Lammers P I, Rubio-Aurioles E, Castell R, Castaneda J, Ponce de Leon R, Hurley D, Lipezker M, Loehr L A, Lowrey F
Zonagen, Inc., The Woodlands, TX 77380, USA.
Int J Impot Res. 2002 Feb;14(1):54-9; discussion 60. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3900816.
Oral therapy has become first line treatment for patients with mild to moderate erectile dysfunction (ED). Studies have shown that sildenafil may not be effective in all patients, and has been associated with a variety of adverse effects and an adverse interaction with nitrates and inhibitors of cytochrome P450 enzymes. The objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of three different oral combinations with the highest dose of sildenafil in men with moderate to severe ED. Randomized, double blind, unblinded active-controlled, Phase II study was carried out at three sites in Mexico. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, patients received all four of the following treatments using a 4-way cross-over design: 40 mg phentolamine (PM) +6 mg apomorphine (Apo); 40 mg PM +150 mg papaverine (Pap); 40 mg PM +6 mg Apo +150 mg Pap (Tricombo); 100 mg sildenafil (SC). With the exception of sildenafil tablets, all study medication was blinded. Moderate to severe ED was defined as a less than 50% vaginal penetration success rate during the placebo run-in period. A total of 44 patients were enrolled, of whom 36 completed all four treatment periods. All treatments produced a significant effect in primary efficacy variable (Sexual Encounter Profile) compared to baseline, however, no statistically significant differences were found between treatments. A significant period effect was observed. Also, the four treatments were found not to differ significantly in five out of six secondary efficacy variables. The lowest incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AE) occurred in the 40 mg PM +6 mg Apo group (9.8%), followed by 100 mg SC (15%), and the other two combinations (16.7 and 17.5%, respectively). Nasocongestion and headache were the most frequently reported AE. An oral combination of vasoactive agents may provide an alternative approach to sildenafil. Based on these results a combination of phentolamine and apomorphine warrants further clinical investigation.
口服疗法已成为轻至中度勃起功能障碍(ED)患者的一线治疗方法。研究表明,西地那非并非对所有患者都有效,且与多种不良反应以及与硝酸盐和细胞色素P450酶抑制剂的不良相互作用有关。目的是比较三种不同口服组合与最高剂量西地那非对中重度ED男性的疗效和安全性。在墨西哥的三个地点进行了随机、双盲、非盲活性对照的II期研究。经过4周的安慰剂导入期后,患者采用4种交叉设计接受以下所有4种治疗:40mg酚妥拉明(PM)+6mg阿扑吗啡(Apo);40mg PM+150mg罂粟碱(Pap);40mg PM+6mg Apo+150mg Pap(三联组合);100mg西地那非(SC)。除西地那非片外,所有研究药物均为盲法。中重度ED定义为在安慰剂导入期阴道插入成功率低于50%。共招募了44名患者,其中36名完成了所有4个治疗期。与基线相比,所有治疗在主要疗效变量(性接触概况)上均产生了显著效果,然而,各治疗组之间未发现统计学上的显著差异。观察到显著的时期效应。此外,在六个次要疗效变量中的五个变量上,发现四种治疗方法之间没有显著差异。治疗相关不良事件(AE)发生率最低的是40mg PM+6mg Apo组(9.8%),其次是100mg SC组(15%),另外两种组合分别为(16.7%和17.5%)。鼻充血和头痛是最常报告的AE。血管活性药物的口服组合可能为西地那非提供一种替代方法。基于这些结果,酚妥拉明和阿扑吗啡的组合值得进一步的临床研究。