Challenges and lessons learned from a long-term postauthorisation safety study programme of rivaroxaban in Europe.

OBJECTIVES: To describe opportunities and challenges experienced from the four pharmacoepidemiological database studies included in the rivaroxaban post authorisation safety study (PASS) programme and propose ways to maximise the value of population-based observational research when addressing regulatory requirements. DESIGN: PASS programme of rivaroxaban carried out as part of the regulatory postapproval commitment to the European Medicines Agency. SETTING: Clinical practice in Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK (electronic health records)-undertaken by pharmacoepidemiology research teams using country-specific databases with different coding structures. PARTICIPANTS: 355 152 patients prescribed rivaroxaban and 338 199 patients prescribed vitamin K antagonists. RESULTS: Two major challenges that were encountered throughout the lengthy PASS programme were related to: (1) finalising country-tailored study designs before the extent of rivaroxaban uptake was known, and (2) new research questions that arose during the programme (eg, those relating to an evolving prescribing landscape). RECOMMENDATIONS: We advocate the following strategies to help address these major challenges (should they arise in any future PASS): conducting studies based on a common data model that enable the same analytical tools to be applied when using different databases; maintaining early, clear, continuous communication with the regulator (including discussing the potential benefit of studying drug use as a precursor to planning a safety study); consideration of adaptive designs whenever uncertainty exists and following an initial period of data collection; and setting milestones for the review of study objectives.

Benefits and risks of extended treatment of venous thromboembolism with rivaroxaban or with aspirin.

BACKGROUND: Full- or lower-dose anticoagulant therapy or aspirin can be used for extended therapy in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), but information on their relative benefit-risk profiles is limited. METHODS: Data from the EINSTEIN-CHOICE trial were used to compare the benefit-risk profiles of extended treatment with rivaroxaban (20 or 10 mg once daily) and aspirin (100 mg once daily) in VTE patients who had completed 6 to 12 months of anticoagulation therapy. One-year cumulative incidences of recurrent VTE and major bleeding were estimated and benefits and risks were calculated by determining the between group differences in a hypothetical population of 10,000 VTE patients treated for 1 year. FINDINGS: A total of 1107 patients were treated with 20 mg of rivaroxaban, 1127 with 10 mg of rivaroxaban, and 1131 with aspirin. The cumulative incidences of recurrent VTE in the rivaroxaban 20-mg, rivaroxaban 10-mg and aspirin groups were 1.9%, 1.6%, and 5.0%, respectively, whereas the cumulative incidences of major bleeding were 0.7%, 0.4% and 0.5%, respectively. The incidences of the combined outcome of recurrent VTE and major bleeding were 2.8% and 3.4% lower in the rivaroxaban 20-mg and 10-mg groups than in the aspirin group. For 10,000 patients treated for 1 year, there would be 284 (95% confidence interval [CI] 106 to 462) and 339 (95% CI 165 to 512) fewer events with rivaroxaban 20 mg or 10 mg than with aspirin. INTERPRETATION: Compared with aspirin, extended anticoagulation with once daily rivaroxaban reduces recurrent VTE with a favourable benefit-risk profile. FUNDING: Bayer AG.

Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism according to baseline risk factor profiles.

The optimal duration of anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE) is uncertain. In this prespecified analysis, we used data from 2 randomized trials, which compared once-daily rivaroxaban (20 mg or 10 mg) with aspirin (100 mg) or placebo for extended VTE treatment to estimate the risk of recurrence according to baseline risk factor profiles. Index VTE events were centrally classified as unprovoked, or provoked by major transient or persistent, or minor transient or persistent risk factors, and rates of recurrence at 1 year were calculated. A total of 2832 patients received rivaroxaban; 1131 received aspirin, and 590 received placebo. With unprovoked VTE, rates of recurrence in the 1173 patients given rivaroxaban, the 468 given aspirin, and the 243 given placebo were 2.0%, 5.9%, and 10.0%, respectively. There were no recurrences in patients with VTE provoked by major transient risk factors. With VTE provoked by minor persistent risk factors, recurrence rates in the 1184 patients given rivaroxaban, the 466 given aspirin, and the 248 given placebo were 2.4%, 4.5%, and 10.7%, respectively. For patients with minor transient risk factors, recurrence rates were 0.4% in the 268 patients given rivaroxaban, 4.2% in the 121 given aspirin, and 7.1% in the 56 given placebo. Recurrence rates in patients with VTE provoked by minor persistent or minor transient risk factors were not significantly lower than that with unprovoked VTE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-1.16; and HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.32-1.30, respectively). Therefore, such patients may also benefit from extended anticoagulation therapy.

Benefit-risk assessment of rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip or knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Venous thromboembolism is a common complication after major orthopedic surgery. When prescribing anticoagulant prophylaxis, clinicians weigh the benefits of thromboprophylaxis against bleeding risk and other adverse events. Previous benefit-risk analyses of the REgulation of Coagulation in ORthopaedic surgery to prevent Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (RECORD) randomized clinical studies of rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin after total hip (THA) or knee (TKA) arthroplasty generally used pooled THA and TKA results, counted fatal bleeding as both an efficacy and a safety event, and included the active and placebo-controlled portions of RECORD2, which might confound benefit-risk assessments. We conducted a post hoc analysis without these constraints to assess benefit-risk for rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin in the RECORD studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from the safety population of the two THA and two TKA studies were pooled separately. The primary analysis compared the temporal course of event rates and rate differences between rivaroxaban and enoxaparin prophylaxis for symptomatic venous thromboembolism plus all-cause mortality (efficacy events) versus nonfatal major bleeding (safety events). Additionally, these rates were used to derive measures of net clinical benefit, number needed to treat (NNT), and number needed to harm (NNH) for these two end points. RESULTS: After THA or TKA, and compared with enoxaparin, rivaroxaban therapy resulted in more efficacy events prevented than safety events caused, with benefits exceeding harms early and throughout treatment and follow-up. Relative to enoxaparin, rivaroxaban treatment prevented six efficacy events per harm event caused for THA, with NNT =262/NNH =1,711. For TKA, rivaroxaban treatment prevented four to five efficacy events per harm event caused, with NNT =102/NNH =442. Sensitivity analysis that included surgical-site bleeding resulted in NNH =345 for THA and NNH =208 for TKA. CONCLUSION: In the RECORD studies, considering death, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, and major bleeding, rivaroxaban resulted in greater benefits than harms compared with enoxaparin. When incorporating surgical-site bleeding, rivaroxaban also results in greater benefit than harm for TKA and is balanced with enoxaparin for THA.

Allogeneic blood transfusions and postoperative infections after total hip or knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Up to 70% of patients who undergo total hip or total knee arthroplasty receive blood transfusions. Using data from more than 12,000 patients assessed in the Phase-III RECORD (Regulation of Coagulation in Orthopedic Surgery to Prevent Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism) studies, we investigated whether allogeneic blood transfusion increases the risk of postoperative infection compared with autologous blood transfusion or no transfusion. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of the pooled RECORD data stratified patients into three groups according to the type of blood transfusion that they received: no transfusion (n = 6313), autologous blood transfusion (n = 1902), and allogeneic blood transfusion with or without autologous blood transfusion (n = 3962). The types of postoperative infection were recorded and included lower or upper respiratory tract and lung infection, bone and joint infection, wound inflammation or infection, urinary tract infection, and other infections. RESULTS: The rates of infection in patients receiving no transfusion or autologous blood transfusion were similar; therefore, data from these two groups were combined. The rate of any infection was 9.9% (392 of 3962) in patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion and 7.9% (646 of 8215) in patients not receiving allogeneic blood transfusion with or without autologous blood transfusion (p = 0.003). The rates of lower or upper respiratory tract and lung infection (2.1% [eighty-five of 3962] versus 1.3% [109 of 8215]; p = 0.002) and of wound inflammation or infection (2.4% [ninety-four of 3962] versus 1.7% [138 of 8215]; p = 0.046) were significantly higher in patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion compared with patients not receiving allogeneic blood transfusion. When comparing patients who had received allogeneic blood transfusion with those who had not received allogeneic blood transfusion, the rates of bone and joint infection (0.4% [fourteen of 3962] versus 0.2% [eighteen of 8215]; p = 0.056), of urinary tract infection (3.1% [123 of 3962] versus 2.5% [209 of 8215]; p = 0.551), and of other infections (3.0% [120 of 3962] versus 2.7% [225 of 8215]; p = 0.308) were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of any infection, lower or upper respiratory tract and lung infection, and wound inflammation or infection were significantly increased after elective total hip or total knee arthroplasty in patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion compared with those receiving autologous blood transfusion or no blood transfusion.

Complication rates after hip or knee arthroplasty in morbidly obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Morbid obesity has been shown to be a risk factor for increased complications after THA and TKA; however, large studies that would determine the effect size are lacking. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were to determine whether morbid obesity increased the risk of: (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE), (2) bleeding, (3) other adverse events, and (4) infections during the early postoperative period (up to 6 to 8 weeks) after THA or TKA? METHODS: Data from the REgulation of Coagulation in ORthopaedic surgery to prevent Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (RECORD) clinical trial program of rivaroxaban for prevention of VTE after THA or TKA were analyzed retrospectively. Data for 12,355 patients were reviewed to identify complication rates in morbidly obese patients (BMI≥40 kg/m2) compared with patients with a BMI less than 40 kg/m2. Explorative analyses compared the rates of asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), symptomatic DVT, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, bleeding, and other adverse events by BMI group. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in asymptomatic DVT, symptomatic DVT, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, or bleeding, but there were increases in other adverse events (including receipt of blood transfusion, erythema, peripheral edema, diarrhea, gastrointestinal or abdominal pain) and infections (including respiratory tract or lung infections, wound inflammation or infection, and extrasurgical-site infections), in patients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater compared with patients with a BMI less than 40 kg/m2. CONCLUSIONS: After THA or TKA, morbid obesity is not associated with an increased risk of VTE or bleeding but is associated with increased early postoperative complications, including erythema, peripheral edema, diarrhea and gastrointestinal or abdominal pain, wound inflammation or infection, extrasurgical-site infections, and respiratory tract or lung infections. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Concomitant use of medication with antiplatelet effects in patients receiving either rivaroxaban or enoxaparin after total hip or knee arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: The RECORD programme compared oral rivaroxaban with enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective total hip or knee replacement. This analysis compared the safety of concomitant use of specified medications with rivaroxaban and enoxaparin by evaluating postoperative bleeding rates from the pooled RECORD1-4 data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The co-medications were non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and platelet function inhibitors, including acetylsalicylic acid (no dose restriction). The endpoints evaluated were the composite of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding and any bleeding occurring after first oral study drug intake. The time relative to surgery was stratified into three time periods: day 1-3, day 4-7 and after day 7. Relative bleeding rate ratios for co-medication use versus non-use were derived using stratified Mantel-Haenszel methods and compared between rivaroxaban and enoxaparin groups. RESULTS: Co-medication use with rivaroxaban or enoxaparin resulted in non-significant increases in bleeding events. Respective rate ratios were not significantly different between rivaroxaban and enoxaparin for all bleeding endpoints with concomitant use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (any bleeding, 1.22 vs 1.22; major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding, 1.28 vs 0.90) and with concomitant use of platelet function inhibitors/acetylsalicylic acid (any bleeding, 1.32 vs 1.40; major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding, 1.11 vs 1.13). CONCLUSIONS: This explorative analysis indicates that there is no significant increase in bleeding risk for rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin when co-administered with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetylsalicylic acid, although, because of low usage, the experience with platelet function inhibitors (except acetylsalicylic acid) was limited.

Stress-induced hyperglycaemia and venous thromboembolism following total hip or total knee arthroplasty: analysis from the RECORD trials.

Stress-induced hyperglycaemia is common during orthopaedic surgery. In addition, hyperglycaemia activates coagulation. The aim of the study was to assess whether stress-induced hyperglycaemia is associated with symptomatic or asymptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) following orthopaedic surgery. We performed post-hoc analyses in the four RECORD studies (REgulation of Coagulation in major Orthopaedic surgery reducing the Risk of Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism). Separate analyses were performed for patients undergoing elective total hip or knee replacement. Outcome measures were symptomatic VTE and "total VTE" (defined as the composite of symptomatic VTE, asymptomatic DVT assessed by per protocol venography and all cause mortality). Glucose levels were measured pre-op and 6 hours post-op, categorised into quartiles, based on the distribution in the respective cohorts. The influence of glucose, adjusted for body mass index, age, gender and diabetes mellitus on VTE was assessed by logistic regression analyses. A total of 12,383 patients were eligible for assessment of symptomatic VTE, and 8,512 patients were eligible for assessment of total VTE. Increased glucose levels after total hip replacement were associated with total VTE; adjusted odds ratio (OR) highest versus lowest quartile 1.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3 to 3.0). Furthermore, increase in glucose levels during total hip replacement was associated with total VTE (OR highest versus lowest quartile 1.8 (95%CI 1.2 to 2.8). This was not observed in patients undergoing total knee replacement, probably due to differences in the applied surgical procedures.

Rivaroxaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip or knee arthroplasty. Pooled analysis of four studies.

Four phase III studies compared oral rivaroxaban with subcutaneous enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA or TKA). A pooled analysis of these studies compared the effect of rivaroxaban with enoxaparin on symptomatic VTE plus all-cause mortality and bleeding events, and determined whether these effects were consistent in patient subgroups. Patients (N=12,729) aged ≥18 years and scheduled for elective THA or TKA received rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily or enoxaparin 40 mg once daily or 30 mg every 12 hours. The composite of symptomatic VTE and all-cause mortality, the prespecified primary efficacy endpoint and adjudicated bleeding events were analysed in the day 12± 2 active treatment pool. Subgroup analyses of these outcomes were performed over the total treatment period. In the day 12± 2 pool, the primary efficacy endpoint occurred in 29/6,183 patients receiving rivaroxaban (0.5%) versus 60/6,200 patients receiving enoxaparin (1.0%; p=0.001). Major bleeding occurred in 21 (0.3%) versus 13(0.2%) patients, p=0.23; major plus non-major clinically relevant bleeding in 176(2.8%) versus 152 (2.5%) patients, p=0.19; and any bleeding in 409 (6.6%) versus 384 (6.2%) patients, p=0.38, respectively. The reduction of symptomatic VTE plus all-cause mortality was consistent across prespecified subgroups (age, gender, body weight, creatinine clearance) in the total treatment period. Compared with enoxaparin regimens, rivaroxaban reduces the composite of symptomatic VTE and all-cause mortality after elective THA or TKA, with a small increase in bleeding, no signs of compromised liver safety and fewer serious adverse events.

Rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis after orthopaedic surgery: pooled analysis of two studies.

Rivaroxaban (BAY 59-7939) is an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor in clinical development for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This analysis of pooled results from two phase II studies of rivaroxaban for VTE prevention after major orthopaedic surgery aimed to strengthen the conclusions of the individual studies. One study was conducted in patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR; N = 722), and one in patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR; N = 621). In both studies, patients were randomized, doubleblind, to oral, twice-daily (bid) rivaroxaban beginning after surgery, or subcutaneous enoxaparin (40 mg once daily beginning before THR, and 30 mg bid beginning after TKR). Treatment continued until mandatory bilateral venography was performed 5-9 days after surgery. Total VTE (deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and all-cause mortality) occurred in 16.1-24.4% of per-protocol patients receiving rivaroxaban 5-60 mg, and 27.8% receiving enoxaparin (n = 914). There was a flat dose response relationship between rivaroxaban and total VTE (p = 0.39). Major bleeding (safety population, n = 1,317) increased dose-dependently with rivaroxaban (p < 0.001), occurring in 0.9%, 1.3%, 2.1%, 3.9%, and 7.0% of patients receiving rivaroxaban total daily doses of 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 mg, respectively, versus 1.7% of patients receiving enoxaparin. No routine coagulation monitoring was performed, and there were no significant differences between dose response relationships with rivaroxaban after THR and TKR. Overall, rivaroxaban total daily doses of 5-20 mg had the most favorable balance of efficacy and safety, relative to enoxaparin, for the prevention of VTE after major orthopaedic surgery.

The COUPLES-project: a pooled analysis of patient and partner treatment satisfaction scale (TSS) outcomes following vardenafil treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of vardenafil on treatment satisfaction in men with erectile dysfunction (ED) and their female partners. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a pooled analysis of three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week studies of flexible-dose vardenafil vs placebo, in men with ED for >/=6 months (n = 788) and their untreated female partners. Measures of efficacy included the Treatment Satisfaction Scale (TSS), International Index of Erectile Function, Erectile Function domain (IIEF-EF), and Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) questions 2 and 3 (SEP-2, 'Were you able to insert your penis into your partner's vagina?'; and SEP-3, 'Did your erection last long enough for you to have sexual intercourse?'). In addition to the overall analysis, there was a subgroup analysis for potential moderators of response, e.g. whether patients who had undergone previous phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE-5) treatment. RESULTS: At baseline, least-squares (LS) mean scores for all TSS domains were similar in the vardenafil and placebo groups. After 12 weeks of treatment, vardenafil significantly improved the LS mean score for all domains compared with placebo, among both patients and their female partners (P < 0.0001, 'last'-observation-carried- forward analysis). Absolute between- group differences in LS mean TSS scores (vardenafil - placebo) were: ease of erection (patients 23.4, partners 24.9), erectile function satisfaction (36.7 and 32.9), pleasure from sexual activity (23.0, 23.7), satisfaction with orgasm (27.6, 21.8), confidence to complete sexual activity (28.2, 32.5), and satisfaction with medication (37.4, 35.6). The benefits of vardenafil were greater in men who had undergone previous PDE-5-inhibitor treatment and men aged <45 years, while the overall pattern of benefit was similar in all examined subgroups. There were significant benefits with vardenafil in all other variables (IIEF-EF scores and positive response rates to SEP-2 and SEP-3). CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil significantly improved treatment satisfaction in men with ED, and in their partners. The results provide further evidence of the validity of the TSS.

Vardenafil restores erectile function to normal range in men with erectile dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: The ability of oral phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor therapy to restore erectile function to normal is an important attribute to men with erectile dysfunction (ED). AIM: To assess the ability of vardenafil to restore normal erectile function in men with general ED. METHODS: In two fixed-dose, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pivotal studies, patients received vardenafil (5, 10, or 20 mg) or placebo for 12/26 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: In this retrospective analysis, the percentage of patients "returning to normal" erectile function at week 12 (as defined by scores > or =26 on erectile function domain of International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF-EF]) was determined, with further stratification by baseline ED severity, etiology, age, and duration of ED. RESULTS: Vardenafil 5, 10, and 20 mg returned 32%, 43%, and 49% of patients, respectively, to normal erectile function after 12 weeks, compared with 10% of patients receiving placebo (P < 0.0001). Return to normal IIEF-EF domain scores was noted irrespective of severity, etiology, age, and duration of ED, and was observed even in challenging-to-treat subgroups. With vardenafil 20 mg, 39% of men with severe ED at baseline, 45-49% of men with ED of mixed or organic etiology, 35% of men aged > or =65 years, and 43% of men with ED of > or =3 years of duration returned to normal erectile function at week 12. Mean per-patient SEP3 (question 3 on the Sexual Encounter Profile) success rates in patients achieving IIEF-EF domain scores > or =26 ranged from 87% to 95%. CONCLUSION: Vardenafil improves the IIEF-EF domain score to the normal range in a substantial proportion of men with ED.

Vardenafil in patients with erectile dysfunction: achieving treatment optimization.

This post hoc analysis of data from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study determined how many attempts were needed to record at least 1 successful penetration and maintenance of erection long enough for successful intercourse in a broad population of men with erectile dysfunction taking vardenafil at 5, 10, or 20 mg or placebo. The cumulative probability of achieving successful penetration and of maintaining an erection increased with the number of attempts for all 3 vardenafil groups. For the first attempt, the probability of achieving successful penetration was higher in all 3 vardenafil groups compared with placebo; 67% in the 5-mg vardenafil group, 77% in the 10-mg vardenafil group, and 74% in the 20-mg vardenafil group compared with 46% for placebo. By the third attempt, the probability of at least 1 success was 82% for 5, 88% for 10, and 85% for 20 mg vardenafil compared with 68% for placebo. The probability of maintaining an erection long enough to complete intercourse at the first attempt was 51% for 5, 69% for 10, and 61% for 20 mg vardenafil compared with 28% for the placebo group. By the third attempt, the probability of maintaining an erection was 66% for 5, 81% for 10, and 77% for 20 mg vardenafil in contrast to 53% for placebo. The results of this analysis indicate that patients without initial treatment success should continue treatment or increase the dose because the cumulative probability of success increases with additional attempts with vardenafil, with a plateau at about the fourth dose.

Penetration and maintenance of erection with vardenafil: a time-from-dosing analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess success rates in ability to penetrate (Sexual Encounter Profile question 2 [SEP2]) and maintain erections to completion of intercourse (SEP3) from time of dosing to start of sexual activity in a retrospective analysis of two pivotal trials. METHODS: In two randomized, double-blind studies, men with ED for > 6 months received vardenafil 5 mg, 10 mg, or 20 mg or placebo for 12-26 weeks. Patients were instructed to start sexual activity 1 hour after dosing. In this retrospective pooled analysis, patient diary questions through week 12 were analyzed, providing attempt data was recorded 0-12 hours post-dose. Mean per-patient SEP2 and SEP3 success rates (intent-to-treat population) were calculated by time between dosing and start of sexual activity, from 0-12 hours through week 12. Least-square means and nominal p-values for differences versus placebo were derived by analysis of covariance with terms for baseline, study and treatment. RESULTS: Most attempts at sexual intercourse occurred 30-90 minutes after dosing: 88%-93% of attempts occurred within 120 minutes. SEP2 success rates in patients choosing to attempt sexual activity in each interval from < or = 15 minutes through the 4-8-hour interval were higher with vardenafil compared with placebo, while SEP3 success rates were greater with vardenafil for patients choosing to initiate sexual activity from < or = 15 min through the 8-12-hour interval. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events in patients receiving vardenafil included headache (11%-22%), flushing (6%-13%), rhinitis (5%-13%), and dyspepsia (2%-7%). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective analysis of two pivotal trials, vardenafil improved success rates compared with placebo in ED patients who attempted intercourse from as early as 15 minutes or less and through 4-8 hours after dosing in ability to penetrate (SEP2) and from as early as 15 minutes or less and through 8-12 hours after dosing in maintenance of erection (SEP3).

Vardenafil is effective and well-tolerated for treating erectile dysfunction in a broad population of men, irrespective of age.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of vardenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) in men of different age groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective pooled subgroup analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, men from the general population with ED received either placebo or vardenafil 5, 10 or 20 mg over 12 weeks. Efficacy variables included the erectile function (EF) domain score from The International Index of Erectile Function, diary response rates to questions on vaginal penetration and maintenance of erection, and positive responses to the Global Assessment Question (GAQ) "Has the treatment you have been taking over the past 4 weeks improved your erections?'. The 1385 men were grouped by age (< 45, 45-64 and > or =65 years). RESULTS: At 12 weeks the EF domain scores approached 20 with vardenafil and 14 with placebo in men aged > or = 65 years (P < 0.03 vardenafil 5 mg vs placebo, P < 0.001 vardenafil 10 and 20 mg vs placebo). The corresponding scores were 22 and 14 in men aged 45-64 years and up to 24 and 16 in those aged <45 years (P < 0.03 vardenafil 5 mg vs placebo, P < 0.001 vardenafil 10 and 20 mg vs placebo). Vardenafil generated positive GAQ responses in approximately 71%, 76% and 85% of men aged <45, 45-64 and > or = 65 years (P < or = 0.001 vardenafil vs placebo). The corresponding placebo rates were 23%, 25% and 34%. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache, rhinitis, flushing and dyspepsia, which were mild to moderate, transient and unrelated to age. CONCLUSION: Vardenafil is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for ED, irrespective of age.

Vardenafil provides reliable efficacy over time in men with erectile dysfunction.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reliability of vardenafil efficacy and tolerability within 12 weeks in a broad population of men with erectile dysfunction (ED). METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of two pivotal, Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials conducted in 107 centers, 1650 men aged 18 years or older with ED received vardenafil 5 mg, 10 mg, or 20 mg on demand for 12 to 26 weeks. Outcome measures included the first-time and subsequent overall success rate until week 12 for diary entries regarding vaginal penetration (Sexual Encounter Profile [SEP]-2), erection maintenance (SEP-3), satisfaction with erection hardness, and overall satisfaction with the sexual experience. Mean efficacy was calculated for each patient during 12 weeks and then averaged for all patients within each treatment group. RESULTS: At baseline, the intention-to-treat population had moderate ED (International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function domain score of 13). For SEP-2 (penetration), the first-attempt and subsequent success rate was 44% and 74% for placebo, 71% and 81% for vardenafil 5 mg, 76% and 86% for vardenafil 10 mg, and 76% and 91% for vardenafil 20 mg, respectively. For SEP-3 (maintenance), first-attempt and subsequent success rate was 25% and 56% for placebo, 51% and 76% for vardenafil 5 mg, 65% and 76% for vardenafil 10 mg, and 59% and 84% for vardenafil 20 mg, respectively. For overall satisfaction with the sexual experience, the first-attempt and subsequent success rate was 19% and 48% for placebo, 48% and 68% for vardenafil 5 mg, 57% and 72% for vardenafil 10 mg, and 56% and 79% for vardenafil 20 mg, respectively. The reliability of vardenafil was similar or slightly greater in sildenafil-naive subjects compared with prior sildenafil responders. The most common adverse events were mild-to-moderate headache, flushing, and rhinitis. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil provides reliable efficacy for key erectile function parameters important to patients when continuing oral treatment for ED.

Vardenafil improves erectile function in men with erectile dysfunction irrespective of disease severity and disease classification.

BACKGROUND: Vardenafil (Levitra) is a potent and selective phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitor used in the management of erectile dysfunction (ED). This retrospective subgroup analysis assessed the effectiveness of vardenafil treatment in men with ED of different baseline severity and disease classification. METHODS: Data from two pivotal, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials enrolling men from the general ED population who received placebo or vardenafil 5 mg, 10 mg, or 20 mg during a 12-week treatment period were retrospectively analysed, stratifying by psychogenic, organic, and mixed ED disease classification as determined by the investigator. Efficacy endpoints included the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-Erectile Function (EF) domain score, per-patient diary response rates to questions on penile insertion [Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP-2)] and maintenance of erection (SEP-3) and rates of positive response to the Global Assessment Question (GAQ). RESULTS: Data from 1,385 men who received at least one dose of study medication and had pre- and post-baseline measures of efficacy available (intent-to-treat population) are presented. At baseline 37-41% of patients had severe ED, 30-34% moderate, 22% mild-to-moderate and 6-8% mild ED. At baseline, 46-51% of patients were considered to have an organic cause for ED, 13-16% psychogenic ED, and 36-38% mixed classification of ED. For all classifications and for mild-to-moderate to severe ED, men treated with 10 or 20 mg of vardenafil showed statistically and clinically significant improvements (P < 0.001) in IIEF-EF scores, diary response rates to the SEP-2 and SEP-3 questions, and GAQ as compared with those given placebo. The greatest improvements relative to placebo were noted in patients with more severe ED. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache, flushing, rhinitis, dyspepsia, and were dose-related, mostly mild to moderate in intensity and consistent with the class. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil improves EF in men with ED irrespective of investigator-determined classification and baseline ED severity.