Trial reportInternational urogynecology journal2019
Do patient characteristics predict which patients with overactive bladder benefit from a higher fesoterodine dose?
Trial report in International urogynecology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drug-Drug Interactions between Tamsulosin and Mirabegron in Healthy Individuals Do Not Affect Pharmacokinetics and Hemodynamic Parameters Significantly.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Oral anticholinergic drugs versus placebo or no treatment for managing overactive bladder syndrome in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Factors Associated with Decisions for Initial Dosing, Up-Titration of Propiverine and Treatment Outcomes in Overactive Bladder Syndrome Patients in a Non-Interventional Setting.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Combination pharmacotherapy for the treatment of the overactive bladder syndrome: a new solution for an old problem?International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisWe sought to determine whether baseline characteristics predict which overactive bladder (OAB) patients benefit from fesoterodine 8 mg versus 4 mg.
methodsIn double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose trials, baseline characteristics of OAB patients with ≥ 1 urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episodes/24 h who escalated from fesoterodine 4 mg to 8 mg were evaluated. Possible dose-escalation predictors (age; sex; previous antimuscarinic use; UUI, micturitions, and urgency episodes/24 h; race; body mass index; time to dose escalation; OAB duration) were compared in escalators versus non-escalators. Patients from fixed-dose trials with dose-escalator characteristics were identified (matched dose-escalator sample) to assess changes from baseline with fesoterodine 4 mg, 8 mg, and placebo.
resultsIn flexible-dose trials, significant predictors of fesoterodine dose escalation were younger age (≤ 65.8 years), greater number of baseline micturitions (≥ 13.1) and urgency episodes/24 h (≥ 10.9), greater OAB duration (≥ 9.1 years), and more frequent previous antimuscarinic use (58.3%), but not baseline UUI episodes/24 h. In the matched dose-escalator sample (fesoterodine 4 mg: n = 215; 8 mg: n = 198; placebo: n = 217), change from baseline in UUI episodes significantly improved with fesoterodine 8 mg versus 4 mg (P = 0.043) and with both doses versus placebo (P < 0.001). Dry mouth and constipation rates were higher with fesoterodine 8 mg.
conclusionsDose-escalator patients had a significantly greater UUI response with fesoterodine 8 mg versus 4 mg. Given the potential for adverse events, fesoterodine 4 mg is recommended to start; however, patients with UUI and identified predictors may benefit from initial treatment with fesoterodine 8 mg or rapid dose escalation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29600400What 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.