Men's Sexual Health Questionnaire score changes vs spontaneous sexual adverse event reporting in men treated with dutasteride/tamsulosin combination therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: A post hoc analysis of a prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled study.

AIM: To assess the impact of baseline characteristics on Men's Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ) total scores and to evaluate the clinical relevance of MSHQ changes and their association with spontaneously reported sexual adverse events (SexAEs) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the Phase 4 FDC116115 study, in which patients aged ≥50 years were randomised 1:1 to receive a fixed-dose combination of dutasteride 0.5 mg and tamsulosin 0.4 mg (DUT-TAM FDC), or placebo. End-points included: change in MSHQ total scores by baseline characteristics and SexAEs; cumulative distribution function for change from baseline to month 12 in MSHQ total score and the ejaculation, erection, satisfaction and sexual desire (libido) domain scores; and relationship between changes in MSHQ scores and SexAEs. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 489 patients (DUT-TAM FDC, n = 243; placebo, n = 246). The mean reduction in total MSHQ score was greater in patients with SexAEs across both groups, compared with patients without SexAEs. Most patients reporting any SexAE (86% DUT-TAM FDC, 67% placebo) had a worsening of the MSHQ total score at month 12 compared with baseline. Specifically, 90% (DUT-TAM FDC) and 75% (placebo) of patients reporting an ejaculation SexAE and 73% (DUT-TAM FDC) and 87% (placebo) of patients reporting an erection SexAE had a worsening of MSHQ ejaculation and erection domain scores, respectively, at month 12. A threshold effect for incident SexAE was observed; patients showing a decrease of approximately 6-10 points in the total MSHQ score were more likely to report SexAEs. CONCLUSION: Findings support the clinical utility of the MSHQ tool in assessing the impact of DUT-TAM on sexual function by linking numerical changes in MSHQ scores to spontaneously reported SexAEs for the first time. The threshold effect for incidence of SexAEs warrants further investigation to determine its clinical relevance.

PANCREATIC SAFETY IN STUDIES OF THE GLUCAGON-LIKE PEPTIDE-1 RECEPTOR AGONIST ALBIGLUTIDE.

Objective: Albiglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), reduces glycated hemoglobin with a low risk of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. The relationship between GLP-1RAs and risk of pancreatitis is unresolved. This independent, rigorous, expert review of the albiglutide HARMONY Phase III clinical program examined suspected cases of acute pancreatitis. Methods: An independent pancreatitis adjudication committee (PAC), composed of physicians with expertise in gastroenterology and pancreatic disease, was prospectively established to review cases of suspected acute pancreatitis in the HARMONY studies. Results: Patients treated in Phase III trials with albiglutide (n = 2,365), or active or placebo comparators (n = 2,530), averaged 56 years of age with a mean 8.3-year diabetes duration. Across the 8 studies, the PAC reviewed potential cases of treatment-emergent acute pancreatitis in 43 patients. Definite or probable acute pancreatitis was adjudicated for 11 patients (8 albiglutide; 3 active comparators). Most of these were considered by the PAC to be at least possibly related to study treatment (6 of 8 albiglutide cases and 2 of 3 active comparator cases). Both cases in the active comparator group adjudicated as definite or probable pancreatitis with at least a possible relationship to study treatment were in patients treated with a GLP-1RA. The frequency of pancreatitis was higher among patients treated with albiglutide (6/2,365, 0.3%) than with placebo (0/486, 0%) or active comparators (2/2,062, 0.08%). Conclusion: In the HARMONY Phase III program, adjudicated cases of acute pancreatitis were uncommon. However, within the limitations of available data, the incidence of acute pancreatitis with albiglutide appears to be within the range described for other studies of GLP-1RAs. Abbreviations: AE = adverse event; CI = confidence interval; DPP-4 = dipeptidyl peptidase-4; GLP-1 = glucagon-like peptide-1; GLP-1RA = glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist; MH-OR = Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio; OR = odds ratio; PAC = pancreatitis adjudication committee; SAE = serious adverse event; ULN = upper limit of normal.

Evaluation of the impact of dutasteride/tamsulosin combination therapy on libido in sexually active men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): A post hoc analysis of a prospective randomised placebo-controlled study.

AIMS: Five-α reductase inhibitor (5ARI) therapy has been associated with sexual dysfunction in some patients. This study assessed the impact of a fixed-dose combination of the 5ARI dutasteride 0.5 mg and the α1 -adrenoceptor antagonist tamsulosin 0.4 mg (DUT-TAM FDC) on Men's Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ) domain scores in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study in sexually active patients, aged ≥50 years, with a confirmed clinical diagnosis of BPH. Sexual activity, sexual desire, and bother domain scores of the MSHQ were assessed at baseline and at Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12. Correlation between MSHQ sexual activity/desire scores and ejaculation, erection, and satisfaction domains at baseline was also evaluated. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population (N = 489), 243 and 246 patients were randomised to DUT-TAM FDC and placebo groups, respectively. Compared with placebo, DUT-TAM FDC therapy resulted in statistically significant reductions (worsening) from baseline in adjusted mean MSHQ sexual activity and bother domain scores at Months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 (all P < 0.05) and in adjusted mean MSHQ sexual desire domain scores at Months 6, 9, and 12 (all P < 0.05). Significant moderate correlations in the expected direction were observed at baseline between the sexual activity/desire domains and the ejaculation, erection, and satisfaction domains (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings help clarify the degree and impact of libido changes in sexually active men treated with DUT-TAM FDC and may support clinical decision-making.

A prospective randomised placebo-controlled study of the impact of dutasteride/tamsulosin combination therapy on sexual function domains in sexually active men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess the impact of the fixed-dose combination (FDC) of the 5α-reductase inhibitor (5ARI), dutasteride 0.5 mg and the α1 -adrenoceptor antagonist, tamsulosin 0.4 mg (DUT-TAM FDC) therapy on sexual function domain scores in sexually active men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), using the Men's Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This European and Australian double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted at 51 centres. INCLUSION CRITERIA: age ≥50 years, International Prostate Symptom Score ≥12, prostate volume ≥30 cc, prostate-specific antigen 1.5-10 ng/mL. Patients were randomised 1:1 to DUT-TAM FDC therapy or placebo for 12 months. The change from baseline to Month 12 on the total MSHQ (primary endpoint) and MSHQ erection, ejaculation and satisfaction domains (secondary outcome) was assessed, using a mixed model repeated measures analysis. Safety was evaluated. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 489 patients (243 DUT-TAM FDC therapy; 246 placebo). A significant decrease (worsening) was observed with DUT-TAM FDC therapy versus placebo on the total MSHQ score (-8.7 vs -0.7; standard error [se]: 0.81, 0.78; P < 0.001), and the ejaculation (-7.5 vs -0.6; se: 0.56, 0.55; P < 0.001) and satisfaction (-0.6 vs +0.3; se: 0.3, 0.29, P = 0.047) domains, but not the erection domain (-1.0 vs -0.5; se: 0.19, 0.19, P = 0.091). CONCLUSION: This is the first domain-specific quantitative evaluation of DUT-TAM FDC therapy on sexual function in men with LUTS secondary to BPH. The observed changes in the MSHQ with DUT-TAM FDC therapy were mainly driven by changes in the ejaculation domain. These findings will help give context to erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction AEs reported spontaneously in earlier 5ARI studies.

Albiglutide efficacy and safety in the Latino/Hispanic subpopulation for the integrated phase III program.

OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of albiglutide compared with placebo and active comparators from an integrated trial subpopulation of Latino/Hispanic patients whose type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) was inadequately controlled on their current regimen of diet and exercise, with or without oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) and/or insulin. METHODS: Latino/Hispanic patient subpopulations (N = 1204) across 7 phase III albiglutide studies (N = 4400) were evaluated post-hoc for efficacy and safety. Comparators were placebo, sulfonylureas, insulin, thiazolidinediones, and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Glycatedhemoglobin (HbA1c) change from baseline to the time of the primary endpoint assessment (from 26 to 104 weeks) was evaluated in patients on diet and exercise and/or OADs, with or without insulin. Patients were allowed to continue in the study if hyperglycemic rescue was required, according to a prespecified algorithm and at the discretion of the investigator. RESULTS: At baseline in the Latino/Hispanic subpopulation, the mean HbA1c was 8.3%, mean age was 53 years, mean body mass index was 32 kg/m2, and mean duration of T2DM was 8.0 years. The primary endpoint of mean HbA1c difference (albiglutide - placebo) was -0.94% for the Latino/Hispanic subpopulation and -0.86% (p < 0.001) for the overall phase III population. Changes in fasting plasma glucose mirrored those of HbA1c. Weight loss with albiglutide was numerically greater than with OADs and insulin in both populations, but it was smaller than with liraglutide. Within the Latino/Hispanic subpopulation, more injection-site reactions were reported with albiglutide vs all comparators, while gastrointestinal and hypoglycemic adverse events were comparable between the two groups, and the latter was uncommon when used without insulin and/or a sulfonylurea. CONCLUSIONS: In the Latino/Hispanic population, albiglutide resulted in effective lowering of glucose and modest weight loss, and it was generally well tolerated.

Weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist albiglutide as monotherapy improves glycemic parameters in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The present phase 3, randomized, double-blind 24-week study with extension to 1 year assessed the efficacy and safety of albiglutide compared with placebo in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by diet and exercise with or without a single oral antidiabetic drug. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received weekly albiglutide 30 mg (n = 160), albiglutide 50 mg (n = 150) or a placebo switched to albiglutide 30 mg after 24 weeks (n = 77). Open-label daily liraglutide 0.9 mg (n = 103) was included as a reference. Oral antidiabetic drug use was discontinued before baseline. The primary end-point was 24-week change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary end-points included fasting plasma glucose, bodyweight and adverse events. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, mean HbA1c changes from baseline were -1.10, -1.30, and 0.25% for albiglutide 30, 50 mg and placebo, respectively (P vs placebo <0.0001 for both albiglutide doses), -1.19% for liraglutide. Decreases in HbA1c with albiglutide were sustained through the study. Mean fasting plasma glucose decreased by ≥20 mg/dL, and the mean change in bodyweight was ≤0.5 kg through 1 year across groups. Most commonly reported adverse events were nasopharyngitis, constipation and nausea. The incidence of adverse events was higher in active treatment groups than in the placebo group. Few hypoglycemia events were reported; no patient withdrew as a result of hypoglycemia. No new safety signals were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Albiglutide monotherapy achieved clinically significant decreases in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose with good tolerability in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by diet and exercise with or without a single oral antidiabetic drug.

Albiglutide, a weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist, improves glycemic parameters in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes over 1 year when added to single oral antidiabetic drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of once weekly albiglutide added to a single oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) in Japanese patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this phase 3, 1 year study (NCT01777282), patients (N = 374) received albiglutide 30 mg plus a single OAD (sulfonylurea [n = 120], biguanide [n = 67)], glinide [n = 65], thiazolidinedione [n = 61], or α-glucosidase inhibitor [n = 61]). Albiglutide could be increased to 50 mg after Week 4, based on glycemic criteria. Primary endpoints were the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and hypoglycemia; secondary endpoints were changes from baseline at Week 52 in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG), proportion of patients achieving HbA1c ≤7.0%, and withdrawals due to hyperglycemia. RESULTS: On-therapy AEs occurred in 78.6% of patients and serious AEs in 2.1%. Common AEs were nasopharyngitis (32.6%), constipation (7.2%), and diabetic retinopathy (5.3%). No serious AEs occurred more than once or were reported in >1 patient. Hypoglycemia occurred in 6.4% of patients, mostly in the albiglutide + sulfonylurea (14.2%) and the albiglutide + glinide (6.2%) groups. Albiglutide was uptitrated in 53.2% of patients. Mean baseline HbA1c was 8.1%. Mean decreases from baseline in HbA1c were observed with the addition of albiglutide to thiazolidinediones (-1.42%), α-glucosidase inhibitors (-1.39%), sulfonylureas (-1.04%), glinides (-0.95%), and biguanides (-0.94%). HbA1c of <7% in >50% of patients and mean reductions in FPG were achieved in all groups. Mean changes from baseline in body weight ranged from +0.52 kg (albiglutide + thiazolidinedione) to -0.33 kg (albiglutide + biguanide). Limitations of the study included open label treatment that was not randomized. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with a single OAD in Japanese patients with inadequately controlled T2DM, albiglutide led to favorable changes in all glycemic parameters, with minor changes in body weight depending on the background OAD. No new safety concerns were noted.

Impact of dutasteride on nocturia in men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH): a pooled analysis of three phase III studies.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of dutasteride compared with placebo on nocturia in men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia, using pooled data from dutasteride phase III studies. METHODS: Nocturia was assessed using Question 7 of the International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaire. Efficacy measures included: mean change in nocturia at 24 months; proportion of patients with improvement/worsening in nocturia; nocturnal voiding frequency at baseline and study end, overall and by baseline subgroups; and nocturnal voiding frequency <2 at study end in patients with baseline score ≥ 2. RESULTS: In total, 4,321 patients with a mean age of 66 years were evaluated. From month 12 onwards, mean nocturia improvements were significantly superior with dutasteride than with placebo (p ≤ 0.05). Reduction in nocturia was significantly better with dutasteride than with placebo across all baseline subgroups tested (p ≤ 0.05). Also at month 24, dutasteride therapy resulted in a greater proportion of subjects with nocturia improvement compared with placebo (p ≤ 0.05), with the largest treatment group differences in subjects with a baseline nocturia score of 2 or 3. Among patients with significant nocturia at baseline (score ≥ 2), significantly more subjects with dutasteride versus placebo had a score <2 at month 24 (26 vs. 19 %, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After 24 months of treatment, dutasteride treatment provided significantly greater improvements in nocturia, and less worsening, compared with placebo, primarily in subjects with two or three nocturia episodes per night. Studies specifically designed to assess nocturia are required to prospectively confirm these findings.

Modeling and analysis of Gleason score 8-10 prostate cancers in the REDUCE study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore explanations for the numerical imbalance of biopsy-detected Gleason 8-10 prostate cancers (PCa) diagnosed in years 3-4 in the dutasteride and placebo groups of the Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) study. METHODS: REDUCE was a 4-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of dutasteride (0.5 mg/d) vs placebo for PCa risk reduction. We modeled the incidence of Gleason 8-10 cancer and used logistic regression analysis to evaluate the effects of baseline predictors of PCa, as well as post-baseline prostate volume at the time of biopsy, on PCa diagnosis. We compared needle biopsy Gleason scores with corresponding surgery Gleason scores. All statistical tests conducted were 2-sided. RESULTS: Had there been a scheduled biopsy occurring only at year 4, we estimated a similar incidence of Gleason 8-10 PCa in the dutasteride (n = 45) and placebo (n = 46) groups. Two biopsy Gleason 7 cancers in the placebo group (n = 150) were upgraded to Gleason 8-10 cancer on prostatectomy, and no patients in the dutasteride group (n = 111) were upgraded. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated the effect of prostate volume on Gleason 8-10 cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Although modeling of REDUCE data showed a similar incidence of Gleason 8-10 cancer in the dutasteride and placebo groups at year 4, an association between dutasteride and Gleason 8-10 cancer cannot be definitely excluded. It is likely that several biases, notably study design and prostate size at the time of biopsy, contributed to the numerical imbalance in Gleason 8-10 cancers observed between the treatment groups in years 3-4.

Nocturia improvement in the combination of Avodart(®) and tamsulosin (CombAT) study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of dutasteride plus tamsulosin combination therapy, compared with dutasteride or tamsulosin monotherapy, on nocturia in men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) using data from the 4-year CombAT study. METHODS: Nocturia was assessed using Question 7 of the International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaire. Efficacy measures included as follows: mean change in nocturia at 3-month intervals up to 48 months; proportion of patients with improvement/worsening in nocturia; nocturnal voiding frequency at baseline and study end, overall and by baseline subgroups; and nocturnal voiding frequency <2 at study end in patients with a baseline score ≥ 2. RESULTS: In total, 4,722 patients with a mean age of 66 years were included. Mean nocturia improvements were significantly superior (p ≤ 0.01) with combination therapy than with either monotherapy (adjusted mean change from baseline in IPSS Question 7 score at month 48: combination therapy -0.5, dutasteride -0.4, tamsulosin -0.3). Reduction in nocturia score with combination therapy was significantly (p ≤ 0.01) better than tamsulosin monotherapy across all baseline subgroups tested, except for men with previous 5ARI use. Among those with a baseline IPSS Q7 score ≥ 2, more patients with combination therapy had a score <2 at month 48 (34 %) compared with dutasteride (30 %, p = 0.018) or tamsulosin (26 %, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy provided greater improvements and less worsening of nocturia compared with both dutasteride and tamsulosin monotherapies. These analyses are the first to show greater improvement with a 5ARI/α-blocker combination versus either agent alone for the management of nocturia in patients with LUTS/BPH.

Influence of baseline variables on changes in International Prostate Symptom Score after combined therapy with dutasteride plus tamsulosin or either monotherapy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms: 4-year results of the CombAT study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine, using post hoc analysis, the influence of baseline variables on changes in international prostate symptom score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax ) and IPSS quality of life (QoL) in patients with moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) treated with either the α-blocker tamsulosin or the dual 5-alpha reductase inhibitor dutasteride, alone or in combination, as part of the 4-year Combination of Avodart and Tamsulosin (CombAT) study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CombAT was a 4-year, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study in 4844 men ≥50 years of age with a clinical diagnosis of BPH by medical history and physical examination, an IPSS ≥12 points, prostate volume (PV) ≥30 mL, total serum PSA level ≥1.5 ng/mL, and Qmax >5 mL/s and ≤15 mL/s with a minimum voided volume ≥125 mL. Eligible subjects were randomized to receive oral daily tamsulosin, 0.4 mg; dutasteride, 0.5 mg; or a combination of both. Baseline variable subgroups analysed were as follows: PV (30 to <40; 40 to <60; 60 to <80; ≥80 mL), PSA level (1.5 to <2.5; 2.5 to <4; ≥4 ng/mL), age (median: <66, ≥66 years), IPSS (median: <16, ≥16; IPSS thresholds, <20, ≥20), IPSS QoL score (question 8, Q8) (median: <4, ≥4), Qmax (median: <10.4, ≥10.4 mL/s), BPH impact index (BII) (median: <5, ≥5) and body mass index (BMI, median: <26.8, ≥26.8 kg/m(2) ). Within each baseline variable subgroup, changes in IPSS, Qmax and IPSS QoL Q8 from baseline were evaluated using a generalized linear model with effects for baseline IPSS, Qmax or IPSS QoL Q8 and treatment group at each post-baseline assessment up to and including the month 48 visit using a last observation carried forward approach. The treatment comparisons of combination therapy vs dutasteride and combination therapy vs tamsulosin were performed from the general linear model with statistical significance defined as P ≤ 0.01. RESULTS: Combination therapy resulted in a significantly greater improvement from baseline IPSS at 48 months vs tamsulosin monotherapy across all baseline subgroups. The benefit of combination therapy over dutasteride was confined to groups with lower baseline PV (<60 mL) and PSA (<4 ng/mL). In groups with baseline PV ≥60 mL and PSA ≥4 ng/mL, dutasteride and combination therapy show similar improvements in symptoms. Combination therapy resulted in significantly improved Qmax compared with tamsulosin but not dutasteride monotherapy. Qmax improvement appeared to increase with PV and PSA level in combination therapy subjects. The proportion of subjects with an IPSS QoL ≤2 (at least mostly satisfied) at 48 months was significantly higher with combination therapy than with dutasteride for subgroups with PV 40-60 mL and PSA level <4 ng/mL and than with tamsulosin for all PSA subgroups and PV subgroups ≥40 mL. CONCLUSIONS: CombAT data support the use of long-term combination therapy with dutasteride and tamsulosin in patients considered at risk for progression of BPH, as determined by high PV (≥30 mL) and high PSA (≥1.5 ng/mL). Combination therapy, dutasteride monotherapy and tamsulosin monotherapy all improved Qmax , but to different extents (combination therapy > dutasteride >> tamsulosin), suggesting that dutasteride contributes most to the Qmax benefit in combination therapy. Combination therapy provided consistent improvement over tamsulosin in LUTS across all analysed baseline variables at 48 months. Compared with dutasteride, the superiority of combination therapy at 48 months was shown in patients with PV <60 mL or PSA <4 ng/mL.

Predictors of pathological progression among men with localized prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance: a sub-analysis of the REDEEM study.

PURPOSE: We identify risk factors for pathological progression among men on active surveillance in the REDEEM (REduction by Dutasteride of clinical progression Events in Expectant Management trial). MATERIALS AND METHODS: REDEEM was a 3-year, randomized, double-blind study of patients in 65 North American academic centers. Eligible men were 48 to 82 years old, with low risk prostate cancer (T1c-T2a), Gleason score 6 or less, 3 or fewer cores positive, tumor less than 50% of any 1 core, serum prostate specific antigen 11 ng/ml or less, life expectancy greater than 5 years and undergoing active surveillance. Entry biopsies (10 cores or more) were required. The analysis included 276 patients with 1 biopsy or more after the start of study treatment. Patients received dutasteride 0.5 mg per day or placebo for 3 years. Time to pathological progression (volume [4 or more cores positive or 50% or greater of 1 core] or grade progression [Gleason score 7 or greater]) in a post-baseline biopsy (not preceded by therapeutic intervention), and baseline variables were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: In total 94 of 276 patients with a post-baseline biopsy (34.1%) had pathological progression, 54 (19.6%) had volume progression only, 19 (6.9%) had grade progression only and 21 (7.6%) had both types of progression. Older age (HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.08, p=0.009) and higher prostate specific antigen density (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.09, p<0.001) were associated with pathological progression. Post-baseline prostate specific antigen identified grade, but not volume progression in patients treated with placebo and dutasteride. CONCLUSIONS: Older age and higher prostate specific antigen density were independent predictors of pathological progression. Post-baseline measurements as predictors of pathological progression could not be established. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of dutasteride and establish better markers of pathological progression in active surveillance.

The effect of dutasteride on the detection of prostate cancer: A set of meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Dutasteride has been shown to significantly improve symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce clinical progression. Recent data from studies evaluating 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) for the prevention of prostate cancer, however, suggest 5ARIs, including dutasteride, may be associated with increased incidence of Gleason 8-10 prostate tumours. This meta-analysis was undertaken to quantify the effect of dutasteride on detection of prostate cancer and high-grade prostate cancer. METHODS: Our meta-analysis includes data from GlaxoSmithKline-sponsored phase III randomized clinical trials (with a study duration of ≥2 years) evaluating the effect of dutasteride, alone or in combination with tamsulosin, to treat BPH or to reduce the risk of prostate cancer. The incidence of prostate cancer, including Gleason 7-10 and Gleason 8-10, for patients taking either dutasteride, dutasteride plus tamsulosin, tamsulosin alone, or placebo, were evaluated using the Mantel-Haenszel Risk Ratio (MHRR) method of conducting meta-analyses. RESULTS: The meta-analysis demonstrated that in a population with symptomatic BPH and/or at increased risk of prostate cancer, a statistically significant lower number of detectable prostate cancers was found in men taking dutasteride compared to control groups (MHRR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.52-0.85). In our analysis, there was no increased risk for Gleason 7-10 (MHRR: 0.83, 95% CI 0.56-1.21) or Gleason 8-10 prostate cancers (MHRR: 0.99, 95% CI 0.39-2.53) in men taking dutasteride over control groups. There were several limitations that need to be considered when interpreting these results. CONCLUSION: These data provide support for the continued use of dutasteride in the treatment of symptomatic BPH patients.

Comparison of the response to treatment between Asian and Caucasian men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: long-term results from the combination of dutasteride and tamsulosin study.

The Combination of Avodart and Tamsulosin study was a 4-year, randomized, double-blind study of the efficacy and safety of dutasteride and tamsulosin, alone or in combination, in men with moderate-to-severe benign prostatic hyperplasia. In this post-hoc investigation, we analyzed primary and secondary end-points from the Combination of Avodart and Tamsulosin study in Asian (n = 325) and Caucasian men (n = 4259). The incidence of acute urinary retention or benign prostatic hyperplasia-related surgery did not differ significantly between treatment groups in the Asian subpopulation. In Caucasian men, the incidence of acute urinary retention/benign prostatic hyperplasia-related surgery was significantly lower in the combination therapy group compared with the tamsulosin monotherapy group (P < 0.001), but not compared with dutasteride monotherapy. Combination therapy significantly increased the time to benign prostatic hyperplasia clinical progression and resulted in improved International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum urinary flow rate, quality of life, and reduced prostate volume in Asian and Caucasian men who received combination therapy compared with tamsulosin monotherapy. Combination therapy also significantly improved (P < 0.05) time to benign prostatic hyperplasia clinical progression, International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum urinary flow rate and quality of life versus dutasteride in the Caucasian subpopulation. The adverse-event profile was comparable between subpopulations. In conclusion, Asian and Caucasian men respond similarly to these treatments, despite apparent racial differences in 5α-reductase activity.

Quantifying the contribution of symptom improvement to satisfaction of men with moderate to severe benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4-year data from the CombAT trial.

PURPOSE: We quantified the magnitude of symptom improvement required to achieve different levels of patient reported satisfaction, as assessed by the Patient Perception of Study Medication questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, international, double-blind, randomized study included men 50 years old or older with International Prostate Symptom Score 12 or greater, prostate volume 30 cc or greater, total prostate specific antigen 1.5 to 10.0 ng/ml, maximum urinary flow greater than 5 and less than or equal to 15 ml per second and minimum voided volume 125 ml or greater. Patients were randomized to dutasteride (0.5 mg) and/or tamsulosin (0.4 mg) but results are reported without respect to treatment. International Prostate Symptom Score and Patient Perception of Study Medication responses were assessed at baseline and at 3-month intervals for 48 months. Using pooled data Patient Perception of Study Medication responses were correlated with changes in International Prostate Symptom Score from baseline for 2 Patient Perception of Study Medication measures, including 1) total score and 2) overall satisfaction on question 11, "Overall how satisfied are you with the study medication and its effect on your urinary problems?" RESULTS: Patient Perception of Study Medication total score and question 11 correlated significantly with the mean change in International Prostate Symptom Score from baseline (p <0.0001). A response of very satisfied to question 11 was associated with an International Prostate Symptom Score improvement of -9.4 points while a response of very dissatisfied was associated with 1.3-point worsening. There was only moderate correlation between Patient Perception of Study Medication question 11 and changes in symptoms (r = 0.38). Thus, factors other than lower urinary tract symptoms also contribute to satisfaction and they could not be formally analyzed in this report. CONCLUSIONS: We noted correlations between patient satisfaction and the magnitude of the International Prostate Symptom Score change from baseline, which allowed us to determine treatment outcomes in terms of true clinical instead of only statistical significance.

Dutasteride reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with placebo in men enrolled in the REDUCE study.

PURPOSE: Men at risk for prostate cancer may concurrently experience chronic prostatitis or pelvic pain. We evaluated the effect of dutasteride on prostatitis-like symptoms in the REDUCE study population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: REDUCE was a 4-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study of prostate cancer risk reduction with 0.5 mg dutasteride vs placebo in men 50 to 75 years old with prostate specific antigen 2.5 to 10 ng/ml and a negative prostate biopsy in the previous 6 months. In this analysis we investigated change from baseline in Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index in men with prostatitis-like pain (Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index pain subscore 5 or greater) and prostatitis-like syndrome (perineal or ejaculatory pain plus Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index pain subscore 4 or greater), the proportion of subjects with at least a moderate Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index response (6-unit or greater improvement) and reports of new onset clinical prostatitis. RESULTS: Of 5,379 men with a total baseline Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index score 678 (12.6%) had prostatitis-like pain and 427 (7.9%) had prostatitis-like syndrome. Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index total score decreased significantly at 48 months in the dutasteride group vs placebo in men with prostatitis-like pain (p <0.0001) and with prostatitis-like syndrome (t test p = 0.03). There were significantly more Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index responders with dutasteride vs placebo in the prostatitis-like pain (49% vs 37%, respectively, p = 0.0033) and prostatitis-like syndrome (46% vs 35%, Fisher's exact test p = 0.0265) subgroups. Prostatitis was reported as an adverse event by significantly more men randomized to placebo (3.6%) than to dutasteride (2.5%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term dutasteride therapy resulted in improvement in prostatitis related symptoms in older men with an increased prostate specific antigen.

Dutasteride improves outcomes of benign prostatic hyperplasia when evaluated for prostate cancer risk reduction: secondary analysis of the REduction by DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of dutasteride versus placebo on the symptoms and associated complications of male lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) across a range of prostate volumes and BPH symptoms in men evaluated for prostate cancer risk reduction in the 4-year REduction by DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) trial. METHODS: REDUCE was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of prostate cancer risk reduction with daily dutasteride 0.5 mg or placebo. Eligible men were aged 50-75 years, with a prostate-specific antigen level of 2.5-10 ng/mL and a prostate volume of ≤80 cm3. The prespecified and post hoc analyses were performed on the incidence of acute urinary retention, BPH-related surgery, and urinary tract infections, as well as on changes in prostate volume, International Prostate Symptom Score, BPH Impact Index, and maximal urinary flow rate (Qmax). RESULTS: A total of 8122 men were included in the efficacy population. During the 4-year study, the International Prostate Symptom Score increased in placebo-treated patients, while dutasteride-treated patients had a stabilized or decreased International Prostate Symptom Score and improved BPH Impact Index and quality of life due to urinary symptom scores across all prostate volume quintiles (including prostate glands smaller than those studied in previous dutasteride trials). 48 months, the incidence of acute urinary retention or BPH-related surgery was significantly less in the dutasteride group (2.5%) than in the placebo group (9%) overall (P<.001) and in each baseline prostate volume quintile (P<.01). CONCLUSION: During the 4-year study, dutasteride was associated with a decreased risk of BPH progression in men with mild-to-moderate symptoms and normal or enlarged prostates.

Comparison of dutasteride and finasteride for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia: the Enlarged Prostate International Comparator Study (EPICS).

OBJECTIVE: • To assess the efficacy and safety of dutasteride compared with finasteride in treating men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) for 12 months. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • The Enlarged Prostate International Comparator Study was a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, 12-month, parallel-group study. • Men aged ≥ 50 years with a clinical diagnosis of BPH received once-daily treatment with dutasteride 0.5 mg (n= 813) or finasteride 5 mg (n= 817). After a 4-week placebo run-in period, patients were randomized to receive dutasteride or finasteride for 48 weeks, followed by an optional 24-month, open-label phase, during which patients received dutasteride 0.5 mg once daily. • The primary endpoint was change in prostate volume, and the secondary endpoints included improvement in American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUA-SI) scores, improvement in maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) and long-term safety in the 24-month open-label phase. RESULTS: • Both dutasteride and finasteride were effective at reducing prostate volume with no significant difference between the two treatments during the study. • Similar reductions in mean AUA-SI scores and Q(max) were also observed for men in both treatment groups. • A similar percentage of adverse events was experienced by patients of both treatment groups, and no new adverse events were reported in the open-label phase. CONCLUSION: • Dutasteride and finasteride, when administered for 12 months, were similarly effective in reducing prostate volume and improving Q(max) and urinary symptoms associated with BPH in men with an enlarged prostate.

Clinical outcomes after combined therapy with dutasteride plus tamsulosin or either monotherapy in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) by baseline characteristics: 4-year results from the randomized, double-blind Combination of Avodart and Tamsulosin (CombAT) trial.

OBJECTIVE: • To investigate the influence of baseline variables on the 4-year incidence of acute urinary retention (AUR), benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related surgery and overall clinical progression in men treated with tamsulosin, dutasteride, or a combination of both. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • The 4-year Combination of Avodart® and Tamsulosin (CombAT) study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study of clinical outcomes in men aged ≥ 50 years with symptomatic (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS]≥ 12) BPH, with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of ≥ 1.5 ng/mL and ≤ 10 ng/mL, and a prostate volume (PV) of ≥ 30 mL. • Eligible patients received tamsulosin 0.4 mg, dutasteride 0.5 mg, or a combination of both. • The primary endpoint was time to first AUR or BPH-related surgery. Secondary endpoints included clinical progression of BPH and symptoms. Posthoc analyses of the influence of baseline variables (including age, IPSS health-related quality of life [HRQL], PV, PSA, IPSS, peak urinary flow rate [Q(max) ] and body-mass index [BMI]) on the incidence of AUR or BPH-related surgery, clinical progression of BPH, and symptoms were performed. RESULTS: • There were 4844 men in the intent-to-treat population. Overall baseline characteristics were similar across all patient groups. • Regardless of baseline subgroup, the incidence of AUR or BPH-related surgery was higher in men treated with tamsulosin than in those treated with dutasteride or combined therapy. • Combined therapy was statistically better than tamsulosin in reducing the risk of AUR or BPH-related surgery in subgroups of baseline PV > 42.0 mL, in all subgroups of baseline PSA level, and all other baseline subgroups (P ≤ 0.001). • Across treatment groups, the incidence of clinical progression was highest in men with a baseline IPSS of < 20 or IPSS HRQL score of < 4. The incidence of clinical progression was also higher in men receiving tamsulosin than dutasteride or combined therapy in all baseline subgroups, except for men with a baseline PV of < 40 mL. Combined therapy reduced the relative risk (RR) of clinical progression compared with tamsulosin across all baseline subgroups and compared with dutasteride across most baseline subgroups. • Symptom deterioration was the most common progression event in each treatment group regardless of baseline subgroup, except in those men with an IPSS of ≥ 20 at baseline. Combined therapy reduced the RR of symptom deterioration compared with tamsulosin across all but one baseline subgroup (the reduction was not significant for men with a baseline PV of < 40 mL) and compared with dutasteride in most subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: • Men with a baseline PV of ≥ 40 mL and any baseline PSA level of ≥1.5 ng/mL had greater reductions in the RR of AUR or BPH-related surgery and greater reductions in the RR of clinical progression and symptom deterioration on combined therapy or dutasteride monotherapy than on tamsulosin monotherapy. • These analyses support the long-term use of combined therapy with dutasteride plus tamsulosin in men with moderate-to-severe BPH symptoms and a slightly enlarged prostate.

The effects of dutasteride or tamsulosin alone and in combination on storage and voiding symptoms in men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): 4-year data from the Combination of Avodart and Tamsulosin (CombAT) study.

OBJECTIVE: • To assess the effects of combined therapy with dutasteride and tamsulosin on voiding and storage symptoms compared with those of dutasteride or tamsulosin alone, using 4-year data from the Combination of Avodart and Tamsulosin (CombAT) study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • Men (n = 4844) aged ≥ 50 years with moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), a prostate volume of ≥ 30 mL, and a serum prostate-specific antigen level of 1.5-10 ng/mL. • CombAT was a multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group study. • Oral dutasteride (0.5 mg) or tamsulosin (0.4 mg) alone or in combination was taken daily for 4 years. • Mean changes from baseline in storage and voiding symptoms at 4 years were assessed using subscales of the International Prostate Symptom Score. RESULTS: • At 4 years, the mean reduction in the storage subscore was significantly greater in the combined therapy group vs the dutasteride (adjusted mean difference -0.43) and tamsulosin (adjusted mean difference -0.96) monotherapy groups (P < 0.001). • Also at 4 years, the mean reduction in the voiding subscore was significantly greater in the combined therapy group vs the dutasteride (adjusted mean difference -0.51) and tamsulosin (adjusted mean difference -1.60) monotherapy groups (P < 0.001). • The improvement in the storage subscore with combined therapy was significantly better (P < 0.001) than dutasteride and tamsulosin from 3 months and 12 months, respectively. Similarly, the improvement in the voiding subscore with combined therapy was significantly better than dutasteride (P < 0.001) and tamsulosin (P ≤ 0.006) from 3 months and 6 months, respectively. • Improvements in the storage and voiding symptom subscores with combined therapy were achieved irrespective of prostate volume, although in men with the highest baseline prostate volumes (≥ 58 mL), combined therapy was not better than dutasteride. CONCLUSIONS: • In men with a prostate volume of ≥ 30 mL, combined therapy with dutasteride plus tamsulosin provided better long-term (up to 4 years) control of both storage and voiding LUTS compared with tamsulosin monotherapy. • Combined therapy was better than dutasteride monotherapy in men with prostate volumes of ≥ 30 to < 58 mL, but not in men with a prostate volume of ≥ 58 mL.