[go: up one dir, main page]


Investig Clin Urol. 2024 Sep;65(5):466-472. English.
Published online Jul 16, 2024.
© The Korean Urological Association
Original Article

Efficacy and safety evaluation of imidafenacin administered twice daily for continency recovery following radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer patients: Prospective open-label case-controlled randomized trial

Jun Hee Lee,1 Hyeok Jun Goh,1 Kisoo Lee,1 Dong Won Choi,1 Kwang Min Lee,2 and Soodong Kim1
    • 1Department of Urology, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
    • 2Department of Cardiology, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Received April 17, 2024; Revised May 26, 2024; Accepted June 03, 2024.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to prospectively analyze the effects of anticholinergic therapy using imidafenacin on detrusor overactivity occurring after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

Materials and Methods

Patients were followed-up at outpatient visits 2–4 weeks post-surgery (visit 2) to confirm the presence of urinary incontinence. Those confirmed with urinary incontinence were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the anticholinergic medication group (imidafenacin 0.1 mg twice daily) or the control group. Patients were followed-up at 1, 3, and 6 months post-surgery for observational assessments, including the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS).

Results

A total of 49 patients (25 in the treatment group and 24 in the control group) were randomized for the study. There were no differences observed between the groups in terms of age, comorbidities, prostate size, or pathological staging. According to the IPSS questionnaire results, there was no statistically significant difference between the medication and control groups (p=0.161). However, when comparing storage and voiding symptoms separately, there was a statistically significant improvement in storage symptom scores (p=0.012). OABSS also revealed statistically significant improvement in symptoms from 3 months post-surgery (p=0.005), which persisted until 6 months post-surgery (IPSS storage: p=0.023, OABSS: p=0.013).

Conclusions

In the case of urinary incontinence that occurs after RARP, even if the function of the intrinsic sphincter is sufficiently preserved, if urinary incontinence persists due to changes in the bladder, pharmacological therapy using imidafenacin can be beneficial in managing urinary incontinence.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords
Anticholinergics; Lower urinary tract symptoms; Prostatectomy; Urinary incontinence

INTRODUCTION

According to data from the Korea Central Cancer Registry released in 2023, 277,523 new cases of cancer were reported in South Korea in 2021. Among them, prostate cancer (C61) accounted for 18,697 cases, ranking sixth with 6.7% of all cancer cases and fourth among cancers occurring in men. Over the past 20 years, as medical robot technology has been applied to the treatment of prostate cancer, tremendous technological progress has been made in prostate cancer surgery, and the number of surgeries has increased significantly. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has shown excellent functional and oncological outcomes [1, 2]. However, as the number of RARP cases increases, urinary incontinence and voiding dysfunction that occur after prostatectomy are also increasing, but this problem remains unresolved. There have been various developments in surgical techniques to address these problems, and surgical treatments such as inserting a sling or artificial urethral sphincter, as well as drug treatment and behavioral therapy, are being implemented; however, urinary incontinence remains a problem in some people. Urinary incontinence after RARP has a significant impact on the patient's quality of life and causes social inconvenience. The incidence rate has been reported to be approximately 4%–69% [3, 4].

After RARP, anticholinergics are commonly used for treating urinary incontinence. These act on the muscarinic receptors of the bladder to inhibit bladder overactivity and potentially facilitated recovery from incontinence. However, their efficacy remains controversial.

This study aims to prospectively analyze the effects of anticholinergic therapy using imidafenacin on detrusor overactivity occurring after RARP and its impact on improving voiding dysfunction and urinary incontinence through questionnaire surveys.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed the effects of anticholinergics on urinary incontinence after RARP in patients diagnosed with prostate cancer at Dong-A University College of Medicine between July 2019 and June 2023. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Dong-A University Hospital (approval number: DAUHIRB-18-217), and the written informed consent was obtained from all patients. And this study protocol was designed and conducted in accordance with CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) guidelines for randomized controlled trials.

1. Study design and population

This was a prospective open-label case-controlled randomized trial conducted on patients diagnosed with prostate cancer who underwent RARP and experienced urinary incontinence 2–4 weeks post-surgery.

RARP was performed by a single surgeon with over 20 years of experience using consistent techniques, including lateral bladder neck dissection to preserve the intrinsic sphincter and neurovascular bundle and posterior reconstruction during urethrovesical anastomosis. Patients with positive surgical margins or pathological stage T3 or higher who required adjuvant radiation or hormone therapy were excluded. Patients with pathological stage T3 disease and negative surgical margins who did not require additional treatment were eligible to participate. Continence was defined as the ability to control voiding without using pads post prostatectomy, with patients using safety pads because of anxiety and not being classified as incontinent. Patients deemed suitable for the study signed informed consent forms before undergoing RARP and were followed-up at outpatient visits 2–4 weeks post-RARP (visit 2) to confirm the presence of urinary incontinence.

2. Sample size calculation

As there are no existing papers reporting the effectiveness of anticholinergics in restoring quality of life and treating urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. This study will be conducted as a prospective randomized study, and considering a dropout rate of approximately 10%. So, the medication group was set at 30 patients, and the control group was also set at 30 patients.

3. Randomization and masking

Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to the anticholinergic medication group (imidafenacin 0.1 mg twice daily) or the control group using a web-based application (http://www.random.org).

The randomization list was created by a statistician (who had no role in the final analysis) in the Dong-A University Hospital clinical trial center. Randomized therapy was not masked to participants, site staff, and treating physicians but was masked to the clinical endpoint adjudication committee. Placebo was not given in this study because it was designed to be a pragmatic, open-label clinical trial.

4. Assessment of study outcomes

Both medication and control groups underwent pelvic floor muscle training through Kegel exercises. The medication group received continuous imidafenacin 0.1 mg twice daily. Patients were followed-up at 1 month (visit 3), 3 months (visit 4), and 6 months (visit 5) post-RARP for observational assessments, including the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) questionnaires, to evaluate voiding patterns and assess adverse drug reactions. The IPSS questionnaire analysis separated storage symptoms (questions 2, 4, and 7) from voiding symptoms (questions 1, 3, 5, and 6).

5. Statistical analysis

Descriptive analysis was performed by presenting the data as mean and standard deviation or number (%). Continuous variables were compared with the independent t-test or Mann–Whitney U test, and categorical variables were compared with the χ2 test or the Fisher exact test. The IPSS and OABSS were measured before and after surgery; changes were observed, and differences were evaluated after surgery. Additionally, the changes in IPSS and OABSS scores for the groups are shown graphically. All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics software version 22.0 (IBM Corp.). Statistical significance was defined as a two-tailed p-value <0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were randomly assigned to participate in the study, resulting in a final participation of 49 patients (25 in the treatment group and 24 in the control group), 11 patients excluded due to patient refusal and lost to follow-up (Fig. 1). No differences were observed between groups in terms of age, comorbidities, prostate size, or pathological staging (Table 1). No serious adverse reactions related to the drug were identified, and mild dry mouth symptoms were reported by 5 patients (10.2%).

Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the prospective open-label case-controlled randomized trial.

Recovery of continence was observed in the treatment group, with recovery rates of 68.0%, 84.0%, and 96.0% at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively, respectively, whereas continence recovery rates in the control group were 66.7%, 79.2%, and 87.5%, respectively. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (p=0.282) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
Continence recovery rate. V2, visit 2 (2–4 weeks post–robot-assisted radical prostatectomy [RARP]); V3, visit 3 (1 month post-RARP); V4, visit 4 (3 months post-RARP); V5, visit 5 (6 months post-RARP).

According to the IPSS questionnaire results, there was no statistically significant difference between the treatment and control groups at 6 months post-surgery, with scores of 8.08±4.30 and 10.46±7.11, respectively (p=0.161), also. However, when comparing storage and voiding symptoms separately, a statistically significant improvement in storage symptoms was observed in the treatment group compared to the control group, starting from 3 months post-surgery (p=0.012) (Table 2).

Table 2
IPSS and OABSS questionnaire scores and difference

Analysis of the OABSS between the treatment and control groups also revealed a statistically significant improvement in symptoms from 3 months postoperatively (p=0.005), which persisted until 6 months postoperatively (IPSS storage, p=0.023; OABSS, p=0.013) (Table 2, Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
Flow chart of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) scores. V2, visit 2 (2–4 weeks post–robot-assisted radical prostatectomy [RARP]); V3, visit 3 (1 month post-RARP); V4, visit 4 (3 months post-RARP); V5, visit 5 (6 months post-RARP).

DISCUSSION

The frequency of urinary incontinence after RARP varies widely from 1% to 87%, depending on the definition of incontinence, timing of assessment, surgical techniques, and evaluators [5, 6, 7, 8]. Generally, urinary continence is defined as the ability to control urination without the use of pads after radical prostatectomy. Most patients experience temporary urinary incontinence after RARP, with continence recovery typically occurring 2–3 months post-RARP. At 12 months post-RARP prostatectomy, continence recovery rates ranged from 68% to 97%, with gradual improvement observed for up to 2 years postoperation [9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14].

Various factors contribute to post-RARP urinary incontinence, including intrinsic sphincter deficiency and prominent bladder dysfunction. Intrinsic sphincter deficiency is often confirmed through urodynamic testing with reported frequencies ranging from 67% to 92.4%. This deficiency is typically induced by damage to the rhabdosphincter during apical dissection of the prostate. Techniques such as bladder neck preservation, posterior reconstruction, and Reziussparing have been developed to address this issue.

In this study, bladder neck preservation was performed in all the patients. This technique can preserve a sufficient length of the urethra through precise bladder neck dissection, and recovery of urinary function can be expected. The results of a recent meta-analysis based on 13 published papers also confirmed that the bladder neck preservation procedure was significantly helpful not only in the early recovery of urinary continence, but also in the recovery of long-term urinary continence (6 months: odds ratio [OR] 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21–2.27; p=0.001) (>12 months: OR 3.99, 95% CI 1.94–8.21; p=0.0002) [15].

Similarly, the preservation or restoration of the membranous urethral supporting structure and Rezius-sparing techniques have shown significant improvements in continence recovery [16, 17]. However, even with well-preserved sphincters, urinary incontinence may persist due to bladder abnormalities or an overactive bladder. Post-RARP overactive bladder or bladder dysfunction occurs in 33%–61% of cases, although it rarely serves as the sole cause of urinary incontinence and often co-occurs with intrinsic sphincter deficiency [18, 19, 20, 21, 22].

Bladder dysfunction is presumed to arise from partial somatic and autonomic nerve damage, inflammation, or infection resulting from bladder dissection during surgery. Additionally, factors such as urethral stricture at the bladder neck or preexisting conditions such as prostate enlargement or bladder neck obstruction can contribute to urinary incontinence [23, 24, 25, 26].

Recently, anticholinergics have been commonly used to treat bladder overactivity following RARP. Porena et al. [25] reported that 50% of patients develop urination problems after prostatectomy due to decreased bladder compliance; for this reason, they explained that treatment using anticholinergics is helpful in recovering from urinary incontinence. Bianco et al. [27] reported a urinary continence rate of 29% versus 21% in a 12-week observational study of 640 patients in the solifenacin 5 mg daily group and the placebo group in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study. It has been reported that solifenacin is helpful in the recovery from incontinence. Shim et al. [28] reported the effectiveness of solifenacin 5 mg once daily in reducing the amount of urinary incontinence and improving lower urinary tract symptom through a prospective randomized trial study.

In this study, the use of imidafenacin 0.1 mg twice daily was prospectively analyzed and compared to a control group. Although a slight difference was observed between the medication and control groups three and six months after radical prostatectomy, the difference was not statistically significant. However, significant improvements were observed in the IPSS and OABSS, suggesting that imidafenacin may enhance bladder stability and improve storage symptoms (Table 2, Fig. 3).

This study is a prospective open-label case-controlled randomized trial, but it has limitations due to the small number of subjects and the relatively short duration of the study (only 6 months). However, currently, there is a lack of research confirming the clinical efficacy of anticholinergic drugs other than solifenacin. The significance of this study lies in demonstrating the effectiveness of an imidafenacin 0.1 mg twice twice-daily regimen in improving storage symptoms associated with urinary incontinence caused by bladder dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. Therefore, further multi-center studies of various medications are necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, it was found that even with successful preservation of the internal urethral sphincter, bladder overactivity can still lead to urinary incontinence. It was confirmed that administering imidafenacin twice daily helps improve bladder overactivity, thereby addressing urinary incontinence.

Notes

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST:The authors have nothing to disclose.

FUNDING:The current study was financially supported by the Chong Kun Dang Pharmaceutical Corporation.

AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS:

  • Research conception and design: Soodong Kim.

  • Data acquisition: Jun Hee Lee and Soodong Kim.

  • Statistical analysis: Kwang Min Lee.

  • Data analysis and interpretation: Jun Hee Lee, Hyeok Jun Goh, Kisoo Lee, Dong Won Choi, Kwang Min Lee, and Soodong Kim.

  • Drafting of the manuscript: Jun Hee Lee, Hyeok Jun Goh, Dong Won Choi, and Soodong Kim.

  • Critical revision of the manuscript: Hyeok Jun Goh, Kisoo Lee, and Dong Won Choi.

  • Obtaining funding: Soodong Kim.

  • Supervision: Kisoo Lee, Dong Won Choi, and Soodong Kim.

  • Approval of the final manuscript: Soodong Kim.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Full trial protocol can be accessed through CRIS (https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris), and the trial was registered at Clinical Research information Service, CRIS (KCT0003784), registered on 04/15/2019).

References

    1. Coughlin GD, Yaxley JW, Chambers SK, Occhipinti S, Samaratunga H, Zajdlewicz L, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: 24-month outcomes from a randomised controlled study. Lancet Oncol 2018;19:1051–1060.
    1. Yaxley JW, Coughlin GD, Chambers SK, Occhipinti S, Samaratunga H, Zajdlewicz L, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: early outcomes from a randomised controlled phase 3 study. Lancet 2016;388:1057–1066.
    1. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Carroll PR, Costello A, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012;62:405–417.
    1. Kretschmer A, Hübner W, Sandhu JS, Bauer RM. Evaluation and management of postprostatectomy incontinence: a systematic review of current literature. Eur Urol Focus 2016;2:245–259.
    1. Kielb S, Dunn RL, Rashid MG, Murray S, Sanda MG, Montie JE, et al. Assessment of early continence recovery after radical prostatectomy: patient reported symptoms and impairment. J Urol 2001;166:958–961.
    1. Jønler M, Madsen FA, Rhodes PR, Sall M, Messing EM, Bruskewitz RC. A prospective study of quantification of urinary incontinence and quality of life in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 1996;48:433–440.
    1. Foote J, Yun S, Leach GE. Postprostatectomy incontinence. Pathophysiology, evaluation, and management. Urol Clin North Am 1991;18:229–241.
    1. Majoros A, Bach D, Keszthelyi A, Hamvas A, Romics I. Urinary incontinence and voiding dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy (prospective urodynamic study). Neurourol Urodyn 2006;25:2–7.
    1. Moore KN, Truong V, Estey E, Voaklander DC. Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: can men at risk be identified preoperatively? J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2007;34:270–279.
      quiz 280-1.
    1. Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Orvieto MA, Mikhail AA, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: functional and pathologic outcomes with interfascial nerve preservation. Eur Urol 2007;51:755–762.
      discussion 763.
    1. Patel VR, Thaly R, Shah K. Robotic radical prostatectomy: outcomes of 500 cases. BJU Int 2007;99:1109–1112.
    1. Borin JF, Skarecky DW, Narula N, Ahlering TE. Impact of urethral stump length on continence and positive surgical margins in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology 2007;70:173–177.
    1. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Kaul S, Badani KK, Fumo M, Bhandari M, et al. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: contemporary technique and analysis of results. Eur Urol 2007;51:648–657.
      discussion 657-8.
    1. Rodriguez E Jr, Skarecky DW, Ahlering TE. Post-robotic prostatectomy urinary continence: characterization of perfect continence versus occasional dribbling in pad-free men. Urology 2006;67:785–788.
    1. Ma X, Tang K, Yang C, Wu G, Xu N, Wang M, et al. Bladder neck preservation improves time to continence after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 2016;7:67463–67475.
    1. Galfano A, Ascione A, Grimaldi S, Petralia G, Strada E, Bocciardi AM. A new anatomic approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a feasibility study for completely intrafascial surgery. Eur Urol 2010;58:457–461.
    1. Liu J, Zhang J, Yang Z, Liu Q, Zhang W, Qing Z, et al. Comparison of Retzius-sparing and conventional robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy regarding continence and sexual function: an updated meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2022;25:47–54.
    1. Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Chaikin DC, Weiss JP, Verhaaren M. The pathophysiology of post-radical prostatectomy incontinence: a clinical and video urodynamic study. J Urol 2000;163:1767–1770.
    1. Leach GE, Trockman B, Wong A, Hamilton J, Haab F, Zimmern PE. Post-prostatectomy incontinence: urodynamic findings and treatment outcomes. J Urol 1996;155:1256–1259.
    1. Goluboff ET, Chang DT, Olsson CA, Kaplan SA. Urodynamics and the etiology of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: the initial Columbia experience. J Urol 1995;153(3 Pt 2):1034–1037.
    1. Desautel MG, Kapoor R, Badlani GH. Sphincteric incontinence: the primary cause of post-prostatectomy incontinence in patients with prostate cancer. Neurourol Urodyn 1997;16:153–160.
    1. Giannantoni A, Mearini E, Zucchi A, Costantini E, Mearini L, Bini V, et al. Bladder and urethral sphincter function after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a prospective long-term study. Eur Urol 2008;54:657–664.
    1. Steiner MS. Continence-preserving anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 2000;55:427–435.
    1. Bessede T, Sooriakumaran P, Takenaka A, Tewari A. Neural supply of the male urethral sphincter: comprehensive anatomical review and implications for continence recovery after radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 2017;35:549–565.
    1. Porena M, Mearini E, Mearini L, Vianello A, Giannantoni A. Voiding dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy: more than external urethral sphincter deficiency. Eur Urol 2007;52:38–45.
    1. Stanford JL, Feng Z, Hamilton AS, Gilliland FD, Stephenson RA, Eley JW, et al. Urinary and sexual function after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. JAMA 2000;283:354–360.
    1. Bianco FJ, Albala DM, Belkoff LH, Miles BJ, Peabody JO, He W, et al. A randomized, double-blind, solifenacin succinate versus placebo control, phase 4, multicenter study evaluating urinary continence after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2015;193:1305–1310.
    1. Shim M, Kim J, Park S, Choi SK, Lee SM, Huh KO, et al. The therapeutic effect of solifenacin succinate on the recovery from voiding dysfunction after radical prostatectomy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Urology 2015;85:1123–1129.

Publication Types
Original Article
Substance
Metrics
Share
Figures

1 / 3

Tables

1 / 2

PERMALINK