In patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension, tadalafil 40 mg was well tolerated and improved exercise capacity and quality of life measures and reduced clinical worsening.

OBJECTIVETo test the safety and efficacy of exenatide once weekly (EQW) compared with metformin (MET), pioglitazone (PIO), and sitagliptin (SITA) over 26 weeks, in suboptimally treated (diet and exercise) drug-naive patients with type 2 diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSPatients were randomized to subcutaneous (SC) EQW 2.0 mg + oral placebo (n = 248), MET 2,000 mg/day + SC placebo (n = 246), PIO 45 mg/day + SC placebo (n = 163), or SITA 100 mg/day + SC placebo (n = 163) for 26 weeks. MET and PIO therapies were increased to maximum-tolerated dosages. Injections with EQW or placebo were administered weekly, while oral medication or placebo was administered daily.RESULTSBaseline characteristics were as follows: 59% men, 67% Caucasian, mean age 54 years, HbA1c 8.5%, fasting serum glucose 9.9 mmol/L, body weight 87.0 kg, and diabetes duration 2.7 years. HbA1c reductions (%) at 26 weeks (least-squares means) with EQW versus MET, PIO, and SITA were −1.53 vs. −1.48 (P = 0.620), −1.63 (P = 0.328), and −1.15 (P < 0.001), respectively. Weight changes (kg) were −2.0 vs. −2.0 (P = 0.892), +1.5 (P < 0.001), and −0.8 (P < 0.001), respectively. Common adverse events were as follows: EQW, nausea (11.3%) and diarrhea (10.9%); MET, diarrhea (12.6%) and headache (12.2%); PIO, nasopharyngitis (8.6%) and headache (8.0%); and SIT, nasopharyngitis (9.8%) and headache (9.2%). Minor (confirmed) hypoglycemia was rarely reported. No major hypoglycemia occurred.CONCLUSIONSEQW was noninferior to MET but not PIO and superior to SITA with regard to HbA1c reduction at 26 weeks. Of the agents studied, EQW and MET provided similar improvements in glycemic control along with the benefit of weight reduction and no increased risk of hypoglycemia.

No abstract

Long-term treatment with tadalafil was well tolerated in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. In patients receiving either T20 mg or T40 mg, the improvements in 6MWD demonstrated in the 16-week PHIRST study appeared sustained for up to 52 additional weeks of treatment in PHIRST-2. (Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Response to Tadalafil Study; NCT00549302).

OBJECTIVES To determine if baseline characteristics, treatment efficacy, psychosocial outcomes or tolerability were associated with patient preference for sildenafil citrate (sildenafil) or tadalafil for treating erectile dysfunction (ED) in men naive to phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS In an open‐label, crossover study of sildenafil (25, 50 or 100 mg) and tadalafil (10 or 20 mg), dosed as needed, after a 4‐week baseline assessment, 367 men with ED were randomly assigned to sildenafil followed by tadalafil or vice versa (8‐week dose optimization and 4‐week assessment phase for each treatment period). Patients completing both periods chose which treatment they preferred for an 8‐week extension phase. Bivariate logistic regression and stepwise logistic regression were used to determine if any baseline characteristics or post‐baseline measurements were associated with the patients’ treatment preference. Baseline variables examined were age, race, ED aetiology/duration, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol consumption, vital signs, comorbid medical conditions, and baseline scores for the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) domains, Psychological and Interpersonal Relationship Scales (PAIRS) domains, and Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) diary questions. Post‐baseline variables examined were therapy sequence, dosage, and differences in IIEF and PAIRS domains, SEP scores, in number/timing of sexual attempts and in the severity of side‐effects (overall patient perception). RESULTS Of 291 patients completing both treatments and indicating a preference, 85 (29%) preferred sildenafil and 206 (71%) preferred tadalafil. Variables were individually analysed using bivariate analysis; one baseline characteristic (presence/absence of hyperlipidaemia) and 13 post‐baseline measurements were significantly associated with the patients’ treatment preference. Variables were analysed as a group using stepwise logistic regression; a set of six post‐baseline factors was identified as significantly associated with patient preference. Dosage choice, reductions in the PAIRS time concerns domain, IIEF intercourse satisfaction domain improvements, smaller side‐effect severity scores, more sexual attempts, and increased SEP4 scores (satisfaction with erection hardness) during the tadalafil or sildenafil treatment periods were all significantly associated with preference for tadalafil or sildenafil. CONCLUSIONS We identified no baseline characteristics that prospectively distinguish patients who will prefer tadalafil or sildenafil. Patient differences in time concerns, dosage choice, intercourse satisfaction, treatment tolerability, number of sexual attempts and satisfaction with erection hardness were the set of factors most significantly associated with treatment preference, and the preference observed for tadalafil (71%) or sildenafil (29%) might be substantially accounted for by differences in these factors during the tadalafil and sildenafil treatment periods.