Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40198627›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2025

Comparison of efficacy and safety of mirabegron and vibegron in the treatment of Overactive Bladder (OAB) in older women: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jiankun Zhang, Junpeng Chi, Keyuan Lou, Junjie Zhao, Feng Gao, Yuanshan Cui

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jiankun ZhangSchool of Clinical Medicine, Shandong Second Medical University, Weifang, China.
Junpeng ChiDepartment of Urology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China.
Keyuan LouDepartment of Urology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China.
Junjie ZhaoDepartment of Urology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China.
Feng GaoDepartment of Urology, Weifang People's Hospital, WeiFang, China.
Yuanshan CuiDepartment of Urology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China.ORCID 0009-0000-8418-5134

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAfter the introduction of anticholinergic drugs for the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB), the discovery of β-adrenergic agonists has helped reduce the side effects associated with the former. Currently, the two available medications, mirabegron and vibegron, are β-adrenergic agonists. However, clinical practitioners are still faced with the dilemma of which drug to choose.

objectiveTo analyze and compare the efficacy and adverse effects of the two medications.

methodsA literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials using mirabegron and vibegron for the treatment of OAB. Databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched. The search cutoff date was July 25 2024. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed using standardized methods. A meta-analysis was then conducted using RevMan software and a random-effects model, with studies weighted according to sample size and variance. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. All statistical analyses were performed using RevMan, and results were presented as effect sizes (e.g., mean difference or risk ratio).

resultsThree randomized controlled trials compared the safety and efficacy of mirabegron and vibegron head-to-head, involving 368 patients. The trials, each lasting 8 or 12 weeks. The trials compared the changes in various indices of the OABSS (Overactive Bladder Symptom Score) between the two drugs. The statistical methods used in the analysis included Mean Difference (MD), 95% Confidence Interval (CI), p-value, and I² statistic. For OABSS: MD =  0.38, 95% CI =  - 0.19 to 0.95, p =  0.28, I² =  21%; for Q1: MD =  0.08, 95% CI =  - 0.01 to 0.26, p =  0.31, I² =  4%; for Q2: MD =  0.08, 95% CI =  - 0.21 to 0.37, p =  0.67, I² =  0%; for Q3: MD =  0.05, 95% CI =  - 0.45 to 0.56, p =  0.90, I² =  0%; for Q4: MD =  - 0.21, 95% CI =  - 0.68 to 0.27, p =  0.35, I² =  0%. The relative risk (RR) of adverse effects between the two drugs was: RR =  0.87, 95% CI =  0.57 to 1.34, p =  0.27, I² =  25%; for constipation: RR =  0.73, 95% CI =  0.37 to 1.43, p =  0.27, I² =  25%; and for dry mouth: RR =  0.98, 95% CI =  0.42 to 2.30, p =  0.78, I² =  0%.

conclusionThere appears to be no statistically significant difference in efficacy and safety between mirabegron and vibegron for OAB patients. Further high-quality prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.

Indexed as

AcetanilidesPyridinesThiazolesUrinary Bladder, OveractiveUrological AgentsAdrenergic beta-3 Receptor AgonistsAgedFemaleHumansPyrimidinonesPyrrolidinesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAcetanilidesAdrenergic beta-3 Receptor AgonistsmirabegronN-(4-((5-(hydroxy(phenyl)methyl)pyrrolidin-2-yl)methyl)phenyl)-4-oxo-4,6,7,8-tetrahydropyrrolo(1,2-a)pyrimidine-6-carboxamidePyridinesPyrimidinonesPyrrolidinesThiazolesUrological Agents

Identifiers

PMID40198627
PMCPMC11977964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.