stabilization and penetration into the eyeball instead of BAK and sodium phosphate. In order to improve the tolerability,instead of having a pH of 5.5 like the conventional latanoprost formulation [Xalatan?], TJO-002 has a physiologically active pH range of 7.0-7.3. This new formulation focuses on high stability, tolerability and non-inferior efficacy compared with the conventional formulation. This study aimed to compare TJO-002 with BAK-preserved latanoprost for IOP-lowering efficacy, safety and tolerability in patients with POAG/OHT.

    SUBJECTS AND METHODS

    Ethical Approval This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of each center. This study was performed according to the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration and compliance with the International Conference on Harmonization Good Clinical Practice guidelines and Korean regulations. All patients were fully informed and provided written consent for participation before enrollment.

    Study Design and Patients The study was a multicenter,randomized, investigator-masked, active control, and parallelgroup phase III clinical trial (NCT03419975). It was conducted in 17 clinical sites from 3 December 2015 to 5 March 2018.This study compared the newly developed PF latanoprost formulation TJO-002 (Taejoon Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.,Yongin, Republic of Korea) with BAK-preserved latanoprost(Xalatan?, Pfizer Inc., Belgium NV Puurs, Belgium) during a 3-month treatment period. Given that TJO-002 is supplied in single dose units and BAK latanoprost in bottles, the investigational drug was managed by dividing the blind part and the unblind part and the investigator was blind part so that they could not know which eyedrop to be administered, only the investigator measuring IOP during the ophthalmological examination was masked to the study medication.

    This study enrolled adult patients (≥19 years of age) with POAG/OHT. Patients with an IOP of 21 to 35 mm Hg at 9a.m.(±1h) in eligible eyes after a run-in period were randomized 1:1 and assigned the treatment schedule with TJO-002 or BAK latanoprost administered as one drop daily in each eye.We excluded the patients who had 20/80 or below of bestcorrected visual acuity on the Snellen chart and medical history of chronic intraocular inflammation in progress or within 3mo prior to screening. Patients who needed to use contact lenses during the clinical study and women who were pregnant, planning to become pregnant, currently nursing,of childbearing potential, or not using a reliable form of contraception were also excluded. Patients were randomized if IOP was >21 mm Hg in the eligible eye(s). If both eyes met the criteria, the eye with the higher IOP was selected. If the IOP was equal, the right eye was selected. Patients were instructed to instill one drop in each eye once daily in the evening(9p.m.±1h) and were scheduled for follow-up visits at 4, 8,and 12wk. The subjects were asked to keep a daily indication of whether or not to take an investigational drug in their diary table every time they administered, and were asked to answer the symptoms that they felt bad for the last week before the visit.

    Assessment Parameters The primary efficacy variable was the change in IOP between baseline and 12wk in the study eye.Diurnal IOP (average of 2 consecutive IOP measurements)was measured at the same hour (9a.m.±1h and 5p.m.±1h)at each visit using a calibrated Goldmann applanation tonometer(Figure 1). All patients underwent ocular examinations, including visual acuity assessment, slit lamp biomicroscopy, gonioscopy,standard automated perimetry, and ophthalmoscopy. IOP was measured (at 9a.m.and 5p.m.) during the baseline visit and at the 8-week and 12-week visits after eye-drop instillation. At the 4-week visit after instillation, IOP was measured only at 9a.m. Safety outcome measures included adverse events (AEs) reporting, visual acuity, and tolerability.

    Table 1 Patient demographics

    Figure 1 Study schedule Eligible patients were randomized to either the TJO-002 group or the BAK-preserved latanoprost group.

    Tolerability was evaluated with the frequency and percentage of distributions of severity level by symptoms in each group after administration at 4, 8, and 12wk with questionnaire in the blind part (investigator). The symptoms checked during follow-up visits were pruritus, burning/stinging, blurred vision,sticky eye sensation, eye dryness sensation, and foreign body sensation. Each of symptoms was written by investigator about the symptoms subjects feel after instilling investigational drugs. The tolerability was evaluated by checking how the symptoms were changed based on the symptoms of the worst degree among the records written about the symptoms of the investigational drug administration for a week before visit.

    Statistical Analysis The primary objective was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the trial drug to the control drug in terms of diurnal IOP variation after the administration of the drugs for 12wk. If the maximum value of the confidence intervals was less than 1.5 mm Hg, the trial group was judged to be non-inferior to the control group[18]. The upper limit of noninferiority was set at 1.5 mm Hg as this is the standard acceptance level for noninferiority in glaucoma studies[19-21].The adjusted average and standard error of the IOP variations in the trial and control groups, the difference between the average and adjusted average, 95% two-tailed confidence intervals of adjusted average difference andP-values were calculated by conducting an analysis of covariation(ANCOVA) with baseline IOP as covariate and treatment as a parameter for IOP variations. Additionally, if there were any statistically significant variables among sex, ages, and BMI distribution, an ANCOVA was performed that corrected for these variables as a sensitivity analysis. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS v9.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC,USA). Tolerability was evaluated with the frequency and percentage of severity level distribution for each symptom in each group at 4, 8, and 12wk, and those differences between the groups were evaluated through Chi-square tests or Fisher’s exact tests. When there was a missing value, the last observation carried forward method was used.

    RESULTS

    Among 196 consenting subjects, 52 people were excluded(38 patients with “Deviation of inclusion/exclusion criteria”,13 with “Consent withdrawal” and 1 with “Other”), and 144 people were randomized. The full description of the inclusion and exclusion steps is outlined in Figure 2.

    Demographic Characteristics There were 78.38% menvs21.62% women in the TJO-002 group and 60.00% men vs 40.00% women in the BAK latanoprost group. The sex ratios between the two groups were statistically significantly different(P=0.0167). There were no differences in other characteristics between the two groups (P>0.05; Table 1).

    Efficacy Twelve weeks after initiation of drug administration,the mean diurnal IOP change was -7.21±3.10 mm Hg in the TJO-002 group and -7.02±3.17 mm Hg in the BAK latanoprost group. Both groups showed a statistically significant decrease of average diurnal IOP (P<0.0001) compared with baseline,but there was no significant difference in the follow-up IOPs and IOP changes between the two groups (Table 2).

    Table 3 shows the change in the mean IOP at 9a.m.of each follow-up visit after drug administration compared to baseline.Both groups showed a statistically significant decrease in IOP at each follow-up visit (P<0.0001 each) from the baseline IOPs, but there was no statistically significant difference in the follow-up IOPs between the two groups.

    Although the IOP in the TJO-002 group was less than that of the BAK latanoprost group at 9a.m.at 8wk after the beginning of the instillation, the difference was not statistically significant(P=0.06). Table 4 shows diurnal IOP fluctuation from 9a.m.to 5p.m.at 8 and 12wk of drug administration compared to that of baseline. The IOP fluctuations of the TJO-002 group were less than those of the BAK latanoprost group during the entire study period. However, the difference did not reach statistical significance except by 8wk after instillation (P<0.0342).

    Figure 2 Study progress diagram FAS: Full analysis set; PPS: Per protocol set.

    Table 2 Diurnal IOP by measurement time at baseline and 12wk of the treatment groups by ITT and PP mean±SD, mm Hg

    Table 3 IOP by measurement time at baseline, 4, 8 and 12wk of the treatment groups by ITT and PP mean±SD, mm Hg

    Table 4 Diurnal IOP fluctuation from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at baseline, 8 and 12wk of the treatment groups by ITT and PP mean±SD, mm Hg

    Table 5 Number of patients with ocular adverse events and drug-associated systemic adverse events

    Safety Table 5 shows ocular and systemic AEs in both groups. The incidence of AEs regardless of relationship with the study medications was 24.66% (18/73 people, 26 cases)in the TJO-002 group and 25.00% (17/68, 27 cases) in the BAK latanoprost group; there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (P=0.9625). The incidence of“Eye disorders” in the BAK latanoprost group was 10.29%(7/68 people, 10 cases), and in the TJO-002 group, it was 12.33% (9/73, 13 cases). The difference in incidence between the groups was not statistically significant (P=0.7035). Drugassociated systemic adverse events other than ocular adverse events included nasopharyngitis (1) and cerebral infarction (1)in the TJO-002 group and atypical mycobacterial pneumonia(1), bronchiolitis (1), sinusitis (1), acute myeloid leukemia (1)and rash (1) in the BAK latanoprost group. However, those AE did not appear to be associated with the study medications.

    Tolerability Severity of pruritus, burning/stinging, blurred vision, sticky eye sensation, eye dryness sensation, and foreign body sensation were compared between the two groups at 4-, 8-, and 12-week visits in the PP population among them,the severity of pruritus (12wk:P=0.0117), burning/stinging(4wk:P=0.0256, 8wk:P=0.0003, 12wk:P<0.0001), and sticky eye sensation (8wk:P=0.0010) were significantly different between the groups. TJO-002 showed a statistically significantly better tolerability than BAK latanoprost in three categories (Table 6).

    DISCUSSION

    In this randomized, investigator-masked multicenter trial in patients with POAG/OHT, the newly formulated PF latanoprost, TJO-002, showed similar efficacy and better tolerability compared with BAK latanoprost. In terms of efficacy, TJO-002 was non-inferior to BAK latanoprost in lowering IOP at all study follow-up assessment points (week 4, 8, and 12). In terms of tolerability, TJO-002 showed lower incidence of pruritus, burning/stinging, and sticky eye sensation than BAK latanoprost for the study duration.There was no difference in systemic side effects between the two groups. TJO-002 appeared to have better efficacy and tolerability compared with BAK latanoprost eyedrops.

    Measured IOPs were significantly reduced at all follow-up periods from baseline in the groups, and neither the magnitudenor the distribution of the IOP reduction at any visits were statistically different between the two groups. When the IOP measured at 9a.m.was analyzed separately, as it approximates the time of maximal IOP reduction by both medications, it was decreased and maintained for the entire duration of the study.This means that TJO-002 was at least non-inferior to BAK latanoprost in terms of the ability to lower IOP. The reduction of mean IOP at 9a.m.of the last visit compared with baseline was -8.13 mm Hg (33.16%) for TJO-002 and -7.43 mm Hg(31.05%) for BAK latanoprost, which was consistent with the range of the optimal IOP reduction associated with latanoprost 0.005% (approximately 28%-31%) reported previously[22-24].Aspberget al[22]reported that latanoprost was associated with a 28% decrease from the baseline IOP. These results are in agreement with the result of a study in which the IOPlowering efficacy of latanoprost was not dependent on the presence of BAK. Pellinen and Lokkila[25]demonstrated comparable corneal penetration of preserved and PF tafluprost in the aqueous humor of rabbits. Aiharaet al[26]reported that fewer ocular surface complications without significant IOP changes were observed with BAK-free travoprost than with BAK latanoprost, with a reduced prevalence of superficial punctate keratitis and less hyperemia, in a long-term 12-month prospective study. Harasymowyczet al[23]reported that PF latanoprost showed the same efficacy, along with improved local tolerance, compared with BAK latanoprost.

    Table 6 Number of patients with symptoms categorized by severity level comparing the TJO-002 group and the BAK latanoprost group n (%)

    Considering the importance of adherence and the fact that glaucoma requires long-term treatment, local ocular tolerability as well as efficacy is an important factor in preserving the quality of life in patients with glaucoma. In this study, TJO-002 showed better tolerability compared with BAK latanoprost, in terms of pruritus, burning/stinging, and sticky eye sensation.

    There are several presumed reasons for the favorable tolerability of TJO-002. One may be the absence of BAK. While BAK is a commonly used preservative in ophthalmic eye drops,its ocular toxicity is well known. Some studies have shown ocular surface damage, including inflammatory and toxic effects, associated with BAK[14,27-28]. Martinez-de-la-Casaet al[29]reported that the preservative appeared to have an impact on tear cytokine levels. Latanoprost with BAK increased the levels of interleukin, basic fibroblast growth factor, plateletderived growth factor, and tumor necrosis factor-α in tear film. Baudouinet al[28]also suggested that BAK in topical eye drops induces tear film instability, conjunctival inflammation,subconjunctival fibrosis, epithelial apoptosis, and corneal surface impairment. Long-term use of BAK could lead to apoptosis of conjunctival cells and chronic conjunctival inflammation[30]. Furthermore, Desbenoitet al[31]reported that BAK was found in the iris, lens capsule, and trabecular meshwork tissue of rabbits after topical exposure, thus suggesting the penetration of BAK into deep ocular structures.Pisellaet al[32]demonstrated that removal of preservative from timolol ophthalmic solution was associated with improvement of corneal epithelial barrier function, prevention of ocular surface inflammation, and reduction of complaints. Yanget al[33]suggested that topical latanoprost treatment itself could induce dry eyeviainflammation. They reported the effects of latanoprost in mice: it decreased tear production,induced conjunctival goblet cell loss, disrupted the corneal epithelial barrier, and promoted cell apoptosis in the ocular surface. Therefore, latanoprost itself may cause ocular surface problems, and BAK can further aggravate that problem. The new BAK-free formulation of latanoprost in this study, TJO-002,appeared to minimize the discomfort by eliminating BAK toxicity.Another reason may be the ocular tissue-friendly composition of TJO-002, which includes carbomer and sorbitol as the excipient. Carbomer has been widely used for artificial tears[30].Carbomers are anionic polymers and strongly interact with anionic mucin[34]. This mucoadhesive interaction causes carbomer-based formulations to bind with the mucin layer to prolong adhesion[35]. Reports have demonstrated that the ocular retention time of carbomer gel was significantly longer than that of other low-viscosity eye drops[36-37]. In a previous study,when compared to sodium hyaluronate, carbomer showed equivalent therapeutic effects on symptom severity in moderate dry eye[37]. The properties of carbomer seem to play a role in reducing ocular AEs. Furthermore, due to the characteristics of the carbomer, latanoprost may stay on the surface of the eye longer, possibly resulting in a better IOP reduction. The IOP at 9a.m.after 8wk in the TJO-002 group was lower than that in the BAK latanoprost group. Sorbitol is used to enhance the stability of the topical composition in TJO-002.In a 4-week test of stability under severe conditions (55°C,relative humidity 75%), the main ingredient, latanoprost,was maintained without loss. This result showed that the latanoprost preparation containing sorbitol was kept more stable than the preparation without sorbitol (data not shown here). Sorbitol appeared to maintain the stability of TJO-002 at room temperature for 3y. In addition, the appropriate pH for activation and maintenance of TJO-002 is pH 7.0-7.3, at which TJO-002 is neutral, while that of BAK-preserved latanoprost used in this study (Xalatan?, Pfizer Inc., Belgium NV Puurs,Belgium) is pH 5.5. This may be one of the reasons why there is less tingling sensation with TJO-002 than with BAK latanoprost.Gonneringet al[38]showed that the optimal pH range to prevent corneal damage is 6.5 to 8.5, which includes the pH of lacrimal fluid (approximately pH 7.4). Although corneas perfused at pH 5.5 showed changes in endothelial morphology, those perfused at pH values of 7.0, 8.0, and 8.5 maintained normal endothelial morphology[38]. While conjunctival hyperemia was more common in TJO-002 (3vs1). Considering the absence of stimulation by BAK, it was expected to appear less, but the opposite result was obtained. The exact reason for this is not known. In our opinion, the carbomer contained in TJO-002 may be the result of prolonging the hyperemia effect of latanoprost by causing latanoprost to stay in the conjunctival sac for a long time. Severe foreign body sensation was shown in 2 cases of TJO-002 at 4wk after instillation and were lost over time, but in BAK latanoprost, severe case was shown at 12wk. Further study is needed.

    Despite various efforts, this study has several limitations.First, there was no objective examination for ocular surface evaluation, such as tear film break-up testing and corneal/conjunctival staining evaluations. Second, the study was performed using data from one ethnic group; thus, results may not be applicable to other ethnic groups. Third, we did not evaluate all adverse effects of prostaglandin analogue(e.g.,lid pigmentation, deepening of upper eyelid sulcus, and growth of eyelashes) due to the relatively short follow-up duration. Fourth, other ingredients in addition to BAK may have been involved, but comparisons were not made. Since not all of the component of two drugs are the same except for BAK, all other ingredients in the drug may be involved. Fifth,our study conducted a relatively short follow-up duration,12wk. Considering that responses may vary from person to person, the duration of the study may not be appropriate.Further longterm study is needed. Sixth, we did not measure the 24-hour IOP variation, but only examined IOP twice in a day to estimate a certain daily change. However, despite the above limitations, we consider that we sufficiently evaluated and compared TJO-002, PF latanoprost, with conventional latanoprost containing preservative in terms of IOP reduction and ocular surface adverse effects. Finally, compared to previous studies, the subjects in our study are more male and have a relatively young average age. Other similar studies show that the average age is mostly over 60, with similar sex ratios or more female than male[39-42]. However, since our study is a multicenter study, and we have not tried to control the sex ratio of patients, it is not known why this structure was established. Considering the possible reasons, our study was performed in tertiary hospital and general hospitals. These hospitals in Korea are located in large cities, and residents of large cities and office workers around them participated in the study, so it seems that there were relatively more males and younger people than other studies. In addition, male have a higher prevalence of glaucoma than female in Korea[43]. It will be difficult to put our study on the same line with other existing studies and compare it, but it will be a good reference considering age and gender.

    In conclusion, PF latanoprost generic, TJO-002, offers a useful alternative to the available prostaglandin analogues containing BAK for the treatment of POAG/OHT and is likely to be associated with fewer ocular surface problems, without any reduction in efficacy. On the basis of our result, PF-latanoprost could be considered as an alternative to conventional latanoprost, especially in patients suffering from pre-existing or concomitant ocular surface diseases. In the future, it is also of interest to study the comparison of the difference between efficacy and safety with and without preservatives in three different prostaglandin analogues in relation to the surface eye effect of PF.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    Foundation:Supported by Taejoon Pharmaceutical.

    Conflicts of Interest:Kim JM, None; Sung KR, None;Lee JW, None; Kyung H, None; Rho S, None; Kim CY,None.

    中国国产av一级| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线 | 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| www日本黄色视频网| 欧美bdsm另类| 草草在线视频免费看| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 少妇丰满av| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 99热全是精品| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 嫩草影院精品99| 国产成人aa在线观看| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 国产成人91sexporn| 欧美人与善性xxx| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 欧美3d第一页| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 看黄色毛片网站| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 久久午夜福利片| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 亚洲性久久影院| 22中文网久久字幕| 熟女电影av网| 69av精品久久久久久| 欧美zozozo另类| 在现免费观看毛片| 国产免费视频播放在线视频 | 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 日韩高清综合在线| 中文字幕久久专区| 午夜日本视频在线| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 高清毛片免费看| 国产精品.久久久| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 久久6这里有精品| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 亚洲综合精品二区| 天堂网av新在线| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o | 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 中文资源天堂在线| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 国产在视频线精品| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| h日本视频在线播放| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 变态另类丝袜制服| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 嫩草影院入口| 久久久色成人| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 高清视频免费观看一区二区 | 日韩欧美精品v在线| 我要搜黄色片| 老司机福利观看| 岛国毛片在线播放| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 久久久精品大字幕| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久 | av福利片在线观看| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 人妻系列 视频| 国产探花极品一区二区| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂 | 2022亚洲国产成人精品| 一级二级三级毛片免费看| 超碰97精品在线观看| 亚洲最大成人中文| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 我要搜黄色片| 精品久久久久久成人av| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 久久精品夜色国产| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 亚州av有码| 成人av在线播放网站| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 日本与韩国留学比较| 嫩草影院新地址| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 亚洲国产色片| 91狼人影院| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 国产乱来视频区| 简卡轻食公司| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 亚洲丝袜综合中文字幕| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 2022亚洲国产成人精品| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生 | 久99久视频精品免费| 国产视频内射| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 身体一侧抽搐| 国产精品国产三级专区第一集| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 久久久精品94久久精品| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 国产高清三级在线| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆 | 亚洲不卡免费看| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 精品国产三级普通话版| 亚洲五月天丁香| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 天堂中文最新版在线下载 | 久久久久久久久久久丰满| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| av在线蜜桃| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 91狼人影院| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| av在线天堂中文字幕| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| videos熟女内射| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 日本色播在线视频| 我要搜黄色片| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 九草在线视频观看| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 在线播放国产精品三级| 久久久久国产网址| 老司机福利观看| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 精品久久久久久成人av| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 99热全是精品| 欧美+日韩+精品| av天堂中文字幕网| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 亚洲五月天丁香| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版 | 在线播放无遮挡| 插逼视频在线观看| 精品人妻视频免费看| 激情 狠狠 欧美| 久久精品夜色国产| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 99热全是精品| 小说图片视频综合网站| 综合色丁香网| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 91av网一区二区| 一本一本综合久久| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 日本免费在线观看一区| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 亚洲综合精品二区| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 七月丁香在线播放| 欧美zozozo另类| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 观看美女的网站| av在线老鸭窝| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| av.在线天堂| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 午夜日本视频在线| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 特级一级黄色大片| 久久久精品94久久精品| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| av国产免费在线观看| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 一级黄色大片毛片| 嫩草影院新地址| 一级毛片aaaaaa免费看小| 少妇丰满av| 51国产日韩欧美| 一级黄色大片毛片| 日韩av在线大香蕉| av在线亚洲专区| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 日本三级黄在线观看| 永久网站在线| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 赤兔流量卡办理| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 97在线视频观看| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 麻豆成人av视频| 国产成人91sexporn| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| av专区在线播放| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 亚洲图色成人| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 亚洲丝袜综合中文字幕| 免费看a级黄色片| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 老司机福利观看| 久久精品91蜜桃| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 日本黄色片子视频| .国产精品久久| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 有码 亚洲区| 99久国产av精品| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 床上黄色一级片| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 久热久热在线精品观看| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 精品人妻视频免费看| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 老司机福利观看| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花 | 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 伦精品一区二区三区| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| av卡一久久| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 国产av码专区亚洲av| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 国产精品福利在线免费观看| 欧美激情在线99| 国产高清三级在线| 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生 | 永久网站在线| or卡值多少钱| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 身体一侧抽搐| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 激情 狠狠 欧美| 久久人人爽人人片av| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 国产探花极品一区二区| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 天堂网av新在线| 亚洲av.av天堂| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 在现免费观看毛片| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 在现免费观看毛片| 特级一级黄色大片| 美女黄网站色视频| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 日韩成人伦理影院| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 秋霞伦理黄片| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 成人av在线播放网站| 九草在线视频观看| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 国产单亲对白刺激| 国产精品野战在线观看| 成人国产麻豆网| 乱系列少妇在线播放| 波野结衣二区三区在线| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看 | 国产在线一区二区三区精 | АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 国产精品久久久久久久电影| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看 | 一级毛片电影观看 | 日韩成人伦理影院| www.色视频.com| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 久久精品91蜜桃| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 99热这里只有精品一区| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 亚洲五月天丁香| 国产午夜精品论理片| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 亚洲最大成人中文| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 国产老妇女一区| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 亚洲成色77777| 天堂√8在线中文| 干丝袜人妻中文字幕| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 亚洲在线观看片| 成人三级黄色视频| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 美女黄网站色视频| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 欧美zozozo另类| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 免费观看人在逋| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 天堂中文最新版在线下载 | 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 国产成人一区二区在线| 91av网一区二区| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 搞女人的毛片| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 亚洲五月天丁香| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 精品国产三级普通话版| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 免费看光身美女| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 成年版毛片免费区| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 国产精品无大码| 久99久视频精品免费| 插逼视频在线观看| 激情 狠狠 欧美| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 99久国产av精品| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 男女那种视频在线观看| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 色网站视频免费| 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 国产精品伦人一区二区| 国产av在哪里看| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 九九在线视频观看精品| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 联通29元200g的流量卡| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 欧美激情在线99| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 亚洲av熟女| 97超碰精品成人国产| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 国产三级在线视频| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 九色成人免费人妻av| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 午夜a级毛片| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 欧美区成人在线视频| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 国产在视频线在精品| 成人国产麻豆网| 国产视频内射| av在线观看视频网站免费| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 国产老妇女一区| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄 | 搞女人的毛片| 黑人高潮一二区| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 少妇丰满av| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 美女大奶头视频| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 看黄色毛片网站| 舔av片在线| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放 | 国产成人一区二区在线| 亚洲内射少妇av| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 国产 一区精品| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| kizo精华| 草草在线视频免费看| 一级av片app| 日日啪夜夜撸| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 1024手机看黄色片| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 69人妻影院| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 欧美日本视频| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 亚洲综合色惰| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 久久人人爽人人片av| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 国产成人aa在线观看| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 六月丁香七月| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99 | 有码 亚洲区| 一级毛片aaaaaa免费看小| 一级毛片电影观看 | 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 久久久精品94久久精品| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 欧美97在线视频| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 色哟哟·www| 一级毛片aaaaaa免费看小| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 色综合站精品国产| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 少妇的逼好多水| av专区在线播放| 日韩强制内射视频| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 看免费成人av毛片| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 麻豆成人av视频| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99 | av在线播放精品| 看免费成人av毛片| 嫩草影院入口| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看 | 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 三级毛片av免费| 日日啪夜夜撸| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 一级爰片在线观看| 色哟哟·www| 免费av观看视频| 日本免费a在线| 看免费成人av毛片| 一夜夜www| 黄色配什么色好看| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 女人久久www免费人成看片 | 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 热99在线观看视频| 欧美97在线视频| 亚洲av一区综合| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 国产三级在线视频| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 成人国产麻豆网| av线在线观看网站| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 超碰97精品在线观看| 高清av免费在线| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 国产在视频线精品| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| av线在线观看网站| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 日本三级黄在线观看| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| videos熟女内射| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 欧美性感艳星| 看免费成人av毛片| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看 | 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 热99re8久久精品国产| 日韩中字成人|