A prospective, double-blind, randomized, two-period crossover, multicenter study to evaluate tolerability and patient preference between mirabegron and tolterodine in patients with overactive bladder (PREFER study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to assess the tolerability and treatment preference in patients with overactive bladder (OAB) treated with mirabegron or tolterodine. METHODS: This was a two-period, 8-week crossover, double-blind, phase IV study (PREFER; NCT02138747) in treatment-naive adults with OAB for 3 months or longer randomized to one of four treatment sequences in a 5:5:1:1 ratio (mirabegron/tolterodine, tolterodine/mirabegron, mirabegron/mirabegron, or tolterodine/tolterodine), separated by a washout period of 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was drug tolerability using the Medication Tolerability scale of the OAB Treatment Satisfaction (OAB-S) questionnaire at end of treatment (EoT). Period-by-treatment interactions were analyzed to determine any effect of drug order. Patient preference, change from baseline in OAB symptoms, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 358 randomized patients completed the OAB-S Medication Tolerability scale questionnaire at one or more visits after the baseline evaluation. The mean (95% CI) OAB-S Medication Tolerability scores were significantly higher (better tolerability) for mirabegron (86.29 [83.50, 89.08]) than for tolterodine (83.40 [80.59, 86.20]; p = 0.004). The period-by-treatment interaction was not significant (p = 0.955). Improvements in OAB-S Medication Tolerability scores at EoT were more evident in women, patients aged ≥65 years, and in patients without baseline incontinence, and were greater with mirabegron than with tolterodine extended release. There were no significant differences in patient preference or improvements in OAB symptoms. Significant differences in favor of mirabegron were observed for anticholinergic TEAEs (20.4% vs. 27.4%; p = 0.042) and specifically for gastrointestinal disorders (14.7% vs. 22.5%; p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Tolerability of mirabegron was significantly higher than that of tolterodine, and patient preference and improvements in OAB symptoms were comparable. Both treatments were well tolerated; however, anticholinergic side effects were higher with tolterodine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".