Avanafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study in men with diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess the safety and effectiveness of the investigational phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor avanafil to treat erectile dysfunction in men with diabetes mellitus. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted between December 15, 2008, and February 11, 2010, randomized 390 men with diabetes and erectile dysfunction 1:1:1 to receive avanafil, 100 mg (n=129), avanafil, 200 mg (n=131), or placebo (n=130). Coprimary end points assessed changes in the percentage of sexual attempts in which men were able to maintain an erection of sufficient duration to have successful intercourse (Sexual Encounter Profile [SEP] 3), percentage of sexual attempts in which men were able to insert the penis into the partner's vagina (SEP 2), and International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, least-squares mean change from baseline to study end in SEP 3, SEP 2, and International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score were significantly improved with both avanafil, 100 mg (P≤.002), and avanafil, 200 mg (P<.001). Additional analyses indicated that successful intercourse could be initiated in 15 minutes or less through more than 6 hours after avanafil dosing. Adverse events most commonly reported with avanafil treatment were headache, nasopharyngitis, flushing, and sinus congestion. CONCLUSION: Avanafil was safe and effective for treating erectile dysfunction in men with diabetes and was effective as early as 15 minutes and more than 6 hours after dosing. The adverse events seen with avanafil were similar to those seen with other phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT00809471.

Effectiveness, pharmacokinetics, and safety of a new sustained-release leuprolide acetate 3.75-mg depot formulation for testosterone suppression in patients with prostate cancer: a Phase III, open-label, international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: A microencapsulated, sustained-release formulation of leuprolide acetate 3.75 mg has been developed. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the effectiveness, pharmacokinetics, and safety profile of a 1-month leuprolide acetate 3.75-mg depot formulation for suppressing testosterone concentrations in patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: This was a Phase III, open-label, international multicenter clinical trial. Patients with prostate cancer who, in the judgment of the investigators, could benefit from androgen deprivation therapy received 6 monthly intramuscular injections of leuprolide acetate 3.75-mg depot. Plasma testosterone concentrations were determined at specific times throughout the study. The primary end point was the proportion of successful patients over the total number of evaluable patients (ie, patients with evaluable testosterone concentrations at all monthly assessments and no missing values due to treatment-related adverse events). Treatment success was defined as testosterone suppression below the clinical castration level (ie,

A 12-month clinical study of LA-2585 (45.0 mg): a new 6-month subcutaneous delivery system for leuprolide acetate for the treatment of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of LA-2585, a new 6-month subcutaneous depot of leuprolide acetate (Atrix Laboratories, Fort Collins, Colorado) were investigated in patients with prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this 12-month, open label, multicenter study 111 patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate were administered 45.0 mg LA-2585 subcutaneously once every 6 months. The primary efficacy parameter was serum testosterone 50 ng/dl or less. Leuprolide acetate pharmacokinetics were analyzed in a subset of 28 patients. RESULTS: Of the 111 enrolled patients 103 (93%) completed the 12-month study. Eight patients withdrew due to nonmedical reasons in 1, disease progression in 5 and cardiovascular disease in 2. By day 28, 108 of the 109 remaining patients (99%) achieved testosterone suppression, while 1 who never attained suppression was withdrawn at day 85. Mean time to castrate suppression was 21.2 days (median 21). At study completion 102 of 103 patients (99%) were below medical castrate testosterone levels of 50 ng/dl (mean +/- SE 12.3 +/- 2.1 ng/dl) with 91 of 103 (88%) at less than 20 ng/dl. Mean luteinizing hormone decreased from 6.98 +/- 0.48 mIU/ml at baseline to 0.23 +/- 0.14 mIU/ml at month 12. Luteinizing hormone was consistently below 1 mIU/ml. Mean prostate specific antigen decreased 97% from 39.8 +/- 21.5 ng/ml at baseline to 1.2 +/- 0.3 ng/ml at 12 months. No clinically significant flare reactions were observed. The most common treatment related adverse event was mild to moderate hot flashes. CONCLUSIONS: LA-2585 (45.0 mg depot) consistently produced and maintained safe and effective serum testosterone suppression with total serum testosterone well below the medical castrate level of less than 50 ng/dl.

Open-label trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of zoledronic acid in preventing bone loss in patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and bone metastases.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in preventing bone loss in patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and bone metastases who were receiving androgen deprivation therapy. METHODS: Patients received zoledronic acid 4 mg as a 15-minute infusion every 3 weeks for 1 year. Bone mineral density of the lumbar spine (L2 to L4) and total hip was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and 12 months. Biochemical markers of bone turnover (N-telopeptide and bone alkaline phosphatase) and serum creatinine levels were evaluated at baseline and during the study. Skeletal-related events were assessed at each study visit. RESULTS: Of the 221 enrolled patients, 202 and 221 patients were included in the efficacy and safety analyses, respectively. The mean increase in bone mineral density of the lumbar spine and total hip was 7.7% (P <0.001) and 3.6% (P <0.001), respectively. Decreases in N-telopeptide and bone alkaline phosphatase levels were significant and sustained. The median time to the first skeletal-related event was not reached; 11.9% of patients had a skeletal-related event. Arthralgia (20.4%), nausea (14%), fatigue (14%), and back pain (12.2%) were the most common adverse events. Adverse events due to renal function deterioration were infrequent. The mean maximal change in serum creatinine level from baseline was 0.3 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: Zoledronic acid administration for 1 year to patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and bone metastases who were receiving androgen deprivation therapy was safe and prevented bone loss, as demonstrated by significant increases in bone mineral density and sustained suppression of biochemical markers of bone turnover.

Vardenafil is effective and well-tolerated for treating erectile dysfunction in a broad population of men, irrespective of age.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of vardenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) in men of different age groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective pooled subgroup analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, men from the general population with ED received either placebo or vardenafil 5, 10 or 20 mg over 12 weeks. Efficacy variables included the erectile function (EF) domain score from The International Index of Erectile Function, diary response rates to questions on vaginal penetration and maintenance of erection, and positive responses to the Global Assessment Question (GAQ) "Has the treatment you have been taking over the past 4 weeks improved your erections?'. The 1385 men were grouped by age (< 45, 45-64 and > or =65 years). RESULTS: At 12 weeks the EF domain scores approached 20 with vardenafil and 14 with placebo in men aged > or = 65 years (P < 0.03 vardenafil 5 mg vs placebo, P < 0.001 vardenafil 10 and 20 mg vs placebo). The corresponding scores were 22 and 14 in men aged 45-64 years and up to 24 and 16 in those aged <45 years (P < 0.03 vardenafil 5 mg vs placebo, P < 0.001 vardenafil 10 and 20 mg vs placebo). Vardenafil generated positive GAQ responses in approximately 71%, 76% and 85% of men aged <45, 45-64 and > or = 65 years (P < or = 0.001 vardenafil vs placebo). The corresponding placebo rates were 23%, 25% and 34%. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache, rhinitis, flushing and dyspepsia, which were mild to moderate, transient and unrelated to age. CONCLUSION: Vardenafil is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for ED, irrespective of age.

Women's sexual function improves when partners are administered vardenafil for erectile dysfunction: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited data concerning the sexual function of women whose male partners receive pharmacological treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED). AIM: One objective of this research was to prospectively compare the efficacy of vardenafil vs. placebo administered to men with ED in improving men's and women partners' sexual function and satisfaction. Another goal was to assess the relationship of erectile function changes in men with ED receiving treatment with sexual function changes in women partners not directly receiving treatment. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-institutional comparison of vardenafil vs. placebo was performed in 229 couples (treated man with ED>6 months and untreated woman partner). Co-primary outcomes for which this research was statistically powered were Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP3) (treated man with ED) and Sexual Life Quality Questionnaire (mSLQQ-QOL) (untreated woman partner). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Erectile function changes in men with ED receiving vardenafil vs. placebo were compared at last observation carried forward (LOCF) in SEP3, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) and Erection Quality Scale (EQS). Sexual function at LOCF in women partners was determined by mSLQQ-QOL and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULTS: Compared with placebo at LOCF, vardenafil significantly increased least square (LS) mean scores in: (i) overall per-treated male SEP3 success rate, IIEF-EF, and EQS; and (ii) mSLQQ-QOL, total FSFI and sexual desire, subjective arousal, lubrication, orgasm and satisfaction FSFI domains in untreated women partners. Treatment-related improvement in erectile function as assessed by IIEF-EF and EQS was correlated reliably with improvement in women partners' FSFI total and individual domain scores. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil is an effective ED treatment in men that also significantly improves sexual function/satisfaction in untreated women partners. Women partners' sexual function improvements relate significantly and consistently to treatment-related improvements in men's erectile function. ED management should emphasize both members of the couple.

Improving the sexual quality of life of couples affected by erectile dysfunction: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of vardenafil.

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) has a dual negative impact on men and their female partners; both are likely to face a drop in sexual quality of life and challenges to their intimate relationship as couples' sexual activities are curtailed by the loss of erectile function. AIM: The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of vardenafil vs. placebo in terms of success of maintenance of erection in men with ED and improvement of their female partner's sexual quality of life. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, flexible-dose, parallel-group comparison of vardenafil vs. placebo for 12 weeks in men (> or =18 years) with ED of > or = 6 months duration, and their female partners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in patient's overall response rate to Sexual Encounter Profile question 3 (SEP3) "Did your erection last long enough for you to have sexual intercourse?" and female partner's response to the quality of life domain of the modified Sexual Life Quality Questionnaire (mSLQQ-QOL) at last observation carried forward (LOCF) were considered the primary efficacy measures. In addition, patient's response to SEP2 "Were you able to insert your penis into your partner's vagina?," the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) and patient's mSLQQ-QOL score were also assessed. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, vardenafil significantly improved overall least square (LS) mean per-patient SEP3 success rate (28% vs. 68%; P < 0.0001) and partner's LS mean (standard error [SE]) mSLQQ-QOL score at LOCF (32.14 [3.24] vs. 65.80 [3.10]; P < 0.0001). In addition, compared with placebo, vardenafil also improved overall LS mean per-patient SEP2 success rate (47% vs. 80%; P < 0.0001), LS mean (SE) IIEF-EF scores at LOCF (12.7 [0.8] vs. 22.8 [0.8]; P < 0.0001) and patient's LS mean (SE) mSLQQ-QOL (28.37 [3.46] vs. 63.85 [3.28]; P < 0.0001) at LOCF. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil improved erectile function in men with ED and improved the sexual quality of life of the couple.

Safety and efficacy of vardenafil for the treatment of men with erectile dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: More than one-third of men may experience erectile dysfunction (ED) after nerve sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. The efficacy and safety of vardenafil, a potent, selective, phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, was assessed for the treatment of ED after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind study 440 men with ED after nerve sparing radical prostatectomy were randomized to take placebo, or 10 or 20 mg vardenafil. Efficacy was measured after 12 weeks using the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function, diary questions measuring vaginal penetration and intercourse success rates, and a global assessment question (GAQ) on erection. RESULTS: Of the intent to treat population 70% had severe ED (erectile function less than 11) at baseline. After 12 weeks both vardenafil doses were significantly superior to placebo (p <0.0001) for all efficacy variables. Improved erections (based on GAQ) were reported by 65.2% and 59.4% of patients on 20 and 10 mg vardenafil, respectively, and by only 12.5% of patients on placebo (p <0.0001). Among men with bilateral neurovascular bundle sparing, positive GAQ responses were reported by 71.1% and 59.7% of patients on 20 and 10 mg vardenafil, respectively, versus 11.5% of those on placebo (p <0.0001). The average intercourse success rate per patient receiving 20 mg vardenafil was 74% in men with mild to moderate ED and 28% in men with severe ED, compared to 49% and 4% for placebo, respectively. Few adverse events were observed. They were generally mild to moderate headache, flushing and rhinitis. CONCLUSIONS: In men with severe ED after nerve sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy, vardenafil significantly improved key indices of erectile function.

Sustained efficacy and tolerability of vardenafil, a highly potent selective phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor, in men with erectile dysfunction: results of a randomized, double-blind, 26-week placebo-controlled pivotal trial.

The durability of key efficacy response parameters and safety of vardenafil was evaluated in a pivotal trial conducted in a broad population of men with erectile dysfunction (ED) in North America. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, fixed-dose, parallel-group, 6-month comparison study, men >18 years of age with ED for >6 months received 5-mg, 10-mg, and 20-mg doses of vardenafil as needed for up to 26 weeks. The primary efficacy variables were the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-Erectile Function (EF) domain scores, and the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) mean per-patient success rates for penetration (SEP question 2) and maintenance of erections (SEP question 3). Safety data were also collected over time. Improvement in all primary efficacy variables was observed in all vardenafil groups versus placebo. These improvements occurred early and were either sustained or increased through week 26. Vardenafil in 10-mg and 20-mg doses was significantly superior to placebo at all time points for all efficacy variables (P <0.01), and all doses were superior to placebo at endpoint (P <0.001). Most treatment-emergent adverse events (headache, flushing, dyspepsia, and rhinitis) were mild or moderate in intensity, and incidence generally decreased over time. All 3 doses of vardenafil were superior to placebo across all primary efficacy variables and all study time points in a broad range of patients with ED, regardless of etiology or severity. Vardenafil was well tolerated. These results demonstrate that vardenafil provides sustained efficacy with reduced incidence of nuisance side effects over time. High resolution video, medium resolution video, low resolution video.