PURPOSE: To evaluate how much the improvement of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) affects sexual function and which storage symptoms or voiding symptoms have the greatest effect on sexual function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 187 patients were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either tamsulosin 0.2 mg (group A) or tamsulosin 0.2 mg and solifenacin 5 mg (group B). At 4 weeks and 12 weeks, the LUTS and sexual function of the patients were evaluated by use of the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF5), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) questionnaire, uroflowmetry, and bladder scan. RESULTS: Both groups A and B showed statistically significant improvements in IPSS, OABSS, and quality of life (QoL). Group A showed improved maximum flow rate, mean flow rate, and residual urine volume by time. Group B did not show an improvement in flow rate or residual urine volume but total voiding volume increased with time. The IIEF5 score was not improved in either group. In group A, the IIEF5 score dropped from 13.66+/-4.97 to 11.93+/-6.14 after 12 weeks (p=0.072). Group B showed a decline in the IIEF5 score from 13.19+/-5.91 to 12.45+/-6.38 (p=0.299). Although group B showed a relatively smaller decrease in the IIEF5 score, the difference between the two groups was not significant (p=0.696). CONCLUSIONS: Tamsulosin monotherapy and combination therapy with solifenacin did not improve erectile function despite improvements in voiding symptoms and QoL. The improvement in storage symptoms did not affect erectile function.
Aged ; Drug Therapy, Combination/methods ; Erectile Dysfunction/*drug therapy/etiology ; Humans ; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/complications/*drug therapy ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Quality of Life ; Questionnaires ; Quinuclidines/*administration & dosage ; Rheology ; Sulfonamides/*administration & dosage ; Tetrahydroisoquinolines/*administration & dosage ; Treatment Outcome ; Urological Agents/*administration & dosage

PURPOSE: To evaluate how much the improvement of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) affects sexual function and which storage symptoms or voiding symptoms have the greatest effect on sexual function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 187 patients were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either tamsulosin 0.2 mg (group A) or tamsulosin 0.2 mg and solifenacin 5 mg (group B). At 4 weeks and 12 weeks, the LUTS and sexual function of the patients were evaluated by use of the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF5), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) questionnaire, uroflowmetry, and bladder scan. RESULTS: Both groups A and B showed statistically significant improvements in IPSS, OABSS, and quality of life (QoL). Group A showed improved maximum flow rate, mean flow rate, and residual urine volume by time. Group B did not show an improvement in flow rate or residual urine volume but total voiding volume increased with time. The IIEF5 score was not improved in either group. In group A, the IIEF5 score dropped from 13.66+/-4.97 to 11.93+/-6.14 after 12 weeks (p=0.072). Group B showed a decline in the IIEF5 score from 13.19+/-5.91 to 12.45+/-6.38 (p=0.299). Although group B showed a relatively smaller decrease in the IIEF5 score, the difference between the two groups was not significant (p=0.696). CONCLUSIONS: Tamsulosin monotherapy and combination therapy with solifenacin did not improve erectile function despite improvements in voiding symptoms and QoL. The improvement in storage symptoms did not affect erectile function.
Aged ; Drug Therapy, Combination/methods ; Erectile Dysfunction/*drug therapy/etiology ; Humans ; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/complications/*drug therapy ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Quality of Life ; Questionnaires ; Quinuclidines/*administration & dosage ; Rheology ; Sulfonamides/*administration & dosage ; Tetrahydroisoquinolines/*administration & dosage ; Treatment Outcome ; Urological Agents/*administration & dosage

OBJECTIVETo evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination therapy of tamsulosin and solifenacin for mild and moderate benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with overactive bladder (OAB).

METHODSWe randomly divided 166 patients with BPH and concomitant OAB into a mild obstruction symptom group (n = 88) and a moderate obstruction symptom group (n =78), 48 of the former group treated with 0. 2 mg tamsulosin + 5 mg solifenacin and the other 40 with 0. 2 mg tamsulosin; 36 of the latter group treated with 0. 2 mg tamsulosin + 5 mg solifenacin and the other 42 with 0. 2 mg tamsulosin, all administered once daily for 12 weeks. We obtained the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), urine storage period symptom score (USPSS), voiding symptom score (VSS), Qmax, residual urine volume, OAB symptom score (OABSS) and adverse reactions, and compared them among different

RESULTSAmong the patients with mild obstruction symptoms, the combination of tamsulosin and solifenacin achieved remark-groups. able improvement in IPSS, USPSS, Qmax and OABSS as compared with the baseline (P < 0.05), but made no significant difference in the residual urine volume (P > 0. 05) , while tamsulosin improved IPSS only (P < 0.05). The combination therapy exhibited an obvious superiority over tamsulosin alone in improving IPSS (9.7 micro 3.0 vs 15.8 micro 3.3), USPSS (8. 1 micro 1.7 vs 12.3 micro 3.1), Qmax ([18.6 micro 2.3] ml/s vs [14.2 micro 2.3] ml/s ), and OABSS (5.3micro 1.3 vs 9.7 micro 2.7) (P < 0.05), but there were no obvious differences in residual urine, urine routine test results and adverse events between the two therapies ( P > 0. 05). In those with moderate obstruction symptoms, the combination therapy significantly improved IPSS, VSS, Qmax and OABSS (P < 0.05) but not the residual urine (P > 0. 05) in comparison with the baseline. The tamsulosin therapy achieved obvious improvement in IPSS, VSS, Qmax, OABSS and residual urine. The combination therapy showed a better effect than tamsulosin only in OABSS (4. 8 +/-1.5 vs 6.5 +/-2.5, P < 0.05), but no significant differences from the latter in IPSS, Qmax, VSS, routine urine test results, and adverse

CONCLUSIONCombination therapy of tamsulosin and solifenacin is obviously safe and efficacious in the treatment (P > 0.05). events of both mild and moderate BPH with concomitant OAB, and it is superior to tamsulosin alone.

Aged ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prospective Studies ; Prostatic Hyperplasia ; complications ; drug therapy ; Quinuclidines ; administration & dosage ; therapeutic use ; Solifenacin Succinate ; Sulfonamides ; administration & dosage ; therapeutic use ; Tetrahydroisoquinolines ; administration & dosage ; therapeutic use ; Urinary Bladder, Overactive ; complications ; drug therapy

OBJECTIVE: There is no research regarding the appropriate antiemetic agents for female patients, especially those receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). We evaluated the antiemetic efficacy of a combination of 5-HT3 receptor with/without aprepitant in patients with gynecological cancer treated with the TC (paclitaxel and carboplatin) regimen of MEC. METHODS: We enrolled 38 patients diagnosed with gynecologic cancer and scheduled to receive the TC regimen. The patients were randomly assigned to receive a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, either palonosetron in the first cycle followed by granisetron in the second cycle or vice versa. In the third cycle, all patients received a combination of the 5-HT3 receptor and dexamethasone with/without aprepitant. RESULTS: When three drugs were administered, palonosetron consistently produced an equivalent complete response (CR) rate to granisetron in the acute phase (89.5% vs. 86.8%, p=0.87) and delayed phase (60.5% vs. 65.8%, p=0.79). With regard to the change in dietary intake, palonosetron exhibited similar efficacy to granisetron in the acute phase (92.1% vs. 89.4%, p=0.19) and delayed phase (65.7% vs. 68.4%, p=0.14). However, in the delayed phase, the addition of aprepitant therapy with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone produced a higher CR rate than a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with dexamethasone (93.3% vs. 47.8%, p<0.001) and allowed the patients to maintain a higher level of dietary intake (93.3% vs. 56.5%, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The addition of aprepitant therapy was more effective than the control therapy of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone in gynecological cancer patients treated with the TC regimen.
Adult ; Aged ; Antiemetics/*administration & dosage ; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects ; Carboplatin/administration & dosage/adverse effects ; Cross-Over Studies ; Diet ; Drug Administration Schedule ; Female ; Genital Neoplasms, Female/*drug therapy ; Granisetron/administration & dosage ; Humans ; Isoquinolines/administration & dosage ; Middle Aged ; Morpholines/administration & dosage ; Nausea/chemically induced/*prevention & control ; Paclitaxel/administration & dosage/adverse effects ; Quinuclidines/administration & dosage ; Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists ; Vomiting/chemically induced/*prevention & control

OBJECTIVETo evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of palonosetron for prevention of vomiting induced by high dose cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

METHODSOne-hundred and twenty-eight patients received tropisetron 5 mg plus dexamethasone 10 mg at the first cycle or palonosetron 0.25 mg plus dexamethasone 10 mg, respectively, each administered 30 min before the initiation of high dose cisplatin-based chemotherapy. To observe the remission rate of acute emetic episodes and delayed emetic episodes, adverse effects and daily food-intake in the patients after the chemotherapy.

RESULTSThe complete response (CR) rates for acute vomiting were not significantly different between the tropisetron and palonosetron cycles (75.8% vs. 79.7%, P>0.05). The complete control rate of delayed vomiting in the palonosetron cycle was significantly higher than that in the tropisetron cycle (70.3% vs. 50.8%, P<0.01). The food-intake decrease rate of palonosetron cycle was 18.8%, significantly lower than the 53.1% of the tropisetron cycle (P<0.05). The toxicity in the two cycles was similar and no grade 3-4 toxicity was observed.

CONCLUSIONSPalonosetron is superior to tropisetron with a lower remission rate of delayed emesis induced by high dose cisplatin-based chemotherapy and with tolerable toxicity. Moreover, the apparent emesis control of palonosetron treatment seems to provide an adequate food-intake in these patients.

Aged ; Antiemetics ; therapeutic use ; Antineoplastic Agents ; administration & dosage ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Cisplatin ; administration & dosage ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; Eating ; drug effects ; Female ; Humans ; Indoles ; therapeutic use ; Isoquinolines ; therapeutic use ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasms ; drug therapy ; Quinuclidines ; therapeutic use ; Vomiting ; chemically induced ; prevention & control

The in vivo muscarinic receptor binding of antimuscarinic agents (oxybutynin, solifenacin, tolterodine, and imidafenacin) used to treat urinary dysfunction in patients with overactive bladder is reviewed. Transdermal administration of oxybutynin in rats leads to significant binding of muscarinic receptors in the bladder without long-term binding in the submaxillary gland and the abolishment of salivation evoked by oral oxybutynin. Oral solifenacin shows significant and long-lasting binding to muscarinic receptors in mouse tissues expressing the M3 subtype. Oral tolterodine binds more selectively to muscarinic receptors in the bladder than in the submaxillary gland in mice. The muscarinic receptor binding of oral imidafenacin in rats is more selective and longer-lasting in the bladder than in other tissues such as the submaxillary gland, heart, colon, lung, and brain, suggesting preferential muscarinic receptor binding in the bladder. In vivo quantitative autoradiography with (+)N-[11C]methyl-3-piperidyl benzilate in rats shows significant occupancy of brain muscarinic receptors with the intravenous injection of oxybutynin, solifenacin, and tolterodine. The estimated in vivo selectivity in brain is significantly greater for solifenacin and tolterodine than for oxybutynin. Imidafenacin occupies few brain muscarinic receptors. Similar findings for oral oxybutynin were observed with positron emission tomography in conscious rhesus monkeys with a significant disturbance of short-term memory. The newer generation of antimuscarinic agents may be advantageous in terms of bladder selectivity after systemic administration.
Administration, Cutaneous ; Animals ; Autoradiography ; Benzhydryl Compounds ; Brain ; Colon ; Cresols ; Heart ; Humans ; Imidazoles ; Injections, Intravenous ; Lung ; Macaca mulatta ; Mandelic Acids ; Memory, Short-Term ; Mice ; Muscarinic Antagonists ; Phenylpropanolamine ; Positron-Emission Tomography ; Quinuclidines ; Rats ; Receptors, Muscarinic ; Salivation ; Solifenacin Succinate ; Submandibular Gland ; Tetrahydroisoquinolines ; Tolterodine Tartrate ; Urinary Bladder ; Urinary Bladder, Overactive