ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical study was performed on the efficacy and tolerability of IncobotulinumtoxinA (Incobot/A) vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA (OnabotA) intradetrusor injections in patients with refractory neurogenic detrusor overactivity incontinence performing intermittent catheterization. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) or multiple sclerosis were randomized to receive 30 intradetrusor injections of Incobot/A or OnabotA 200 U; 28 patients in incobotulinumtoxinA group and 29 in onabotulinumtoxinA group completed the study. Primary outcome measure was the non-inferior variation from baseline in daily urinary incontinence episodes (week 12), with a non-inferiority margin of one episode/day. Secondary outcomes measures were changes in Incontinence- Quality of Life questionnaire, Visual Analog Scale Score (bother of symptoms on Quality of Life), urodynamic parameters, occurrence of adverse effects and related costs (week 12). RESULTS: At week 12, mean value of difference in urinary incontinence episodes/day between the two groups was -0.2 (95% two-sided CI: -1; 0.7); the difference in incontinence episodes/day between the two groups was -0.4 with a higher limit of one-sided 95% CI of 0.2 episodes/day which was much lower than the non-inferiority margin of one episode/day. Total score and subscores of Incontinence- Quality of Life questionnaire, Visual Analog Scale scores and urodynamics did not show differences between the two groups. Adverse effects were similar for both treatments, with urinary tract infection being the most frequent, localised effect. Minor costs were observed following Incobot/A. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with refractory neurogenic incontinence due to SCI or multiple sclerosis, incobotulinumtoxinA was not inferior to onabotulinumtoxinA in improving clinical and urodynamic findings in the short-term follow-up, with comparable adverse effects but minor costs.