Cargando…

Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison

CONTEXT: OnabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron have recently gained marketing authorisation to treat symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative efficacy of mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA in patients with idiopathic OAB. DESIGN: Network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: A sea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Freemantle, Nick, Ginsberg, David A, McCool, Rachael, Fleetwood, Kelly, Arber, Mick, Khalaf, Kristin, Loveman, Clara, Ni, Quanhong, Glanville, Julie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4769403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26908514
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009122
_version_ 1782418099883999232
author Freemantle, Nick
Ginsberg, David A
McCool, Rachael
Fleetwood, Kelly
Arber, Mick
Khalaf, Kristin
Loveman, Clara
Ni, Quanhong
Glanville, Julie
author_facet Freemantle, Nick
Ginsberg, David A
McCool, Rachael
Fleetwood, Kelly
Arber, Mick
Khalaf, Kristin
Loveman, Clara
Ni, Quanhong
Glanville, Julie
author_sort Freemantle, Nick
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT: OnabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron have recently gained marketing authorisation to treat symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative efficacy of mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA in patients with idiopathic OAB. DESIGN: Network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: A search of 9 electronic databases, review documents, guidelines and websites. METHODS: Randomised trials comparing any licensed dose of onabotulinumtoxinA or mirabegron with each other, anticholinergic drugs or placebo were eligible (19 randomised trials were identified). 1 reviewer extracted data from the studies and a second reviewer checked the data. Candidate trials were assessed for similarity and networks were developed for each outcome. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. When there were differences in mean baseline values between mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA trials they were adjusted for using network meta-regression (NMR). RESULTS: No studies directly comparing onabotulinumtoxinA to mirabegron were identified. A network was created for each of the 7 outcomes, with 3–9 studies included in each individual network. The trials included in the networks were broadly similar. Patients in the onabotulinumtoxinA trials had more urinary incontinence and urgency episodes at baseline than patients in the mirabegron trials and these differences were adjusted for using NMR. Both onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron were more efficacious than placebo at reducing the frequency of urinary incontinence, urgency, urination and nocturia. OnabotulinumtoxinA was more efficacious than mirabegron (50 and 25 mg) in completely resolving daily episodes of urinary incontinence and urgency and in reducing the frequency of urinary incontinence, urgency and urination. NMR supported the results of the network meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing onabotulinumtoxinA to mirabegron, this indirect comparison indicates that onabotulinumtoxinA may be superior to mirabegron in improving symptoms of urinary incontinence, urgency and urinary frequency in patients with idiopathic OAB.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4769403
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47694032016-03-01 Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison Freemantle, Nick Ginsberg, David A McCool, Rachael Fleetwood, Kelly Arber, Mick Khalaf, Kristin Loveman, Clara Ni, Quanhong Glanville, Julie BMJ Open Urology CONTEXT: OnabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron have recently gained marketing authorisation to treat symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative efficacy of mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA in patients with idiopathic OAB. DESIGN: Network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: A search of 9 electronic databases, review documents, guidelines and websites. METHODS: Randomised trials comparing any licensed dose of onabotulinumtoxinA or mirabegron with each other, anticholinergic drugs or placebo were eligible (19 randomised trials were identified). 1 reviewer extracted data from the studies and a second reviewer checked the data. Candidate trials were assessed for similarity and networks were developed for each outcome. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. When there were differences in mean baseline values between mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA trials they were adjusted for using network meta-regression (NMR). RESULTS: No studies directly comparing onabotulinumtoxinA to mirabegron were identified. A network was created for each of the 7 outcomes, with 3–9 studies included in each individual network. The trials included in the networks were broadly similar. Patients in the onabotulinumtoxinA trials had more urinary incontinence and urgency episodes at baseline than patients in the mirabegron trials and these differences were adjusted for using NMR. Both onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron were more efficacious than placebo at reducing the frequency of urinary incontinence, urgency, urination and nocturia. OnabotulinumtoxinA was more efficacious than mirabegron (50 and 25 mg) in completely resolving daily episodes of urinary incontinence and urgency and in reducing the frequency of urinary incontinence, urgency and urination. NMR supported the results of the network meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing onabotulinumtoxinA to mirabegron, this indirect comparison indicates that onabotulinumtoxinA may be superior to mirabegron in improving symptoms of urinary incontinence, urgency and urinary frequency in patients with idiopathic OAB. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4769403/ /pubmed/26908514 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009122 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Urology
Freemantle, Nick
Ginsberg, David A
McCool, Rachael
Fleetwood, Kelly
Arber, Mick
Khalaf, Kristin
Loveman, Clara
Ni, Quanhong
Glanville, Julie
Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
title Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
title_full Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
title_fullStr Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
title_full_unstemmed Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
title_short Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
title_sort comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxina and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
topic Urology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4769403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26908514
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009122
work_keys_str_mv AT freemantlenick comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT ginsbergdavida comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT mccoolrachael comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT fleetwoodkelly comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT arbermick comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT khalafkristin comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT lovemanclara comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT niquanhong comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison
AT glanvillejulie comparativeassessmentofonabotulinumtoxinaandmirabegronforoveractivebladderanindirecttreatmentcomparison