Mirabegron与vibegron在未经治疗的女性膀胱过动症患者中的疗效:一项随机、单诊所、开放标签试验

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Hirotaka Sato, Shota Otsuka, Sachiyuki Tsukada
{"title":"Mirabegron与vibegron在未经治疗的女性膀胱过动症患者中的疗效:一项随机、单诊所、开放标签试验","authors":"Hirotaka Sato,&nbsp;Shota Otsuka,&nbsp;Sachiyuki Tsukada","doi":"10.1111/luts.12480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of mirabegron compared with vibegron (both 50 mg once daily) in Japanese female patients with symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This prospective, 12-week, two-arm, parallel-group, open-label randomized trial (UMIN000038288) was conducted at a single clinic from December 2019 to September 2022. The primary efficacy outcome measure was the change in mean total overactive bladder symptom scores (OABSSs) from baseline to end of treatment (EOT) (Week 12). The secondary efficacy outcome measures were changes in mean International Prostate Symptom Score from baseline to EOT, the ratio of patients who achieved a minimal clinically important change (MCIC) of total OABSS, and individual domains of the King's Health Questionnaire. Safety assessments, such as adverse events (AEs), postvoid residual volume, and patient-reported incidences, were recorded at every visit.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>There was no statistically significant adjusted mean difference between mirabegron and vibegron in terms of the primary outcome of the mean change from baseline to EOT in the total OABSS. The difference in the percentage of patients in the mirabegron and vibegron groups achieving an MCIC on the total OABSS was not statistically significant but appeared to be clinically important. The incidence of treatment-related AEs was significantly higher for the vibegron group (38.5%) than the mirabegron group (19.1%) (<i>p</i> = .047).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These results showed that both drugs were effective in female OAB patients, with no significant differences in terms of efficacy. However, the safety of vibegron requires further investigation.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18028,"journal":{"name":"LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/luts.12480","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mirabegron versus vibegron in previously untreated female patients with overactive bladder: A randomized, single-clinic, open-label trial\",\"authors\":\"Hirotaka Sato,&nbsp;Shota Otsuka,&nbsp;Sachiyuki Tsukada\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/luts.12480\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of mirabegron compared with vibegron (both 50 mg once daily) in Japanese female patients with symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This prospective, 12-week, two-arm, parallel-group, open-label randomized trial (UMIN000038288) was conducted at a single clinic from December 2019 to September 2022. The primary efficacy outcome measure was the change in mean total overactive bladder symptom scores (OABSSs) from baseline to end of treatment (EOT) (Week 12). The secondary efficacy outcome measures were changes in mean International Prostate Symptom Score from baseline to EOT, the ratio of patients who achieved a minimal clinically important change (MCIC) of total OABSS, and individual domains of the King's Health Questionnaire. Safety assessments, such as adverse events (AEs), postvoid residual volume, and patient-reported incidences, were recorded at every visit.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>There was no statistically significant adjusted mean difference between mirabegron and vibegron in terms of the primary outcome of the mean change from baseline to EOT in the total OABSS. The difference in the percentage of patients in the mirabegron and vibegron groups achieving an MCIC on the total OABSS was not statistically significant but appeared to be clinically important. The incidence of treatment-related AEs was significantly higher for the vibegron group (38.5%) than the mirabegron group (19.1%) (<i>p</i> = .047).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>These results showed that both drugs were effective in female OAB patients, with no significant differences in terms of efficacy. However, the safety of vibegron requires further investigation.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/luts.12480\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/luts.12480\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/luts.12480","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估mirabegron与vibegron(均为50 mg,每日1次)在日本女性膀胱过动症(OAB)患者中的疗效和安全性。该前瞻性、为期12周、平行组、开放标签随机试验(UMIN000038288)于2019年12月至2022年9月在一家诊所进行。主要疗效指标是平均膀胱过度活动症状评分(OABSSs)从基线到治疗结束(EOT)(第12周)的变化。次要疗效指标包括从基线到EOT的平均国际前列腺症状评分的变化,达到最小临床重要变化(MCIC)的总OABSS的患者比例,以及King's健康问卷的各个领域。安全性评估,如不良事件(ae)、空隙后残留量和患者报告的发生率,在每次就诊时都被记录下来。结果mirabegron和vibegron在总OABSS从基线到EOT的平均变化的主要结局方面没有统计学上的显著差异。美瑞比龙组和威比龙组在总OABSS上达到MCIC的患者百分比差异无统计学意义,但似乎具有重要的临床意义。vibegron组治疗相关不良事件发生率(38.5%)显著高于mirabegron组(19.1%)(p = 0.047)。结论两种药物对女性OAB患者均有效,且疗效无显著差异。然而,威必荣的安全性需要进一步调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Mirabegron versus vibegron in previously untreated female patients with overactive bladder: A randomized, single-clinic, open-label trial

Mirabegron versus vibegron in previously untreated female patients with overactive bladder: A randomized, single-clinic, open-label trial

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of mirabegron compared with vibegron (both 50 mg once daily) in Japanese female patients with symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB).

Methods

This prospective, 12-week, two-arm, parallel-group, open-label randomized trial (UMIN000038288) was conducted at a single clinic from December 2019 to September 2022. The primary efficacy outcome measure was the change in mean total overactive bladder symptom scores (OABSSs) from baseline to end of treatment (EOT) (Week 12). The secondary efficacy outcome measures were changes in mean International Prostate Symptom Score from baseline to EOT, the ratio of patients who achieved a minimal clinically important change (MCIC) of total OABSS, and individual domains of the King's Health Questionnaire. Safety assessments, such as adverse events (AEs), postvoid residual volume, and patient-reported incidences, were recorded at every visit.

Results

There was no statistically significant adjusted mean difference between mirabegron and vibegron in terms of the primary outcome of the mean change from baseline to EOT in the total OABSS. The difference in the percentage of patients in the mirabegron and vibegron groups achieving an MCIC on the total OABSS was not statistically significant but appeared to be clinically important. The incidence of treatment-related AEs was significantly higher for the vibegron group (38.5%) than the mirabegron group (19.1%) (p = .047).

Conclusions

These results showed that both drugs were effective in female OAB patients, with no significant differences in terms of efficacy. However, the safety of vibegron requires further investigation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
52
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: LUTS is designed for the timely communication of peer-reviewed studies which provides new clinical and basic science information to physicians and researchers in the field of neurourology, urodynamics and urogynecology. Contributions are reviewed and selected by a group of distinguished referees from around the world, some of whom constitute the journal''s Editorial Board. The journal covers both basic and clinical research on lower urinary tract dysfunctions (LUTD), such as overactive bladder (OAB), detrusor underactivity, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse (POP), painful bladder syndrome (PBS), as well as on other relevant conditions. Case reports are published only if new findings are provided. LUTS is an official journal of the Japanese Continence Society, the Korean Continence Society, and the Taiwanese Continence Society. Submission of papers from all countries are welcome. LUTS has been accepted into Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) with a 2011 Impact Factor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信