-
European Journal of Pharmacology Aug 2018Fesoterodine (as one of three drugs: dutasteride, finasteride and fesoterodine) was classified B (beneficial) by LUTS-FORTA 2014, indicating that it is a medicinal... (Review)
Review
Fesoterodine (as one of three drugs: dutasteride, finasteride and fesoterodine) was classified B (beneficial) by LUTS-FORTA 2014, indicating that it is a medicinal product with proven or obvious efficacy in the elderly, with limited side effects and/or safety concerns. A systematic literature review was undertaken in January 2018 using the PubMed and Google Scholar databases with the following individual and combined keywords: "fesoterodine", "pharmacology", "overactive bladder" and "antimuscarinics". The aim of the review was to determine which of fesoterodine's pharmacological properties explains its clinical benefits in general patient populations with OAB and the elderly in particular. The articles in the results were then selected by publication language (English and French only), methodology (off-topic studies, reported cases and literature reviews were excluded), relevance to the subject matter and publication date prior to 31 January 2018. A total of 205 articles was initially obtained, with 115 read and 45 selected. It appears that the association of four pharmacological properties specific to fesoterodine can explain that this drug has a good balance between efficacy and tolerability. These properties are namely the drug's high and nearly equal affinity for both the M2 and M3 muscarinic receptors, poor penetration of the blood-brain barrier, lack of hepatic first-pass activation -fesoterodine being rapidly and extensively converted to its active metabolite, 5-hydroxymethyl tolterodine, by ubiquitous esterases-, and its extended-release formulation. Fesoterodine's pharmacological profile is optimal for the treatment of overactive bladder. It is now recognized as one of the leading first-line treatment for this indication.
Topics: Animals; Benzhydryl Compounds; Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists; Receptor, Muscarinic M2; Receptor, Muscarinic M3; Urinary Bladder, Overactive; Urological Agents
PubMed: 29803689
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2018.05.036 -
Urologia Internationalis 2017This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative dutasteride treatment for reducing surgical blood loss in patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative dutasteride treatment for reducing surgical blood loss in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).
METHODS
A systematic search was performed from the electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library by May 2016. We followed the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement when examining the literature. Identified articles were strictly appraised for quality and relevance.
RESULTS
Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 retrospective cohort studies involving 1,022 patients with benign prostate hyperplasia were analyzed based on the inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis revealed that preoperative treatment with dutasteride had a significantly smaller decrease in hemoglobin (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.47, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.24, p < 0.0001) and hematocrit levels (WMD -1.03, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.33, p = 0.004); However, no significant difference has been found in terms of the total blood loss during TURP and blood loos per gram of resected prostatic tissue, the weight of resected prostate tissue, the microvessel density of the prostate, and the transfusion rate between the dutasteride and the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that preoperative treatment with dutasteride could reduce surgical bleeding during TURP, but the findings of this study should be further confirmed by well-designed prospective RCTs with a larger patient series.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Blood Loss, Surgical; Blood Transfusion; Dutasteride; Hemoglobins; Humans; Male; Microcirculation; Prospective Studies; Prostate; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Transurethral Resection of Prostate; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 28006778
DOI: 10.1159/000453669 -
Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy :... Jun 2024We aimed to determine the efficacy of the various available oral, topical, and procedural treatment options for hair loss in individuals with androgenic alopecia. Using...
We aimed to determine the efficacy of the various available oral, topical, and procedural treatment options for hair loss in individuals with androgenic alopecia. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the National Library of Medicine was performed. Overall, 141 unique studies met our inclusion criteria. We demonstrate that many over the counter (e.g. topical minoxidil, supplements, low-level light treatment), prescription (e.g. oral minoxidil, finasteride, dutasteride), and procedural (e.g. platelet-rich plasma, fractionated lasers, hair transplantation) treatments successfully promote hair growth, highlighting the superiority of a multifaceted and individualized approach to management.
PubMed: 38852607
DOI: 10.1080/14764172.2024.2362126 -
European Urology Focus Apr 20245α-Reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) are widely prescribed for treatment of benign prostatic obstruction and androgenic alopecia. Several studies with controversial... (Review)
Review
5α-Reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) are widely prescribed for treatment of benign prostatic obstruction and androgenic alopecia. Several studies with controversial findings regarding 5-ARI exposure have been published over a number of years, and concerns were recently raised about the potential risks of depression and suicide associated with 5-ARIs. To investigate this association, we conducted a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis. Five studies involving 2213600 patients met our inclusion criteria. We found no statistically significant association between 5-ARI exposure and the risk of depression (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-2.00; p = 0.23) or suicide (aHR 1.30, 95% CI 0.65-2.61; p = 0.45). Subgroup analyses for finasteride and dutasteride revealed similar results. When restricting the analysis to patients without a prior diagnosis of depression, we observed similar findings (aHR for suicide 1.00, 95% CI 0.68-1.46; p = 0.98). PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed study data for more than two million patients taking drugs called 5α-reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs), which are widely prescribed for urinary problems caused by benign prostate enlargement and for male-pattern hair loss. In a pooled analysis we found no evidence of an association between 5-ARI use and the risk of depression or suicide.
PubMed: 38692949
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2024.04.009 -
World Journal of Urology Aug 2014To determine the efficacy and safety of dutasteride, alone or in combination, versus a placebo or control, used for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To determine the efficacy and safety of dutasteride, alone or in combination, versus a placebo or control, used for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
METHODS
Pubmed(®) and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials longer than 6 months in duration. The subjects in the trials were men aged 40 or over, with moderate to severe symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) as determined by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). We pooled data from a total of nine different clinical trials.
RESULTS
Dutasteride was superior to placebo in improving urinary symptoms measured by IPSS (∆ = -1.78, 95 % CI -3.01 to -0.55), peak urinary flow (Q max) (∆ = 1.27 mL/s, 95 % CI 0.97-1.57), and change in total prostate volume (TPV) (∆ = -17.40 cm(3), 95 % CI -25.77 to -9.02) while it resulted in more frequent drug-related adverse events (RR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.19-1.54). Combination therapy with dutasteride and tamsulosin resulted in significantly greater improvements in IPSS and Q max than tamsulosin monotherapy (∆ = -1.80 mL/s, 95 % CI -1.81 to -1.79 and ∆ = 1.60 mL/s, 95 % CI 1.59-1.61, respectively). When comparing dutasteride with finasteride, no significant differences in symptom improvement or the rate of adverse events were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
Dutasteride can be used to improve urinary symptoms (IPSS and Q max) and reduce TPV but with awareness of its potential adverse events. Combination therapy with tamsulosin can be considered when further improvements in symptoms are desired.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Azasteroids; Drug Therapy, Combination; Dutasteride; Finasteride; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Organ Size; Prostate; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfonamides; Tamsulosin; Treatment Outcome; Urological Agents
PubMed: 24500194
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-014-1258-9 -
Translational Andrology and Urology Mar 2022Although the efficacy and safety of monotherapy in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) have been established clinically, the efficacy and safety of...
BACKGROUND
Although the efficacy and safety of monotherapy in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) have been established clinically, the efficacy and safety of dutasteride and finasteride have not been compared. The aim was to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the two drugs in the treatment of BPH to provide medical evidence for clinical treatment.
METHODS
A search of relevant articles was conducted using the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, China Academic Journals Full-text Database (CJFD), Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) and Wanfang Database. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of finasteride (control group) with that of dutasteride (experimental group) in the treatment of BPH with respect to the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), prostate volume (PV), quality of life (QOL), serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) after medication were strictly evaluated and considered for inclusion. Rev Man 5.4 software was used for the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 8 RCTs were included, with a total of 2,116, patients. The meta-analysis showed that compared with finasteride, dutasteride can effectively improve the Qmax of patients with BPH [mean difference (MD) =0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): (0.01, 0.63); P=0.04]. There was no significant difference in reducing IPSS [MD =0.13; 95% CI: (-0.55, 0.82); P=0.70], improving PV [MD =-1.25; 95% CI: (-3.30, 0.79); P=0.23], reducing QOL [MD =-0.44; 95% CI: (-0.93, 0.05); P=0.08] and serum PSA level [MD =-0.04; 95% CI: (-0.15, 0.07); P=0.50], and the occurrence of ADRs [relative risk (RR) =-0.01; 95% CI: (-0.05, 0.04); P=0.72], there was no significant difference.
DISCUSSION
Dutasteride is better than finasteride in improving the Qmax of patients with BPH. There was no statistically significant difference in symptoms, PV, PSA, QOL, or adverse reactions. Dutasteride is an effective and safe treatment for BPH. Due to the limitations of the methodological quality and sample size of the included studies, this conclusion needs to be verified by stratified RCTS with high volumes and long follow-up times.
PubMed: 35402192
DOI: 10.21037/tau-22-58 -
The Canadian Journal of Hospital... 2017Finasteride and dutasteride are competitive inhibitors of 5α-reductase enzymes and are commonly used to treat symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Finasteride and dutasteride are competitive inhibitors of 5α-reductase enzymes and are commonly used to treat symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and safety of finasteride and dutasteride in terms of clinically important outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
A literature search was performed using the search terms "prostatic hyperplasia", "prostatic hypertrophy", "dutasteride", "finasteride", "quality of life", "adverse drug reaction", and "mortality". The Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature databases were searched from inception to December 2015.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized trials, and systematic reviews comparing finasteride with dutasteride, either as monotherapy or in combination with α-blockers, for treatment of men with BPH were included. The outcomes of interest included need for prostate-related surgery, episodes of acute urinary retention, withdrawals due to adverse events, number of patients experiencing serious adverse events, mortality, and sexual dysfunction.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Four studies involving a total of 1879 patients were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in any of the clinically important outcomes examined: for prostate-related surgery, odds ratio (OR) 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-22.24); for episodes of acute urinary retention, OR 1.47 (95% CI 0.68-3.19); for number of withdrawals due to adverse events, OR 1.10 (95% CI 0.68-1.75); for total number of patients experiencing adverse events, OR 0.94 (95% CI 0.78-1.14); for number of patients experiencing serious adverse events, OR 1.31 (95% CI 0.87-1.97); and for sexual dysfunction, OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.08).
CONCLUSION
There is insufficient evidence to suggest that either finasteride or dutasteride offers an advantage in efficacy or safety over the other, in terms of clinically important outcomes.
PubMed: 28487578
DOI: 10.4212/cjhp.v70i2.1643 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Dec 2019This systematic review aims to examine surgical and non-surgical treatments and identify those procedures that are most effective in terms of patient satisfaction.
INTRODUCTION
This systematic review aims to examine surgical and non-surgical treatments and identify those procedures that are most effective in terms of patient satisfaction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review protocol was developed a priori in accordance with the Preferred Reporting for Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. The search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, the Cochrane handbook. A multistep search of the PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, PreMEDLINE, Ebase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies on hair loss causes and hair loss treatment with different surgical and non-surgical techniques RESULTS: Our search generated a total of 781 articles; 646 studies were excluded based on the content of the abstracts, and an additional 105 studies were excluded based on the content of the complete article. We performed a review of the 30 remaining studies, which had sufficient data for inclusion, and met all the aforementioned inclusion criteria. Of the 30 studies, four were about minoxidil, four about finasteride, two about dutasteride, three about phototherapy, six about platelet-rich plasma injection, four about follicular unit transplantation technique, six about follicular unit extraction technique, and one about patient satisfaction following surgical treatment without a specified surgical technique. Only three studies used a patient-reported outcome measurement.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study is the first comprehensive systematic review of hair loss, looking at the problem from different points of view, and focusing on finding the best solution for the patient. In the literature, there is currently no algorithm for the management of patients who go to a plastic surgeon for a solution to the problem of hair loss.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
Topics: Alopecia; Humans; Patient Satisfaction; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31451851
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-019-01480-9 -
Age and Ageing Sep 2015we aimed to systematically review drugs to treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) regularly used in older persons to classify appropriate and inappropriate drugs... (Review)
Review
Appropriateness of oral drugs for long-term treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in older persons: results of a systematic literature review and international consensus validation process (LUTS-FORTA 2014).
AIM
we aimed to systematically review drugs to treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) regularly used in older persons to classify appropriate and inappropriate drugs based on efficacy, safety and tolerability by using the Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA) classification.
METHODS
to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of drugs used for treatment of LUTS in older persons, a systematic review was performed. Papers on clinical trials and summaries of individual product characteristics were analysed regarding efficacy and safety in older persons (≥65 years). The most frequently used drugs were selected based on current prescription data. An interdisciplinary international expert panel assessed the drugs in a Delphi process.
RESULTS
for the 16 drugs included here, a total of 896 citations were identified; of those, only 25 reported clinical trials with explicit data on, or solely performed in older people, underlining the lack of evidence in older people for drug treatment of LUTS. No drug was rated at the FORTA-A-level (indispensable). Only three were assigned to FORTA B (beneficial): dutasteride, fesoterodine and finasteride. The majority was rated FORTA C (questionable): darifenacin, mirabegron, extended release oxybutynin, silodosin, solifenacin, tadalafil, tamsulosin, tolterodine and trospium. FORTA D (avoid) was assigned to alfuzosin, doxazosin, immediate release oxybutynin, propiverine and terazosin.
CONCLUSIONS
dutasteride, fesoterodine and finasteride were classified as beneficial in older persons or frail elderly people (FORTA B). For most drugs, in particular those from the group of α-blockers and antimuscarinics, use in this group seems questionable (FORTA C) or should be avoided (FORTA D).
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Administration, Oral; Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists; Age Factors; Aged; Aging; Consensus; Delphi Technique; Humans; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Muscarinic Antagonists; Patient Selection; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Urological Agents
PubMed: 26104505
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afv077 -
The Journal of Sexual Medicine Sep 20165α-Reductase inhibitors (5ARIs) are widely used for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and androgenetic alopecia (AGA). (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
5α-Reductase inhibitors (5ARIs) are widely used for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and androgenetic alopecia (AGA).
AIM
To review all the available data on the effect of 5ARIs on sexual function and assess whether 5ARIs increase the risk of sexual dysfunction.
METHODS
A systematic search of the literature was conducted using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The search was limited to articles published in English and up to October 2015. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses criteria. Data were analyzed using Stata 12.0. A fixed- or a random-effects model was used to calculate the overall combined risk estimates. Publication bias was assessed using Begg and Egger tests.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Sexual dysfunction, erectile dysfunction, and decreased libido.
RESULTS
After screening 493 articles, 17 randomized controlled trials with 17,494 patients were included. Nine studies evaluated the efficacy of 5ARIs in men with BPH. The other eight reported using 5ARIs in the treatment of men with AGA. The mean age of participants was 60.10 years across all studies. We included 10 trials (6,779 patients) on the efficacy and safety of finasteride, 4 trials (6,222 patients) on the safety and tolerability of dutasteride, and 3 trials (4,493 patients) using finasteride and dutasteride for AGA. The pooled relative risks for sexual dysfunction were 2.56 (95% CI = 1.48-4.42) in men with BPH and 1.21 (95% CI = 0.85-1.72) in men with AGA; those for erectile dysfunction were 1.55 (95% CI = 1.14-2.12) in men with BPH and 0.66 (95% CI = 0.20-2.25) in men with AGA; and those for decreased libido were 1.69 (95% CI = 1.03-2.79) in men with BPH and 1.16 (95% CI = 0.50-2.72) in men with AGA. Estimates of the total effects were generally consistent with the sensitivity analysis. No evidence of publication bias was observed.
CONCLUSION
Evidence from the randomized controlled trials suggested that 5ARIs were associated with increased adverse effects on sexual function in men with BPH compared with placebo. However, the association was not statistically significant in men with AGA. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are indicated to study further the mechanism and effects of 5ARIs on sexual function.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Ejaculation; Erectile Dysfunction; Finasteride; Humans; Libido; Male; Middle Aged; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27475241
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.07.006