Safety and efficacy of an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron compared with an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic in men with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia and overactive bladder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIM

Antimuscarinics and the β3-adrenoreceptor agonist, mirabegron, are commonly used for treating patients with overactive bladder (OAB) and α1 -adrenoreceptor antagonists (α1 -blockers) are the main pharmacological agents used for treating lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). As these conditions commonly occur together, the aim of this systematic review was to identify publications that compared the use of an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron with an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic in men with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. A meta-analysis was subsequently conducted to explore the safety and efficacy of these combinations.

METHODS

Included records had to be from a parallel-group, randomized clinical trial that was ≥8 weeks in duration. Participants were male with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. The indirect analyses that were identified compared an α1 -blocker plus OAB agent with an α1 -blocker plus placebo. The PubMed/Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, the Excerpta Medica Database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry were searched for relevant records up until March 5, 2020. Safety outcomes included incidences of overall treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and urinary retention, postvoid residual volume, and maximum urinary flow (Qmax ). Primary efficacy outcomes were micturitions/day, incontinence episodes/day, and urgency episodes/day, and secondary outcomes were Overactive Bladder Symptom Score and International Prostate Symptom Score. A Bayesian network meta-analysis approach was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 1039 records identified, 24 were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. There were no statistically significant differences between the α1 -blocker plus mirabegron and α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic groups in terms of the comparisons identified for all the safety and efficacy analyses conducted. Numerically superior results were frequently observed for the α1 -blocker plus mirabegron group compared with the α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic group for the safety parameters, including TEAEs, urinary retention, and Qmax . For some of the efficacy parameters, most notably micturitions/day, numerically superior results were noted for the α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic group. Inconsistency in reporting and study variability were noted in the included records, which hindered data interpretation.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron and an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic have similar safety and efficacy profiles in male patients with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. Patients may, therefore, benefit from the use of either combination within the clinical setting.

Evolving Role of Silodosin for the Treatment of Urological Disorders – A Narrative Review

Use of α-androgenic receptor blockers remains a mainstay therapeutic approach for the treatment of urological diseases. Silodosin is recommended over other α-blockers for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), due to its high α_1A uroselectivity. Current research data suggest that silodosin is efficacious in the management of various urological diseases. Thus, we herein review the current evidence of silodosin related to its efficacy and tolerability and appraise the available literature that might ultimately aid in management of various urological conditions at routine clinical practice. Literature reveals that silodosin is beneficial in improving nocturia events related to LUTS/BPH. Silodosin exerts effect on relaxing muscles involved in detrusor obstruction, therefore prolonging the need for patients undergoing invasive surgery. Silodosin treatment, either as a monotherapy or combination, significantly improves International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) including both storage and voiding symptoms in patients with BPH/LUTS. Patients on other treatment therapies such as phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors or other α-blockers are well managed with this drug. Steadily, silodosin has proved beneficial in the treatment of other urological disorders such as chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), overactive bladder/acute urinary retention (AUR), premature ejaculation (PE), and prostate cancer post brachytherapy-induced progression. In patients with distal ureteral stones, silodosin treatment is beneficial in decreasing stone expulsion time without affecting stone expulsion rate or analgesic need. Moreover, there were significant improvements in intravaginal ejaculation latency time, quality of life scores, and decrease in PE profile among patients with PE. Silodosin has also demonstrated promising results in increasing the likelihood of successful trial without catheter in patients with AUR and those taking antihypertensive drugs. Reports from Phase II studies have shown promising role of silodosin in the treatment of CP/CPPS as well as facilitating ureteral stone passage. From the robust data in this review, further silodosin treatment strategies in the management of different urological conditions need to be focused on.

Comparative Efficacy of Different Drugs for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are common in middle-aged and elderly men. The current drugs for treating this disease include α1-adrenoceptor antagonists (ABs), muscarinic receptor antagonists (MRAs), phosphodiesterase five inhibitors (PDE5-Is), and β3-adrenoceptor agonists (B3As). However, direct comparative studies analyzing different therapies are limited; therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the efficacy of different drug regimens for treating BPH/LUTS. Methods: The PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different drug treatments for BPH/LUTS from January 2000 to April 2021. The NMA was performed using R 4.1 software. Results: Fifty-five RCTs were included among a total of 1639 trials. ① ABs + PDE5-Is, ABs + B3As, ABs + MRAs, ABs, and PDE5-IS were superior to the placebo in improving the total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS-Voiding, and IPSS-storage. ② For increasing the maximum flow rate (Qmax), ABs + PDE5-Is, ABs + MRAs, and ABs were more effective than the placebo. ③ Regarding reducing post-void residual urine (PVR), none of the six treatment plans had significant effects. Conclusion: Combination therapy showed greater efficacy than monotherapy, and ABs + PDE5-Is was the most successful treatment for improving the overall IPSS score. ABs are a primary therapeutic measure to increase Qmax, and ABs + PDE5-I may be a more suitable choice for enhancing Qmax. The combination of MRA and AB+ MRA may lead to an increase in PVR. Systematic Review Registration: [website], identifier [registration number].

Anticholinergics combined with alpha-blockers for treating lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) represent one of the most common clinical complaints in men. Alpha-blockers are widely used as first-line therapy for men with LUTS secondary to BPO, but up to one third of men report no improvement in their LUTS after taking alpha-blockers. Anticholinergics used in addition to alpha-blockers may help improve symptoms but it is uncertain how effective they are.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of combination therapy with anticholinergics and alpha-blockers in men with LUTS related to BPO.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of medical literature, including the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registries, with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search was 7 August 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with LUTS secondary to BPO, ages 40 years or older, and a total International Prostate Symptom Score of 8 or greater. We excluded trials of men with a known neurogenic bladder due to spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, or central nervous system disease, and those examining medical therapy for men who were treated with surgery for BPO. We performed three comparisons: combination therapy versus placebo, combination therapy versus alpha-blockers monotherapy, and combination therapy versus anticholinergics monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and interpreted data according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies with 6285 randomized men across three comparisons. The mean age of participants ranged from 54.4 years to 73.9 years (overall mean age 65.7 years). Of the included studies, 12 were conducted with a single-center setting, while 11 used a multi-center setting. We only found short-term effect (12 weeks to 12 months) of combination therapy based on available evidence. Combination therapy versus placebo: based on five studies with 2369 randomized participants, combination therapy may result in little or no difference in urologic symptom scores (mean difference (MD) -2.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.55 to 0.08; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of combination therapy on quality of life (QoL) (MD -0.97, 95% CI -2.11 to 0.16; very low-certainty evidence). Combination therapy likely increases adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.24, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.47; moderate-certainty evidence); based on 252 adverse events per 1000 participants in the placebo group, this corresponds to 61 more adverse events (95% CI 10 more  to 119 more) per 1000 participants treated with combination therapy. Combination therapy versus alpha-blockers alone: based on 22 studies with 4904 randomized participants, we are very uncertain about the effect of combination therapy on urologic symptom scores (MD -2.04, 95% CI -3.56 to -0.52; very low-certainty evidence) and QoL (MD -0.71, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.38; very low-certainty evidence). Combination therapy may result in little or no difference in adverse events rate (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.34; low-certainty evidence); based on 228 adverse events per 1000 participants in the alpha-blocker group, this corresponds to 23 more adverse events (95% CI 23 fewer to 78 more) per 1000 participants treated with combination therapy. Combination therapy compared to anticholinergics alone: based on three studies with 1218 randomized participants, we are very uncertain about the effect of combination therapy on urologic symptom scores (MD -3.71, 95% CI -9.41 to 1.98; very low-certainty evidence). Combination therapy may result in an improvement in QoL (MD -1.49, 95% CI -1.88 to -1.11; low-certainty evidence). Combination therapy likely results in little to no difference in adverse events (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.95; moderate-certainty evidence); based on 115 adverse events per 1000 participants in the anticholinergic alone group, this corresponds to 4 fewer adverse events (95% CI 7 fewer to 13 more) per 1000 participants treated with combination therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of the review, combination therapy with anticholinergics and alpha-blockers are associated with little or uncertain effects on urologic symptom scores compared to placebo, alpha-blockers, or anticholinergics monotherapy. However, combination therapy may result in an improvement in quality of life compared to anticholinergics monotherapy, but an uncertain effect compared to placebo, or alpha-blockers. Combination therapy likely increases adverse events compared to placebo, but not compared to alpha-blockers or anticholinergics monotherapy. The findings of this review were limited by study limitations, inconsistency, and imprecision. We were unable to conduct any of the predefined subgroup analyses.

Silodosin: An Update on Efficacy, Safety and Clinical Indications in Urology

INTRODUCTION

Silodosin determines smooth muscle relaxation in bladder and prostate tissues, increases bladder blood flow in conditions of chronic bladder ischemia and regulates the activity of transcriptional factors responsible for stromal growth and prostate hyperplasia. Phase III trials have already demonstrated the efficacy and safety of silodosin in the treatment of patients bothered by lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to describe the rationality for the use of silodosin and to summarize the current literature on the use of Silodosin for the treatment of LUTS.

METHODS

PubMed and Web of Science were queried with the terms: 'silodosin' in combination (AND) with the terms 'lower urinary tract symptoms', 'LUTS', 'pathophysiology', 'symptoms' OR 'therapy'. Studies published in the last 10 years (2007-2017) in adults and core clinical journals in English were included.

RESULTS

Silodosin 8 mg once-daily was superior to placebo in improving IPSS total score, voiding subscore, storage subscore and QoL score, and at least as effective as tamsulosin 0.4 mg once-daily in all the efficacy analyses. In addition, studies assessing the effect on urodynamic parameters showed that silodosin determined a higher improvement in the bladder outlet obstruction index compared to other alpha1 adrenergic receptor antagonists. Concerning the safety profile, long-term data (after 9 months of treatment) confirmed the limited effect of silodosin on the cardiovascular and gastrointestinal systems. Although ejaculatory disorders represented the main complaint of patients taking silodosin, the discontinuation rate due to this condition remained low even in a long-term follow-up study (7.5%). Encouraging findings showed that silodosin may be administered as a medical expulsive therapy for promoting spontaneous stone passage of distal ureteral stones < 10 mm, to relieve LUTS in patients who underwent prostate cancer brachytherapy and to increase the likelihood of successful trials without a catheter in patients experiencing acute urinary retention.

CONCLUSION

Silodosin is one of the drugs approved for the treatment of BPH, being highly effective in improving not only LUTS but also urodynamic parameter impairments secondary to BPH. Moreover, it has shown efficacy as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones in previous prospective randomized trials.

FUNDING

Sponsorship for this study and article processing charges were funded by Recordati.

Silodosin 8 mg improves benign prostatic obstruction in Caucasian patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement: results from an explorative clinical study

Background

To preliminary investigate the effects of silodosin 8 mg once daily on obstruction urodynamic parameters and subjective symptoms in Caucasian patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement.

Methods

We performed a single-center, open-label, single-arm, post-marketing interventional clinical trial. Inclusion criteria were: Caucasian subjects aged ≥50 years waiting to undergo surgery for lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement, international prostate symptom total score ≥ 13, international prostate symptom-quality of life score ≥ 3, prostate volume ≥ 30 ml, maximum urine flow rate ≤ 15 mL/s, bladder outlet obstruction index > 40. Eligible subjects received one capsule of silodosin 8 mg once daily for 8 weeks. Invasive urodynamic evaluations were performed at baseline and at 8-weeks follow-up. International prostate symptom questionnaire was administered at baseline, after 4-weeks and 8-weeks of treatment.

Results

Overall, 34 subjects were included. Mean bladder outlet obstruction index significantly decreased from 70.6 to 39.2 and bladder outlet obstruction index class improved in 16 patients (53.3%). Statistically significant improvements of mean total international prostate symptom score, mean storage sub-score, mean voiding sub-score and mean quality of life sub-score were evident after 4-weeks of treatment with further improvements after 8-weeks. At the end of the treatment, all patients declared that their condition improved enough to spare or delay surgery.

Conclusions

Silodosin 8 mg once daily significantly improves benign prostatic obstruction in Caucasian patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement waiting for surgery.

Trial registration

EudraCT n. 2015-002277-38 Date of registration: 15th December 2017.

Combination treatment for male lower urinary tract symptoms with anticholinergic and alpha-blockers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although alpha-adrenergic antagonists (α-blockers) are effective for relieving voiding lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men, storage symptoms often persist. The aim of this manuscript is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with α-blockers and muscarinic receptor antagonists (anticholinergics).

RECENT FINDINGS

High-quality evidence confirms that the addition of an anticholinergic improves micturition diary parameters, such as daytime and nocturnal frequency and urgency incontinence episodes, as well as total and storage subset scores on the International Prostate Symptom Score. Most studies demonstrate a statistically significant improvement over α-blocker monotherapy. Both, incidence of urinary retention and study withdrawal because of treatment-related adverse events with combination therapy, are low. Urodynamic indices, such as maximum flow rate and postvoid residual volume, are also minimally impacted by combination therapy. Outcomes on validated questionnaires and quality-of-life (QoL) indices also indicate a significant improvement.

SUMMARY

The addition of an anticholinergic to an α-blocker in men with storage and voiding LUTS is an effective practice in reducing both categories of symptoms. The addition of anticholinergic is associated with a low rate of urinary retention and the impact on efficient bladder emptying is minimal. Not unexpectedly, QoL is improved.

Patient-perceived effectiveness and impact on quality of life of solifenacin in combination with an α-blocker in men with overactive bladder in Sweden: a non-interventional study

Treating male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) by targeting the prostate would have limited effect on overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms. This study assessed perceived symptoms and quality of life (QoL) of male patients with OAB treated with an α-blocker plus solifenacin in daily clinical practice. Male patients aged ≥40 years were included after the decision was made to initiate treatment with an α-blocker for LUTS plus solifenacin for OAB symptoms. The primary endpoint was change in patient perception of bladder condition (PPBC) questionnaire score over 6 months. Other assessments included the OAB-questionnaire short form (OAB-q SF) and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Interpretation of the study data was hindered by not meeting the enrollment target and a high dropout rate. In 36 evaluable patients, mean (SD) PPBC score improved from 4.3 (0.93) at baseline ("moderate" to "severe" problems) to 3.5 (1.06) at month 6 ("minor" to "moderate" problems). OAB-q SF scores and total IPSS also improved. In this patient population, treatment with solifenacin and an α-blocker resulted in improvements in male patient perception of their LUTS and QoL, although the results should be interpreted with caution due to the low number of patients with complete data.

Comparison of Silodosin Monotherapy vs Silodosin With Tadalafil Add-on Therapy in Patients With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of add-on therapy with the phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor tadalafil for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) treated with the α₁-adrenoceptor blocker silodosin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed 103 patients with LUTS/BPH with an International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) of >8 after ≥4 weeks of silodosin treatment from April 2016 through December 2016 at Kori Hospital. The patients subsequently received silodosin 4.0 mg twice daily (monotherapy group) or silodosin 4.0 mg twice daily plus tadalafil 5.0 mg once daily (add-on therapy group) for 8 weeks. We assessed adverse events and evaluated the mean change from baseline to 8 weeks in the IPSS, Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS), maximum urine flow rate (Q_max), and post-void residual urine volume.

RESULTS

Of 103 patients, 101 (98.1%) could continue medical treatment. The IPSS, OABSS, and Q_max showed significantly greater improvement in the add-on therapy than in the monotherapy group (-3.92 vs -1.24, -1.18 vs 0.10, and 1.09 vs -1.04, respectively; all P <.05). Although 4 patients experienced adverse events (add-on therapy: n = 3, 5.7%; monotherapy: n = 1, 2.0%), no significant differences were observed (P = .62). Among patients with overactive bladder (n = 55), the IPSS storage symptom subscore, IPSS urgency subscore, and OABSS urgency subscore showed significantly greater improvement in the add-on therapy than in the monotherapy group (-2.23 vs 0.17, -0.88 vs 0.28, and -1.5 vs -0.48, respectively; all P <.05).

CONCLUSION

Add-on therapy with tadalafil may be effective for patients with LUTS/BPH resistant to silodosin monotherapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Initial Combination Treatment of an Alpha Blocker with an Anticholinergic Medication in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: Updated Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

There is still controversy as to whether initial combination treatment is superior to serial addition of anticholinergics after maintenance or induction of alpha blockers in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)/lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the benefits and safety of initial combination treatment of an alpha blocker with anticholinergic medication in BPH/LUTS through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of improvement in LUTS using International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximal urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-voided residual volume (PVR), and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

In total, 16 studies were included in our analysis, with a total sample size of 3,548 subjects (2,195 experimental subjects and 1,353 controls). The mean change in total IPSS improvement from baseline in the combination group versus the alpha blocker monotherapy group was -0.03 (95% CI: -0.14-0.08). The pooled overall SMD change of storage IPSS improvement from baseline was -0.28 (95% CI: -0.40 - -0.17). The pooled overall SMD changes of QoL, Qmax, and PVR were -0.29 (95% CI: -0.50 - -0.07), 0.00 (95% CI: -0.08-0.08), and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.23-0.89), respectively. There was no significant difference in the number of acute urinary retention (AUR) events or PVR.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial combination treatment of an alpha blocker with anticholinergic medication is efficacious for in BPH/ LUTS with improved measures such as storage symptoms and QoL without causing significant deterioration of voiding function.