4.4 Article

Persistence of solifenacin therapy in patients with overactive bladder in the clinical setting: a prospective, multicenter, observational study

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 70, Issue 4, Pages 351-357

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.12783

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Astellas Pharma Korea, Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the persistence with solifenacin therapy over a 12-month period in patients with overactive bladder (OAB). MethodsThis is a 52-week long, multicenter, prospective, observational study. The subjects were individuals 18years old with OAB symptoms for 3months, characterised by a total OAB Symptom Score (OABSS) of 3 and OABSS urgency item score of 2. Patients were prescribed 5mg or 10mg of solifenacin once daily for OAB symptoms. Drug persistence, reasons for discontinuation and factors related to the persistence were evaluated. ResultsA total of 1018 patients (329 men, 689 women) with a mean age of 59years were included. The 52-week drug persistence rate was 22.1%. The drug persistence rates at 12, 24 and 36weeks were 72.4%, 45.8% and 31.1% respectively. The three most common reasons for discontinuing therapy included symptom improvement in 30.4%, lack of efficacy in 13.4%, and a switch to another antimuscarinic agent in 10.8%. Older patients (odds ratio=1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.04), and female patients (odds ratio=1.94, 95% CI: 1.37-2.75) were more likely to continue the medication over the 12-month period than were younger, male patients. The number of nocturia episodes was negatively correlated with drug persistence (odds ratio=0.83, 95% CI: 0.71-0.97). ConclusionsThere was low persistence (22%) to solifenacin therapy for OAB symptoms over a 12-month period. Older patients, female patients and those with fewer episodes of nocturia were more persistent to therapy than were others.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available