4.6 Article

Salvage of sildenafil failures with bremelanotide: A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study

Journal

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 179, Issue 3, Pages 1066-1071

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.063

Keywords

receptors, melanocortin; erectile dysfunction; drug therapy; sildenafil; PT-141

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of intranasal bremelanotide in men with erectile dysfunction who did not respond to sildenafil. Materials and Methods: A total of 342 married men (28 to 59 years old) with. erectile dysfunction who did not respond to sildenafil were randomly assigned to receive 10 mg bremelanotide as an intranasal spray (group 1, 172) 45 minutes to 2 hours prior to sexual stimulation, or a similar regimen of placebo (group 2, 170). Patients were asked to use at least 16 doses/attempts at home. They underwent preliminary assessment, including medical and sexual history, and self-administered International Index of Erectile Function. The efficacy of 2 treatments was assessed every 4 attempts during treatment and at the end of study, using responses to International Index of Erectile Function, and evaluation of mean intercourse satisfaction domain, mean weekly coitus episodes and adverse drug effects. Results: Positive clinical results were seen in 51 (33.5%) patients in the bremelanotide group compared with 13 (8.5%) patients in the placebo group (p = 0.03). Patients in the bremelanotide group reported significantly greater intercourse satisfaction than those in placebo group (p = 0.03). More drug related adverse effects occurred in the bremelanotide group (p = 0.01). Conclusions: Bremelanotide can be, an alternative treatment for erectile dysfunction with a potentially broad patient base. Further studies with different dosages and treatment regimens are necessary to draw final conclusions on the efficacy of this drug in erectile dysfunction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available