Prospective evaluation of fexapotide triflutate injection treatment of Grade Group 1 prostate cancer: 4-year results.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to determine the safety and efficacy of fexapotide triflutate (FT) 2.5 mg and 15 mg for the treatment of Grade Group 1 prostate cancer. METHODS: Prospective randomized transrectal intraprostatic single injection FT 2.5 mg (n = 49), FT 15 mg (n = 48) and control active surveillance (AS) (n = 49) groups were compared in 146 patients at 28 U.S. sites, with elective AS crossover (n = 18) to FT after first follow-up biopsy at 45 days. Patients were followed for 5 years including biopsies (baseline, 45 days, and 18, 36, and 54 months thereafter), and urological evaluations with PSA every 6 months. Patients with Gleason grade increase or who elected surgical or radiotherapeutic intervention exited the study and were cumulatively included in the data analysis. Percentage of normal biopsies in baseline focus quadrant, tumor grades, and volumes; and outcomes including Gleason grade in entire prostate as well as treated prostate lobe, interventions associated with Gleason grade increase and total incidence of interventions were assessed. RESULTS: Significantly improved long-term clinical outcomes were found after 4-year follow-up, with percentages of patients progressing to interventions with and without Gleason grade increase significantly reduced by FT single treatment. Results in the FT 15-mg group were superior to the FT 2.5-mg dose group. There were no drug-related serious adverse events (SAEs). CONCLUSIONS: FT showed statistically significant long-term efficacy in the treatment of Grade Group 1 patients regarding clinical and pathological progression. FT 15 mg showed superior results to FT 2.5 mg. There were no drug-related SAEs; FT injection was well tolerated.

Fexapotide triflutate: results of long-term safety and efficacy trials of a novel injectable therapy for symptomatic prostate enlargement.

PURPOSE: These studies were undertaken to determine if fexapotide triflutate 2.5 mg transrectal injectable (FT) has significant long-term (LT) safety and efficacy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Two placebo controlled double-blind randomized parallel group trials with 995 BPH patients at 72 sites treated 3:2 FT:placebo, with open-label FT crossover (CO) re-injection in 2 trials n = 344 and long-term follow-up (LF) 2-6.75 years (mean 3.58 years, median 3.67 years; FT re-injection CO mean 4.27 years, median 4.42 years) were evaluated. 12 months post-treatment patients elected no further treatment, approved oral medications, FT, or interventional treatment. Primary endpoint variable was change in Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12 months and at LF. CO primary co-endpoints were 3-year incidence of (1) surgery for BPH in FT treated CO patients versus patients crossed over to oral BPH medications and (2) surgery or acute urinary retention in FT-treated CO placebo patients versus placebo patients crossed over to oral BPH medications. 28 CO secondary endpoints assessed surgical and symptomatic outcomes in FT reinjected patients versus conventional BPH medication CO and control subgroups at 2 and 3 years. RESULTS: FT injection had no significant safety differences from placebo. LF IPSS change from baseline was higher in FT treated patients compared to placebo (median FT group improvement - 5.2 versus placebo - 3.0, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of AUR (1.08% p = 0.0058) and prostate cancer (PCa) (1.1% p = 0.0116) were both reduced in FT treated patients. LF incidence of intervention for BPH was reduced in the FT group versus oral BPH medications (8.08% versus 27.85% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of intervention or AUR in placebo CO group with FT versus placebo CO group with oral medications was reduced (6.07% versus 33.3% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). 28/28 secondary efficacy endpoints were reached in LF CO re-injection studies. CONCLUSIONS: FT 2.5 mg is a safe and effective transrectal injectable for LT treatment of BPH. FT treated patients also had reduced need for BPH intervention, and reduced incidence of PCa and AUR.

Three-month primary efficacy data for the SUCCESS Trial; a phase III, multi-center, prospective, randomized, controlled study treating female stress urinary incontinence with the vesair intravesical balloon.

AIMS: The SUCCESS trial is a phase III study of the Vesair® balloon in the United States for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The purpose of this manuscript is to present the 3 month primary efficacy and tolerability outcome data. METHODS: The SUCCESS trial is a multi-center, prospective, single blind, randomized, sham-controlled study. Subjects were randomized on a 2.33:1 basis to either Vesair balloon placement or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of both a >50% reduction from baseline on 1 h provocative pad weight test and a ≥10-point improvement in symptoms on the Incontinence Quality of Life Survey (I-QOL) questionnaire assessed at the 3 month study visit. RESULTS: A total of 221 subjects were randomized, including 157 treatment arm subjects and 64 controls. The 3 month composite primary efficacy endpoint was achieved in 42.1% of treatment group subjects compared with 28.1% of controls on intention-to-treat analysis (p = 0.046). Treatment arm subjects were significantly more likely to report at least a 50% reduction in incontinence frequency on 7-day voiding diary (55.2% vs 32.3%, P = 0.002, ITT) and more commonly reported their incontinence was improved on Patient Global Impression of Improvement in Incontinence (PGI-I) at 3 months compared with controls (58.0% vs 37.7%, P = 0.007, ITT). No device- or procedure-related serious adverse events nor unanticipated adverse events were reported and no cases of urinary retention were observed. All adverse events fully resolved following balloon removal. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase three trial, the Vesair intravesical balloon achieved 3 month primary and secondary endpoints both objectively and subjectively.

Twelve-Month Efficacy and Safety Data for the "Stress Incontinence Control, Efficacy and Safety Study": A Phase III, Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study Treating Female Stress Urinary Incontinence Using the Vesair Intravesical Balloon.

OBJECTIVES: The "Stress Incontinence Control, Efficacy and Safety Study" (SUCCESS) is a phase III study of the Vesair Balloon in women with stress urinary incontinence who had failed conservative therapy, and either failed surgery, were not candidates for surgery, or chose not to have surgery. The safety and efficacy of the balloon at 12 months is reported for those participants in the treatment arm who elected to continue with the SUCCESS trial beyond the primary end point at 3 months. METHODS: The SUCCESS trial is a multicenter, prospective, single-blinded, randomized, sham-controlled study. Participants were randomized on a 2.33:1 basis to either Vesair Balloon placement or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of both a greater than 50% reduction from baseline on 1-hour provocative pad weight test and an at least 10-point improvement in symptoms on the Incontinence Quality of Life questionnaire assessed at the 3-month study visit. Patients in the treatment arm who opted to continue in the trial were followed up prospectively up to 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 221 participants were randomized, including 157 in the treatment arm and 64 in the control arm. Sixty-seven participants in the treatment arm (42.7% of participants enrolled) were evaluated at 12 months, with 56.3% achieving the composite end point and 78.7% having greater than 50% reduction in pad weight from baseline in a per-protocol analysis. In an intent-to-treat analysis treating all participants who did not continue with the balloon as failures, 24% of the participants achieved the composite end point and 33.6% had a greater than 50% reduction in pad weight from baseline. Treatment-related adverse events in this group included dysuria (40.1%), gross hematuria (36.9%), and urinary tract infection (26.1%). CONCLUSIONS: In this phase III trial, symptom relief was maintained for those participants who continued therapy for 12 months. The balloon was found to be safe with no device- or procedure-related serious adverse events reported. Additional studies are warranted to determine which patient populations are more tolerant of the balloon and to assess the efficacy and safety of its longer-term use. Additional screening methods, including screening patients for balloon tolerability, are warranted to reduce participant withdrawals.