Trial reportWorld journal of urology2018
Fexapotide triflutate: results of long-term safety and efficacy trials of a novel injectable therapy for symptomatic prostate enlargement.
Trial report in World journal of urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prospective evaluation of fexapotide triflutate injection treatment of Grade Group 1 prostate cancer: 4-year results.World journal of urology · 2020Trial
- Treating LUTS in Men with Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A Review Article.Drugs & aging · 2023Review
- Fexapotide triflutate vs oral pharmacotherapy as initial therapy for moderate-to-severe benign prostate hyperplasia patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis.BMC urology · 2022Article
- [Minimally invasive treatment options for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2021Article
- iTIND for BPH: Technique and procedural outcomes: A narrative review of current literature.Turkish journal of urology · 2021Article
- A state-of-art review on the preservation of sexual function among various minimally invasive surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia: Impact on erectile and ejaculatory domains.Investigative and clinical urology · 2021Review
- Therapeutic Peptides Targeting PPI in Clinical Development: Overview, Mechanism of Action and Perspectives.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021Review
- Emerging drugs to target lower urinary tract symptomatology (LUTS)/benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): focus on the prostate.World journal of urology · 2020Review
- [Novel minimally invasive treatment options for male lower urinary tract symptom].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019Review
- Fexapotide Triflutate Induces Selective Prostate Glandular Pharmaco-Ablation in the Rat.Research and reports in urology · 2019Article
- Efficacy and safety of fexapotide triflutate in outpatient medical treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
17 authors at 14 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThese studies were undertaken to determine if fexapotide triflutate 2.5 mg transrectal injectable (FT) has significant long-term (LT) safety and efficacy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
methodsTwo placebo controlled double-blind randomized parallel group trials with 995 BPH patients at 72 sites treated 3:2 FT:placebo, with open-label FT crossover (CO) re-injection in 2 trials n = 344 and long-term follow-up (LF) 2-6.75 years (mean 3.58 years, median 3.67 years; FT re-injection CO mean 4.27 years, median 4.42 years) were evaluated. 12 months post-treatment patients elected no further treatment, approved oral medications, FT, or interventional treatment. Primary endpoint variable was change in Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12 months and at LF. CO primary co-endpoints were 3-year incidence of (1) surgery for BPH in FT treated CO patients versus patients crossed over to oral BPH medications and (2) surgery or acute urinary retention in FT-treated CO placebo patients versus placebo patients crossed over to oral BPH medications. 28 CO secondary endpoints assessed surgical and symptomatic outcomes in FT reinjected patients versus conventional BPH medication CO and control subgroups at 2 and 3 years.
resultsFT injection had no significant safety differences from placebo. LF IPSS change from baseline was higher in FT treated patients compared to placebo (median FT group improvement - 5.2 versus placebo - 3.0, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of AUR (1.08% p = 0.0058) and prostate cancer (PCa) (1.1% p = 0.0116) were both reduced in FT treated patients. LF incidence of intervention for BPH was reduced in the FT group versus oral BPH medications (8.08% versus 27.85% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of intervention or AUR in placebo CO group with FT versus placebo CO group with oral medications was reduced (6.07% versus 33.3% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). 28/28 secondary efficacy endpoints were reached in LF CO re-injection studies.
conclusionsFT 2.5 mg is a safe and effective transrectal injectable for LT treatment of BPH. FT treated patients also had reduced need for BPH intervention, and reduced incidence of PCa and AUR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.