Evaluation of an Epigenetic Assay for Predicting Repeat Prostate Biopsy Outcome in African American Men.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an epigenetic assay performed on tissue from negative prostate biopsies in a group of African American (AA) men undergoing repeat biopsy, and to compare accuracy for predicting repeat biopsy outcome to prior studies conducted in predominantly Caucasian populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 211 AA men from 7 urology centers across the United States; all of whom were undergoing 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided repeat biopsy within 30 months from a negative index biopsy. All biopsy cores from the negative index biopsy were profiled for the epigenetic biomarkers GSTP1, APC, and RASSF1 using ConfirmMDx for Prostate Cancer (MDxHealth, Irvine, CA). RESULTS: Upon repeat biopsy, 130 of 211 subjects (62%) had no prostate cancer (PCa) detected and 81 of 211 (38%) were diagnosed with PCa. Of the subjects with PCa, 54 (67%) were diagnosed with Gleason score (GS) ≤6 PCa and 27 (33%) with GS ≥7 disease. For detection of PCa at repeat biopsy, ConfirmMDx sensitivity was 74.1% and specificity was 60.0%, equivalent to prior studies (P = .235 and .697, respectively). For detection of GS ≥7 PCa, sensitivity was 78% and specificity was 53%. The negative predictive values for detection of all PCa and GS ≥7 PCa were 78.8% and 94.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this group of AA men, we successfully validated an epigenetic assay to assess the need for repeat biopsy. Results were consistent with previous studies from predominantly Caucasian populations. Therefore, the ConfirmMDx assay is a useful tool for risk stratification of AA men who had an initial negative biopsy.

Erectile response to vardenafil in men with a history of nonresponse to sildenafil: a time-from-dosing descriptive analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and tolerability of vardenafil hydrochloride in men with erectile dysfunction (ED) and a history of nonresponse to sildenafil citrate have previously been reported. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this descriptive analysis was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of vardenafil at various times after dosing in men with ED and a history of nonresponse to sildenafil and who chose to attempt sexual intercourse between 0.25 and 6 hours after dosing with vardenafil. METHODS: This analysis used data from a previously published 12-week, prospective, randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled study conducted at 41 hospitals and outpatient clinics across Australia, Europe, Asia, and North America. In that study, men with ED and sildenafil nonresponse, defined using 6 rigorous criteria (including nonresponse to the highest recommended dose, 100 mg/d) were assigned to receive vardenafil 10 mg or placebo QD. At study weeks 4 and 8, patients in both groups were given the option to maintain the 10-mg/d dose, or have the dose titrated to 5 or 20 mg/d. The present analysis used data from patient diaries completed daily, which included information concerning attempts at sexual intercourse, time from dosing to attempt, penetration, and maintenance of erection sufficient for successful intercourse. At week 12, diary data were categorized into time intervals (in hours) after dosing. For each interval, the per-patient success rate was based on the total number of attempts made in that interval. Comparative statistics were not performed on the time-interval analysis. Tolerability was monitored throughout the study. Data concerning the primary end point were reported previously. RESULTS: A total of 463 men were enrolled, of whom 457 were included in the safety analysis (vardenafil, n = 231; placebo, n = 226) and 454 in the intent-to-treat analysis (vardenafil, n = 229; placebo, n = 225; mean age, 60.1 vs 59.0 years; mean body mass index, 28.7 vs 28.0 kg/m2). Six patients were excluded from the safety analysis (2 patients did not use study medication [placebo group], postbaseline safety data unavailable in 4 patients [2 in each study group]). Men receiving vardenafil had numerically greater penetration and completion success rates compared with those receiving placebo at all time intervals. Penetration success rates were numerically higher with vardenafil compared with placebo as early as within 0.25 hour after dosing (62% vs 30%); efficacy continued beyond 6 hours after dosing in 77% and 50% of patients, respectively. Similarly, vardenafil-treated patients had numerically greater completion success rates compared with those receiving placebo at 0.25 hour (53% vs 12%) and beyond 6 hours after dosing (70% vs 24%). The most common drug-related adverse events in the vardenafil and placebo groups were flushing (7% vs 1%), headache (6% vs 2%), and nasal congestion (5% vs <1%). CONCLUSIONS: This descriptive analysis suggests that erection sufficient for penetration and intercourse completion was achieved within 0.25 hour and lasted for >6 hours after dosing with vardenafil 10 mg in these men with mostly moderate to severe ED and a history of nonresponse to sildenafil and who chose to make attempts during those intervals. The drug was generally well tolerated.

Erectile response with vardenafil in sildenafil nonresponders: a multicentre, double-blind, 12-week, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled erectile dysfunction clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of vardenafil in patients previously unresponsive to sildenafil. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentre, double-blind, 12-week, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled trial was conducted, involving 463 men aged > or = 18 years with moderate-to-severe erectile dysfunction (ED) and who were unresponsive to sildenafil (by history). After a 4-week treatment-free run-in, patients received placebo or vardenafil 10 mg with the option to maintain current dose or to titrate by one dose level (5, 10 or 20 mg) based on efficacy and tolerability at 4 and 8 weeks. Outcome measures were the erectile function (EF) domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function, two Sexual Encounter Profile diary questions (vaginal penetration and maintenance of erection until successful completion of intercourse), and the Global Assessment Question (GAQ). RESULTS: There was significantly better EF with vardenafil than with placebo throughout the study. The least-square mean EF domain scores increased from 9.3 at baseline to 17.6 at the 'last' observation carried forward (LOCF) analysis with vardenafil (P < 0.001). Overall least-square mean per-patient success rates more than doubled for penetration (30.3% to 62.3%) and quadrupled for successful intercourse (10.5% to 46.1%) with vardenafil. Improved erections (positive response to the GAQ) were reported by 61.8% of patients receiving vardenafil and 14.7% of those receiving placebo at LOCF (P < 0.001). Normal EF (domain score > or = 26) was achieved by 30% of patients receiving vardenafil and 6% receiving placebo at LOCF (P < 0.001). Adverse events were infrequent and representative of the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor profile. CONCLUSION: Vardenafil is an effective and generally safe treatment for ED, even in men unresponsive to sildenafil (by history).