BackgroundIn randomised studies, the capsaicin 8% patch has demonstrated effective pain relief in patients with peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arising from different aetiologies.MethodsASCEND was an open-label, non-interventional study of patients with non-diabetes-related PNP who received capsaicin 8% patch treatment, according to usual clinical practice, and were followed for ≤52 weeks. Co-primary endpoints were percentage change in the mean numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) ‘average daily pain’ score from baseline to the average of Weeks 2 and 8 following first treatment; and median time from first to second treatment. The primary analysis was intended to assess analgesic equivalence between post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) and other PNP aetiologies. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL, using EQ-5D), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) and tolerability were also assessed.ResultsFollowing first application, patients experienced a 26.6% (95% CI: 23.6, 29.62; n = 412) reduction in mean NPRS score from baseline to Weeks 2 and 8. Equivalence was demonstrated between PHN and the neuropathic back pain, post-operative and post-traumatic neuropathic pain and ‘other’ PNP aetiology subgroups. The median time from first to second treatment was 191 days (95% CI: 147, 235; n = 181). Forty-four percent of all patients were responders (≥30% reduction in NPRS score from baseline to Weeks 2 and 8) following first treatment, and 86.9% (n = 159/183) remained so at Week 12. A sustained pain response was observed until Week 52, with a 37.0% (95% CI: 31.3, 42.7; n = 176) reduction in mean NPRS score from baseline. Patients with the shortest duration of pain (0–0.72 years) experienced the highest pain response from baseline to Weeks 2 and 8. Mean EQ-5D index score improved by 0.199 utils (responders: 0.292 utils) from baseline to Week 2 and was maintained until Week 52. Most patients reported improvements in PGIC at Week 2 and at all follow-up assessments regardless of number of treatments received. Adverse events were primarily mild or moderate reversible application site reactions.ConclusionIn European clinical practice, the capsaicin 8% patch provided effective and sustained pain relief, substantially improved HRQoL, improved overall health status and was generally well tolerated in a heterogeneous PNP population.Trial registration NCT01737294 Date of registration - October 22, 2012.
We argue that the insights gained into men's preferences for treatment and how LUTS affects men's QoL could not have been obtained by either the qualitative research or the DCE alone.
Aims:To compare efficacy and tolerability of solifenacin 5 mg/day versus other oral antimuscarinic agents for the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB).Methods: Literature searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials in OAB (2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015) for antimuscarinic agents. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to estimate efficacy and tolerability outcomes for solifenacin 5 mg/day relative to other antimuscarinics. Results:The NMA included 53 eligible trials (published, n = 48; unpublished on search date, n = 5). Solifenacin 5 mg/day was significantly more effective than tolterodine 4 mg/ day for reducing incontinence and urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episodes, but significantly less effective than solifenacin 10 mg/day for micturition; no other statistically significant differences were noted for efficacy. Solifenacin 5 mg/day had a statistically significant lower risk of dry mouth compared with darifenacin 15 mg/day, fesoterodine 8 mg/day, oxybutynin extended-release 10 mg/day, oxybutynin immediaterelease (IR) 9-15 mg/day, tolterodine IR 4 mg/day, propiverine 20 mg/day, and solifenacin 10 mg/day. There were no significant differences between solifenacin 5 mg/day and other antimuscarinics for risk of blurred vision, or for 11 of 17 active comparators for risk of constipation. Conclusions:This NMA suggests that the efficacy of solifenacin 5 mg/day is at least similar to other common antimuscarinics across the spectrum of OAB symptoms analyzed, and is more effective than tolterodine 4 mg/day in reducing incontinence and UUI episodes. Solifenacin 5 mg/day has a lower risk of dry mouth compared with several agents. K E Y W O R D Santimuscarinics, blurred vision, constipation, dry mouth, incontinence, micturition, solifenacinThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
ObjectiveTo explore and quantify men’s preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for attributes of medications for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia using a discrete choice experiment.Subjects and methodsMen in the UK aged ≥45 years with moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia (based on self-reported International Prostate Symptom Score ≥8) were recruited. An online discrete choice experiment survey was administered. Eligible men were asked to consider different medication scenarios and select their preferred medication according to seven attributes: daytime and nighttime (nocturia) urinary frequency, urinary urgency, sexual and nonsexual side effects, number of tablets/day, and cost/month. A mixed-logit model was used to estimate preferences and WTP for medication attributes.ResultsIn all, 247 men completed the survey. Men were willing to trade-off symptom improvements and treatment side effects. Men preferred medications that reduced urinary urgency and reduced day- and nighttime urinary frequency. Men preferred medications without side effects (base-case level), but did not care about the number of tablets per day. WTP for symptomatic improvement was £25.33/month for reduced urgency (urge incontinence to mild urgency), and £6.65/month and £1.39/month for each unit reduction in night- and daytime urination frequency, respectively. The sexual and nonsexual side effects reduced WTP by up to £30.07/month. There was significant heterogeneity in preferences for most attributes, except for reduced urinary urgency from urge incontinence to mild urgency and no fluid during ejaculation (dry orgasm).ConclusionTo compensate for side effects, a medicine for lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia must provide a combination of benefits, such as reduced urgency of urination plus reduced nighttime and/or reduced daytime urination.
Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of solifenacin 5 mg/day versus other oral antimuscarinic agents used for overactive bladder (OAB) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Study design: In a Markov model, hypothetical patients received solifenacin 5 mg/day or a comparator antimuscarinic, after which they could switch to an alternative antimuscarinic. The model estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) over a 5-year period. Results: Solifenacin 5 mg/day was the dominant treatment strategy (i.e., less costly and more effective) versus tolterodine extended-release (ER) 4 mg/day, fesoterodine 4 and 8 mg/day, oxybutynin ER 10 mg/day and solifenacin 10 mg/day, and was cost-effective (i.e., ICERs below the £30,000 per QALY threshold generally applied in the NHS) versus oxybutynin immediate release (IR) 10 mg/day, tolterodine IR 4 mg/day and trospium chloride 60 mg/day. The probability of solifenacin 5 mg/day being dominant/cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per QALY was 57–98%. Conclusions: Solifenacin 5 mg/day appears to be a cost-effective strategy for the treatment of OAB over a 5-year timeframe compared with other oral antimuscarinic agents in the UK. These findings are important for decision-makers considering the economic implications of selecting treatments for OAB.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.