Silodosin is effective for treatment of LUTS in men with BPH: a systematic review.

Institute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Diseases of Urological System Gansu Province, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Cellular & molecular immunology (Impact Factor: 4.19). 12/2012; DOI: 10.1038/aja.2012.102
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence on the efficacy and safety of silodosin treatments on lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) from randomized controlled trials. We searched PubMed (1966-December 2011), Embase (1974-December 2011) and the Cochrane Library Database (2011, Issue 12). The assessed outcome measures were the change from baseline for the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) score, peak urine maximum flow rate (Q(max)), QoL related to urinary symptoms and adverse effects. Two authors independently assessed the study quality and extracted data. All data were analysed using RevMan 5.1. The meta-analysis included four randomized controlled trials with a total of 2504 patients. The study durations were each 12 weeks. At the follow-up end points, the pooled results showed that the change from baseline for the silodosin group was significantly higher than the placebo group for the IPSS, QoL score and Q(max)(mean difference (MD)=-2.78, P<0.00001; MD=-0.42, P=0.004; MD=1.17, P<0.00001,respectively) and patients felt more satisfied with QoL related to urinary symptoms in the silodosin group than the placebo group. Ejaculation disorder was the most commonly reported adverse effect. The pooled results also showed that the silodosin group was superior to the 0.2 mg tamsulosin group with respect to the IPSS and QoL score (IPSS: MD=-1.14, P=0.02; QoL score: MD=-0.26, P=0.02) and inferior to the 0.2 mg tamsulosin group with respect to Q(max) (MD=-0.85, P=0.01). In contrast, there was no significant difference in the incidence of ejaculation disorder and dizziness between the silodosin and 0.2 mg tamsulosin groups. The current meta-analysis suggested that silodosin is an effective therapy for LUTS in men with BPH and is not inferior to 0.2 mg tamsulosin.Asian Journal of Andrology advance online publication, 10 December 2012; doi:10.1038/aja.2012.102.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: α1-Adrenergic receptor antagonists are commonly used to treat male lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We performed a literature search using PubMed, Medline via Ovid, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify studies on the treatment of BPH by silodosin. Silodosin is a novel α1-adrenergic receptor antagonist whose affinity for the α1A-adrenergic receptor is greater than that for the α1B-adrenergic receptor. Therefore, silodosin does not increase the incidence of blood pressure-related side effects, which may result from the inhibition of the α1B-adrenergic receptor. Patients receiving silodosin at a daily dose of 8 mg showed a significant improvement in the International Prostate Symptom Score and maximum urinary flow rate compared with those receiving a placebo. Silodosin also improved both storage and voiding symptoms, indicating that silodosin is effective, even during early phases of BPH treatment. Follow-up extension studies performed in the United States, Europe, and Asia demonstrated its long-term safety and efficacy. In the European study, silodosin significantly reduced nocturia compared to the placebo. Although retrograde or abnormal ejaculation was the most commonly reported symptom in these studies, only a few patients discontinued treatment. The incidence of adverse cardiovascular events was also very low. Evidence showing solid efficacy and cardiovascular safety profiles of silodosin will provide a good solution for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with BPH in an increasingly aging society.
    01/2014; 6:113-9. DOI:10.2147/RRU.S41618
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is the most common cause of lower urinary tract symptoms in elderly men. Selective alfa1-adrenergic antagonists are now first-line drugs in the medical management of BPH. We conducted a single-blind, parallel group, randomized, controlled trial to compare the effectiveness and safety of the new alfa1-blocker silodosin versus the established drug tamsulosin in symptomatic BPH. Ambulatory male BPH patients, aged above 50 years, were recruited on the basis of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Subjects were randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive either tamsulosin 0.4 mg controlled release or silodosin 8 mg once daily after dinner for 12 weeks. Primary outcome measure was reduction in IPSS. Proportion of subjects who achieved IPSS <8, change in prostate size as assessed by ultrasonography and changes in peak urine flow rate and allied uroflowmetry parameters, were secondary effectiveness variables. Treatment emergent adverse events were recorded. Data of 53 subjects - 26 on silodosin and 27 on tamsulosin were analyzed. Final IPSS at 12-week was significantly less than baseline for both groups. However, groups remained comparable in terms of IPSS at all visits. There was a significant impact on sexual function (assessed by IPSS sexual function score) in silodosin arm compared with tamsulosin. Prostate size and uroflowmetry parameters did not change. Both treatments were well-tolerated. Retrograde ejaculation was encountered only with silodosin and postural hypotension only with tamsulosin. Silodosin is comparable to tamsulosin in the treatment of BPH in Indian men. However, retrograde ejaculation may be troublesome for sexually active patients.
    Indian Journal of Pharmacology 11/2014; 46(6):601-7. DOI:10.4103/0253-7613.144912 · 0.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We performed a meta-analysis to compare treatment with a combination of solifenacin plus tamsulosin oral controlled absorption system (TOCAS) with placebo or TOCAS monotherapy. The aim of the meta-analysis was to clarify the efficacy and safety of the combination treatments method for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). We searched for trials of men with LUTS that were randomized to combination treatment compared with TOCAS monotherapy or placebo. We pooled data from three placebo-controlled trials meeting inclusion criteria. Primary outcomes of interest included changes in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and urinary frequency. We also assessed postvoid residual, maximum urinary flow rate, incidence of urinary retention (UR), adverse events. Data were pooled using random or fixed effect models for continuous outcomes and the Mantel-Haenszel method to generate risk ratio. Reductions in IPSS storage subscore and total urgency and frequency score (TUFS) were observed with solifenacin 6 mg plus TOCAS compared with placebo (P< 0.0001 and P< 0.0001, respectively). Reductions in IPSS storage subscore and TUFS were observed with solifenacin 9 mg plus TOCAS compared with placebo (P = 0.003 and P= 0.0006, respectively). Reductions in TUFS was observed with solifenacin 6 mg plus TOCAS compared with TOCAS (P = 0.01). Both combination treatments were well tolerated, with low incidence of UR. Solifenacin 6 mg plus TOCAS significantly improved total IPSS, storage and voiding symptoms compared with placebo. Solifenacin 6 mg plus TOCAS also improved storage symptoms compared with TOCAS alone. There was no additional benefit of solifenacin 9 mg compared with 6 mg when used in combination with TOCAS.
    Asian Journal of Andrology 09/2014; DOI:10.4103/1008-682X.137685 · 2.53 Impact Factor