SynthesisMedicine2025
An updated meta-analysis of head-to-head trials comparing the efficacy, safety, and adherence of mirabegron and vibegron in overactive bladder.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancements in the Treatment and Management of Voiding Dysfunction in Individuals with Spina Bifida.Current urology reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis updated meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and treatment adherence of mirabegron and vibegron in patients with overactive bladder with head-to-head trials.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2016 to July 6, 2025. Comparative studies evaluating mirabegron versus vibegron were included. Study selection followed the PICOS framework, and quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Handbook for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-RCTs. Outcomes included changes in voiding diary parameters, urodynamic measures, overactive bladder symptom scores, adverse events, and treatment adherence. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.3.
resultsSix studies met the inclusion criteria. Vibegron was associated with a greater reduction in daily urgency episodes (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.37, P = .0006) and urinary urge incontinence (UUI) episodes (SMD = 0.33, P = .006) compared to mirabegron. However, no significant differences were found in other efficacy parameters or overall safety profiles. Vibegron demonstrated better adherence, with a higher continuation rate and lower discontinuation rate.
conclusionRecent data indicated that vibegron demonstrated superior efficacy in reducing urgency and UUI episodes while maintaining a safety profile comparable to mirabegron. Furthermore, vibegron is associated with improved treatment adherence. However, additional RCTs are necessary to confirm these findings.
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.