Premium
Treatment Patterns and Patient Reported Outcomes in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients with Overactive Bladder Symptoms
Author(s) -
PARK Yong Hyun,
KIM Tae Hyo,
LEE Seung Wook,
CHUNG Byung Ha,
CHO Jin Seon,
LEE Ji Youl
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
luts: lower urinary tract symptoms
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.451
H-Index - 15
eISSN - 1757-5672
pISSN - 1757-5664
DOI - 10.1111/luts.12112
Subject(s) - medicine , overactive bladder , urology , international prostate symptom score , quality of life (healthcare) , clinical endpoint , hyperplasia , combination therapy , benign prostatic hyperplasia (bph) , solifenacin , lower urinary tract symptoms , prostate , randomized controlled trial , alternative medicine , nursing , pathology , cancer
Objectives We aimed to examine the treatment patterns, and patient‐reported outcomes ( PROs ) in benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) patients with overactive bladder ( OAB ) symptoms. Methods Seven hundred and forty seven patients were included in this prospective observational study. The primary endpoint was to describe the medical treatment patterns for BPH patients with OAB symptoms. The secondary endpoint was to determine the PROs of these patients. Clinical outcome was assessed using International prostate symptom score ( IPSS ), and PROs were measured using BPH‐R elated QoL Q uestionnaire K orea 1 ( BPH QoL K1 ) and E uroqol‐5 D imension ( EQ‐5D ). Results When starting the study, 391 patients (52.3%) received α‐blocker monotherapy, whereas 356 (47.7%) received combination therapy with anticholinergics. Of the 369 patients who completed the 6‐month treatment, 139 patients (37.7%) still received α‐blocker monotherapy, 122 (33.1%) still received combination therapy with anticholinergics, and 108 (29.3%) received subsequent anticholinergics in addition to α‐blocker. When the patients were stratified, storage subscore was higher (9.5 vs. 8.8, P = 0.034) and voiding subscore (9.7 vs. 11.6, P = 0.001) was lower in patients with anticholinergics than those without it. Although all treatment groups reported a significant improvement from baseline, no significant between‐group differences in changes in IPSS , EQ‐5D and BPH QoL K1 was found. Conclusions About one‐third of patients received α‐blocker monotherapy, one‐third received combination therapy with anticholinergics, and another one‐third received subsequent anticholinergics in addition to α‐blocker. Storage subscore was higher in patients with anticholinergics than those without it, but vice‐versa for voiding subscore. Similar improvement on clinical outcomes and PROs was observed in all treatment groups.