A double-blind,randomised- placebo,controlled, parallel group,multicentre, flexible-dose escalation study to assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil administered as required to male outpatients with erectile dysfunction in Korea

The efficacy and safety of sildenafil was evaluated in a randomiSed, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose study in Korean men aged 28-78 y with erectile dysfunction (ED) of broad-spectrum aetiology and more than 6 months duration. A total of 133 patients were randomised at six centres in Korea to receive either sildenafil (50 mg initially, increased if necessary to l00 mg or decreased to 25 mg depending on efficacy and tolerance) (n=66) or matching placebo (n=67) taken on an 'as needed' basis l h prior to anticipated sexual activity for a period of 8 weeks. At the end of this time, the primary efficacy variables relating to the achievement and maintenance of erections sufficient for sexual intercourse, and the secondary efficacy variables, which included: (1) the five separate domains of sexual functioning of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) scale, (2) the percentage of successful intercourse attempts, and (3) a global assessment of erections, were all statistically significantly improved by sildenafil in comparison with placebo (P&<0.0001). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 56.1% of patients receiving sildenafil and 20.9% receiving placebo. The most common adverse events with sildenafil were vasodilatation (flushing), headache and abnormalities in colour vision (31.8, 22.7 and 6.1% of patients, respectively), and most were mild in nature. The efficacy and safety of sildenafil in this population of Korean men appears similar to that reported in other studies in western populations.     

Long-term efficacy and safety of oral Viagra (sildenafil citrate) in men with erectile dysfunction and the effect of randomised treatment withdrawal

The long-term efficacy and safety of oral Viagra (sildenafil citrate), a selective phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, and the effect of withdrawing treatment were evaluated in men with erectile dysfunction (ED). In 233 men with ED of psychogenic or mixed organic/psychogenic aetiology, 16 weeks of open-label, flexible-dose sildenafil treatment (10-100 mg) was followed by eight weeks of double-blind, fixed-dose, randomised withdrawal to placebo or continued treatment with sildenafil. Sildenafil was taken as needed (not more than once daily) approximately 1 h prior to sexual activity. The main outcome measures were a global efficacy question, a sexual function questionnaire, an event log of erections, and adverse event recording. In the open-label phase, 200 of 216 patients (93%) reported improved erections with sildenafil; 28 patients (12%) discontinued treatment. In the double-blind phase, the significant improvements in the frequency and duration of erections were maintained in the sildenafil group but returned to pre-treatment values in patients on placebo (P values < 0.0001 versus placebo). The most frequent adverse events in the sildenafil group during the double-blind phase were flushing (7%), headache (6%), and dyspepsia (5%). Of the 192 patients enrolled in the 1-y extension, 90% completed the study; only two patients (1%) were withdrawn due to lack of efficacy. In men with ED of psychogenic or mixed aetiology, oral sildenafil is effective and well-tolerated both at the initiation of therapy and during long-term treatment. For most patients, sildenafil treatment must be continued for improvements in erectile function to be maintained.     

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) and oral phentolamine for the treatment of erectile dysfunction

This open-label, multi-center study from Mexico compared the efficacy and safety of oral sildenafil and phentolamine in men with erectile dysfunction. Patients received sildenafil (25-100 mg; n=123) or phentolamine (40 mg; n=119) for 8 weeks, and efficacy was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) as well as two global efficacy questions. Mean scores for the erectile function domain of the IIEF were significantly higher for sildenafil (27.23 +/- 0.62; P=0.0001) than for phentolamine (19.35 +/- 0.66). Approximately twice as many men receiving sildenafil had successful attempts at sexual intercourse (88% vs 42%), improved erections (95% vs 51.1%), and improved ability to have sexual intercourse (94.4% vs 46.4%) compared with phentolamine. The most common adverse events included rhinitis, headache, tachycardia, and nausea, with a higher frequency reported in patients receiving phentolamine than sildenafil (41% vs 33%), with the exception of headache, which was reported more frequently in sildenafil users. Overall, sildenafil was more effective and appeared to be better tolerated than phentolamine for the treatment of erectile dysfunction.     

A two-part pilot study of sildenafil (VIAGRA) in men with erectile dysfunction caused by spinal cord injury

STUDY DESIGN: This was a two-part pilot study in men with erectile dysfunction (ED) due to spinal cord injury (SCI: cord level range T6-L5). Part I was a randomised, double-blind, two-way cross-over study comparing a single dose of sildenafil 50 mg or placebo. Part II was a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group evaluation of sildenafil 50 mg or placebo, taken as required (not more than once daily) approximately 1 h prior to sexual activity, over a period of 28 days. OBJECTIVES: To assay the efficacy and safety of sildenafil 50 mg and placebo. SETTING: Clinic- and home-based assessments in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A total of 27 subjects who were able to achieve at least a grade 2 erection (hard, but not hard enough for penetration) in response to penile vibratory stimulation (PVS) were recruited. In Part I, the reflexogenic response of the penis to PVS was evaluated in the clinic while in Part II, the response to treatment was assessed in the home (global efficacy. questionniare, diary). RESULTS: In Part I, 17/26 (65%) subjects had erections of >60% rigidity at the penile base (median duration 3.5 min) after sildenafil compared with 2/26 (8%) (median duration 0 min) alter placebo (P=0.0003). In Part II, 9/12 (75%) subjects on sildenafil and 1/14 (7%) subjects on placebo reported that the treatment had improved their erections (P<0.005), and 8/12 (67%) and 2/13 (15%) men, respectively, indicated that they wished to continue treatment (P<0.02). An analysis of diary data showed no difference between the groups with respect to the mean number of erections hard enough for penetration (P = 0.08). The mean proportion of attempts at sexual intercourse that were successful was 30 and 15%, respectively (P=0.21). Similarly, responses to the end-of-treatment questionnaire indicated that there were no significant differences between the groups with respect to the frequency of erections hard enough for sexual intercourse (P=0.47) or that lasted as long as the subject would have liked (P=0.11). No subject discontinued sildenafil due to adverse events. CONCLUSION: Sildenafil is an effective, well-tolerated oral treatment for ED in SCI subjects.     

Efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in men in Egypt and South Africa

The efficacy of sildenafil citrate (Viagra), an oral agent for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), has been demonstrated in global studies. This 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, flexible-dose study assessed the efficacy and safety of sildenafil to treat ED in men in Egypt and South Africa. Men with ED of varied etiology were randomized to receive sildenafil 50 mg (n=128) or placebo (n=126); doses could be adjusted to 100 or 25 mg. Questions from the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) assessing the ability to achieve (Q3) and maintain (Q4) erections demonstrated a significant improvement with sildenafil compared with placebo (P<0.0001). Improved erections were reported by 74% of patients receiving sildenafil and 27% of those receiving placebo (P<0.0001). Headache, dyspepsia, and flushing were the most common adverse events in sildenafil-treated patients. These results are consistent with clinical trials in other countries. We conclude that sildenafil is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment for men with ED in Egypt and South Africa.     

A dose-escalation study to assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate in men with erectile dysfunction

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate (Viagra, Pfizer Inc., USA) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study over a period of 26 weeks in men with erectile dysfunction of a broad spectrum of aetiology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 315 patients from five countries were randomized to receive treatment with placebo (156 men) or sildenafil (159 men). Significant concomitant medical conditions were hypertension (20%), a history of pelvic surgery (19%), diabetes mellitus (15%), and ischaemic heart disease (10%). Patients randomized to treatment received a starting dose of 25 mg of sildenafil or matching placebo, which could be increased to 50 mg and then to 100 mg of sildenafil, based on efficacy and tolerability. Assessments of efficacy comprised the 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), including question three (ability to achieve an erection) and question four (ability to maintain an erection), a partner questionnaire, an overall efficacy question, and event-log data. RESULTS: After 12 weeks of treatment, 26%, 32% and 42% of patients were taking 25, 50 and 100 mg of sildenafil, respectively. A similar distribution of doses was reported after 26 weeks of treatment. Treatment with sildenafil significantly improved the patients' abilities to achieve and maintain an erection compared with treatment with placebo (P < 0.001). Scores for four of the five sexual function domains of the IIEF (erectile function, orgasmic function, intercourse satisfaction and overall satisfaction) also improved significantly (P < 0.001). There was a significant improvement in the mean score for the erectile function domain, regardless of the aetiology of erectile dysfunction (P < 0.001). After 12 weeks and 26 weeks of treatment, 82% and 79% of patients receiving sildenafil reported improved erections, compared with 24% and 23% of patients receiving placebo, respectively (P < 0.001). Treatment-related adverse events were mild to moderate and occurred in 27% of patients receiving sildenafil, compared with 8% of patients receiving placebo. CONCLUSION: Sildenafil is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for men with erectile dysfunction of a broad spectrum of aetiology.     

Efficacy and safety of flexible-dose oral sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in the treatment of erectile dysfunction in Brazilian and Mexican men

A 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy and safety of flexible-dose sildenafil citrate (Viagra) treatment (25, 50 or 100 mg) in Brazilian and Mexican men with erectile dysfunction (ED) of broad-spectrum etiology. Efficacy was assessed on the basis of responses to the 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire, completed at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment. At end point, mean scores for all IIEF domains of sexual function (erectile function, orgasmic function, sexual desire, intercourse satisfaction and overall satisfaction) were significantly (P<0.0001) higher in the sildenafil group (n=109) than in the placebo group (n=105). These findings confirm the significant increases in frequency of penetration and frequency of maintained erections reported previously. Sildenafil treatment was well tolerated. The most common adverse events were headache and flushing. In conclusion, sildenafil is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for ED of broad-spectrum etiology in Latin American men.     

A European multicentre study to evaluate the tolerability of apomorphine sublingual administered in a forced dose-escalation regimen in patients with erectile dysfunction

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk-benefit ratio of a forced dose-escalation regimen (2 to 3 to 4 mg) in a European clinical study evaluating apomorphine sublingual (SL) in treating erectile dysfunction (ED), by evaluating the overall tolerability and efficacy of the regimen compared with placebo in patients with ED, and evaluating efficacy by assessing the proportion of successful attempts resulting in sexual intercourse. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, two-arm, parallel-group study was conducted in 507 patients enrolled at 34 European sites. After a 1-2 week screening period, patients were treated for 8 weeks with either placebo or apomorphine SL administered as a forced dose-escalation regimen. Heterosexual men (aged 18-70 years) were eligible for participation in the study if they were in stable health, a stable relationship of > or = 6 months duration, had a history of erectile inability, and were diagnosed with ED (successful in fewer than half of attempts to attain and maintain an erection firm enough for intercourse during the 30 days before screening). Patients provided information (recorded on diary cards and reviewed at each study visit) about the frequency and success in achieving erections and of sexual intercourse attempts during both the screening and treatment periods. The dosing regimen required patients to take one tablet of apomorphine SL (2 mg for 2 weeks, then 3 mg for 2 weeks and finally 4 mg for the remaining 4 weeks) or placebo 15-25 min before intercourse, and intercourse was to be attempted at least twice a week. Safety data were collected throughout the 8-week study period, and included recording adverse events, vital signs and changes in laboratory test values for standard haematology and biochemistry variables. The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of successful attempts, defined as an erection rigid enough for sexual intercourse, occurring after dosing (successful intercourse rate). The proportion of erections achieved was a secondary efficacy variable. RESULTS: Of the 507 patients, 254 received apomorphine SL and 253 received placebo; 87% of patients in both groups completed the 8-week treatment period. Of the patients receiving apomorphine SL, 24% had hypertension, 11% had coronary artery disease, 10% had diabetes, and 5.5% had benign prostatic hypertrophy; 62.6% of treated patients received concomitant medications for these maladies. The treatment groups were balanced for demographic and baseline variables, including comorbidity factors. Treatment-emergent adverse events, reported by > 5% of patients in the treated group, were nausea (9.8%), dizziness (7.1%) and headache (6.7%), compared with 0.4%, 2.4% and 4.0%, respectively, in the placebo group. Sixty-six patients withdrew from the study, 16 because of study drug-related adverse events (12 from the apomorphine and four from the placebo group). Six patients (three in each group) reported a total of nine serious treatment-emergent adverse events, all of which resolved by the end of the study. In the intention-to-treat population, the proportion of successful attempts at sexual intercourse and of erections were statistically greater in the apomorphine than in the placebo group (P = 0.001 and 0.021, respectively); analysis of the per-protocol population results confirmed this significant difference. CONCLUSION: This European study supports the safety and tolerability of apomorphine SL despite the forced escalation to a 4-mg dose (exceeding the approved 2-3 mg dose). Adverse effects were not treatment-limiting. These results further support the clinically significant efficacy of apomorphine SL for treating ED at all doses used. The risk/benefit ratio supports apomorphine SL as a safe and effective alternative in managing ED.     

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose oral sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction of various etiologies

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose oral sildenafil in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) of various etiologies. METHODS: In a 12-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose study, 514 men (mean age 56 years) with ED were randomized to receive 25, 50, or 100 mg of sildenafil or placebo. The primary etiology of ED was determined to be organic in 32% of men, psychogenic in 25%, or mixed in 43%. Sildenafil or placebo was taken in the home setting approximately 1 hour before sexual activity, not more than once daily. Efficacy was determined by responses to question 3 (ability to achieve an erection) and question 4 (ability to maintain an erection) of the 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). Other measures of efficacy included the five sexual function domains of the IIEF, a global efficacy question, event log data, and a partner questionnaire. RESULTS: Sildenafil significantly increased patients' ability to achieve and maintain erections (P <0.0001), with efficacy increasing with increasing dose. Significant improvements were also observed in the IIEF domains for erectile function, orgasmic function, intercourse satisfaction, and overall sexual satisfaction (P <0.0001). The proportion of subjects who felt that treatment with sildenafil improved their erections was significantly greater (67% to 86%) than that with placebo treatment (24%, P <0.0001). The proportion of successful attempts at sexual intercourse also increased significantly with sildenafil treatment (P <0.001). Partner responses corroborated patient reports. Sildenafil was well tolerated at the three doses studied. CONCLUSIONS: Oral sildenafil is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for ED of various etiologies.     

Double-blind, crossover comparison of 3 mg apomorphine SL with placebo and with 4 mg apomorphine SL in male erectile dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the efficacy and safety of a fixed, 3-mg dose of apomorphine SL compared with placebo, and to compare 3 mg with 4 mg apomorphine SL in patients with erectile dysfunction. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, crossover study included 296 heterosexual men with ED of various etiologies and severities. Two crossover groups were evaluated separately: 3 mg apomorphine SL vs. placebo (n = 194), and 3 vs. 4 mg apomorphine SL (n = 102). The primary efficacy variable was the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse; additional variables included the percentage of attempts resulting in intercourse and time to erection. Partner assessments were also analyzed. RESULTS: 3 mg apomorphine SL was significantly more effective than placebo (p<0.001) for the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse and resulting in intercourse, as assessed by both patients and partners. Median time to erection was 18.8 min. The 3-mg dose was not significantly different from 4 mg in the evaluation of efficacy variables, but the incidence of adverse events was higher with 4 mg. Nausea was the most common event, reported by 3.3% of patients on 3 mg vs. 14.1% on 4 mg; in the placebo comparison, nausea was reported by 7.0% of patients taking 3 mg apomorphine SL vs. 1.1% of those taking placebo. CONCLUSIONS: 3 mg apomorphine SL was significantly more effective than placebo and comparable to 4 mg, while offering an improved risk-benefit ratio.     

Erectile response with vardenafil in sildenafil nonresponders: a multicentre, double-blind, 12-week, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled erectile dysfunction clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of vardenafil in patients previously unresponsive to sildenafil. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentre, double-blind, 12-week, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled trial was conducted, involving 463 men aged > or = 18 years with moderate-to-severe erectile dysfunction (ED) and who were unresponsive to sildenafil (by history). After a 4-week treatment-free run-in, patients received placebo or vardenafil 10 mg with the option to maintain current dose or to titrate by one dose level (5, 10 or 20 mg) based on efficacy and tolerability at 4 and 8 weeks. Outcome measures were the erectile function (EF) domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function, two Sexual Encounter Profile diary questions (vaginal penetration and maintenance of erection until successful completion of intercourse), and the Global Assessment Question (GAQ). RESULTS: There was significantly better EF with vardenafil than with placebo throughout the study. The least-square mean EF domain scores increased from 9.3 at baseline to 17.6 at the 'last' observation carried forward (LOCF) analysis with vardenafil (P < 0.001). Overall least-square mean per-patient success rates more than doubled for penetration (30.3% to 62.3%) and quadrupled for successful intercourse (10.5% to 46.1%) with vardenafil. Improved erections (positive response to the GAQ) were reported by 61.8% of patients receiving vardenafil and 14.7% of those receiving placebo at LOCF (P < 0.001). Normal EF (domain score > or = 26) was achieved by 30% of patients receiving vardenafil and 6% receiving placebo at LOCF (P < 0.001). Adverse events were infrequent and representative of the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor profile. CONCLUSION: Vardenafil is an effective and generally safe treatment for ED, even in men unresponsive to sildenafil (by history).     

The efficacy and safety of tadalafil in United States and Puerto Rican men with erectile dysfunction

PURPOSE: We evaluate the efficacy and safety of tadalafil, taken as needed, in men with mild to severe erectile dysfunction (ED) and assess sexual intercourse attempt patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel study conducted in the United States and Puerto Rico 207 men with ED were randomized to placebo or 20 mg tadalafil for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variables were changes from baseline in the mean International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score and mean per patient percentage of "yes" responses to Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) diary questions 2 (successful penetration) and 3 (successful intercourse). The Global Assessment Question was a secondary end point and post hoc analyses on sexual intercourse attempt patterns were conducted. RESULTS: Men treated with tadalafil compared with placebo reported greater mean changes from baseline on the erectile function domain score (9.3 vs 0.3 with placebo, p <0.001) and on the mean per patient percentage of successful penetration (SEP question 2, 31.6% vs 2.3% with placebo, p <0.001) and successful intercourse attempts (SEP question 3, 43.6% vs 3.5% with placebo, p <0.001). The per treatment group percentage of successful intercourse attempts during treatment was higher for tadalafil than placebo (67.6% vs 24.1%, respectively, p <0.001) and most successful intercourse attempts occurred between 4 and 36 hours after taking tadalafil. Of the men treated with tadalafil 82.8% reported improved erections versus 19.6% taking placebo (Global Assessment Question, p <0.001). The most common treatment emergent adverse events were headache (15.7% vs 6.3% with placebo), back pain (8.8% vs 0%), and dyspepsia (7.5% vs 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil (20 mg) significantly improved erectile function and patients did not closely temporally link sexual intercourse attempts with taking tadalafil. Tadalafil was also well tolerated in both groups of men with mild to severe ED.     

Early experience with sildenafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in renal transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is common in men with renal failure, but is not always alleviated following kidney transplant. The objective of the present study was to assess the feasibility in renal transplant patients of sildenafil citrate treatment, an agent with proven efficacy in the management of ED. METHODS: This was a phase IV, open, multicentre, 3 month, dose-escalation study. All patients meeting the inclusion criteria were prescribed a dose of 50 mg sildenafil at the first visit. Thereafter the dose could be increased to 100 mg or reduced to 25 mg based on efficacy or tolerability. The primary efficacy parameter assessed the ability of patients to achieve erections sufficient for intercourse and to maintain erections after penetration. Secondary endpoints assessed patient satisfaction with sildenafil and the effect of sildenafil on their quality of life. Patients were carefully monitored throughout the study for adverse events, interactions with immunosuppressive therapy and effect on graft function. RESULTS: The study included 50 patients in the intent-to-treat population. Sildenafil significantly improved patient's erection ability and the frequency of their erection maintenance. Analysis of the secondary efficacy parameters revealed that 66% of patients believed treatment had improved their erections. Patients reported improvements in their sexual life and partner relationships and a high level of satisfaction with treatment. There were no interactions between sildenafil and the immunosuppressive drugs and there was no significant adverse effect of sildenafil on graft function. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil is an effective and well-tolerated agent for the treatment of ED in renal transplant recipients.     

Sildenafil citrate (Viagra) for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in Nigerian men

Fifty-eight Nigerian outpatients with documented erectile dysfunction (ED) received open-label sildenafil citrate (Viagra) for 8 weeks. The 50-mg starting dose could be adjusted to 100 or 25 mg based on response and tolerability. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Questionnaire, a global efficacy question, and intercourse data recorded in a patient event log were used to assess efficacy. Frequency of penetration and maintained erection were both significantly enhanced (P<0.0001); 95% of patients reported improved erections and 81% of all attempts at intercourse were successful. Orgasmic function, sexual desire, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction also improved significantly (P&<0.0001). The most frequent adverse events (all-cause) were headache (17%) and myalgia (3%); only one patient discontinued treatment because of headache, which was considered unrelated to sildenafil. Oral sildenafil significantly improved erectile function and was well tolerated in this trial of Nigerian men suffering from ED. Our results are consistent with reports from other countries.     

Efficacy and safety of oral sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in the treatment of male erectile dysfunction in Colombia,Ecuador, and Venezuela: a double-blind,multicenter, placebo-controlled study

The objective of this work was to assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) from Colombia, Ecuador, and Venezuela. One hundred and fifty-eight outpatients with ED participated in a double-blind, flexible-dose, randomized-controlled trial. Efficacy measures included question 3 (achieving an erection) and question 4 (maintaining an erection) from the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), the five functional domains of the IIEF, a global efficacy question, and patient event log. Sildenafil increased patients' ability to achieve/maintain erections (P<0.01). Seventy-seven per cent of sildenafil- vs 46% of placebo-treated patients reported improved erections (P<0.001). Sixty-five percent and 35% of intercourse attempts were successful among sildenafil and placebo patients, respectively (P<0.05). Sildenafil patients showed significant improvements in three of the five IIEF functional domains (P<0.05). Adverse events were reported for 51% and 33% of sildenafil and placebo patients, respectively. It can be concluded that sildenafil is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for ED in patients from Latin America.     

Safety and Efficacy of Sildenafil Citrate for the Treatment of Female Sexual Arousal Disorder: A Double-Blind,Placebo Controlled Study

PurposeWe evaluated the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate in spontaneously or surgically postmenopausal women with female sexual arousal disorder (FSAD).Materials and MethodsSildenafil (a 50 mg dose adjustable to 100 or 25 mg) was evaluated in a 12-week, double-blind, placebo controlled study in 202 postmenopausal women with FSAD who had protocol specified estradiol and free testosterone concentrations, and/or were receiving estrogen and/or androgen replacement therapy. Patients were excluded if emotional, relationship or historical abuse issues contributed significantly to sexual dysfunction. Primary end points were questions 2 (increased genital sensation during intercourse or stimulation) and 4 (increased satisfaction with intercourse and/or foreplay) from the Female Intervention Efficacy Index (FIEI). Secondary end points were the remaining questions from this index, the Sexual Function Questionnaire and sexual activity event log questions.ResultsSignificant improvements in FIEI questions 2 (p = 0.017) and 4 (p = 0.015) were noted with sildenafil compared with placebo. For women with FSAD without concomitant hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) sildenafil was associated with significantly greater improvement in 5 of 6 FIEI items compared with placebo (p <0.02). No significant improvements were shown for women with concomitant HSDD. Most adverse events were mild to moderate with headache, flushing, rhinitis, nausea and visual symptoms reported most frequently.ConclusionsSildenafil was effective and well tolerated in postmenopausal women with FSAD without concomitant HSDD or contributory emotional, relationship or historical abuse issues. All patients had protocol specified estradiol and free testosterone concentrations or were receiving estrogen and/or androgen replacement therapy.     

Role of sildenafil citrate in treatment of erectile dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy

BACKGROUND: Sildenafil citrate was introduced as a treatment for erectile dysfunction in April 1998 in the United States and has been available since March 1999 in Japan. In this article, we assess the efficacy of sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction in Japanese men after radical retropubic prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Of 106 men who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy between January 1994 and March 2000, 43 were prescribed sildenafil at their request after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Medication was initiated at 25 mg, and if this was ineffective, the dose was increased to 50 mg. Of the patients, 18 underwent bilateral and 21 unilateral nerve sparing (NS) procedures, while in 4 patients, a non-NS procedure was performed. These patients were interviewed using a questionnaire about their response to sildenafil and using the 5-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) questionnaire. RESULTS: Thirty-three of the 43 patients were eligible for evaluation of the efficacy of sildenafil and 27 completed the IIEF-5 questionnaires. Sildenafil at 50 mg had a better effect on sexual function than 25 mg in most Japanese patients. Of the 16 patients who underwent bilateral NS procedures, 10 (62.5%) had improved ability for intercourse and 3 (18.8%) had improved erections. Of the 13 patients who underwent unilateral NS procedures, 7 (53.8%) had improved ability for intercourse and 4 (30.8%) had improved erections. None of the 4 patients who underwent non-NS procedures had a positive response. Of 24 patients with positive response to sildenafil, 3 (12.5%) did not have to take sildenafil after receiving it because they did not require it for intercourse. Mean IIEF-5 score increased from 4.3 to 11.4 (P < 0.0001). Patient age, time since surgery, PSA and pathological stage did not have statistically significant effects on outcome. The most commonly cited adverse effect was headache (21%). CONCLUSION: Sildenafil is equally effective for erectile dysfunction in Japanese patients who have undergone bilateral and unilateral NS procedures, and aids recovery of natural erectile function after radical retropubic prostatectomy. However, non-NS procedure patients had no response to sildenafil. This study suggested that sildenafil is well tolerated and should be initially used for treatment of Japanese men with erectile dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy.     

Efficacy and safety of on demand tadalafil in the treatment of East and Southeast Asian men with erectile dysfunction: a randomized double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled clinical study

Aim:To assess the efficacy and safety of tadalafil in comparison to a placebo,when taken on demand for 12 weeksby East/Southeast Asian men with erectile dysfunction(ED).Methods:This multicenter,randomized,double-blind,parallel group,placebo-controlled study was conducted at 17 centers across East and Southeast Asia between August2002 and February 2003.Men more than 18 years of age with mild to severe ED of various etiologies were randomizedto receive a placebo or 20 mg of tadalafil taken as needed(maximum once daily).Efficacy assessments included theInternational Index of Erectile Function,the Sexual Encounter Profile diary and Global Assessment Questions.Results:Tadalafil significantly improved erectile function as compared to the placebo(P<0.001).At the endpoint,the pa-tients receiving 20 mg of tadalafil reported a greater mean per patient percentage of successful intercourse attempts(Sexual Encounter Profile question 3:70.9% compared to 33.5% in the placebo)and a greater proportion of improvederections(Global Assessment Question:86.2% compared to 30.1%).Most(≥3%)treatment emergent adverseevents were mild or moderate.The most common treatment emergent adverse events were headache,back pain,dizziness and dyspepsia.Conclusion:Tadalafil was an effective and well-tolerated treatment for ED in East andSoutheast Asian men.(Asian J Androl 2006 Nov;8:685-692)     

Sildenafil does not improve sexual function in men without erectile dysfunction but does reduce the postorgasmic refractory time

Sildenafil is one of two oral drugs approved for first-line treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED). Anecdotally, some young healthy men who wish to enhance their sexual performance are requesting or abusing sildenafil. In this randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study, we investigated the effect of sildenafil in young men without ED. A total of 60 young healthy men age 20-40 y with no reported ED were enrolled for this single-dose home-use study. Subjects had used no medication in the 6 months prior to the study. All had been engaged in a stable relationship for at least 3 months. After completing the IIEF-5 questionnaire, patients were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either one 25 mg tablet of sildenafil (group 1) taken prior to intercourse, or an identical placebo tablet (group 2). All subjects completed a questionnaire relating to their erectile quality. There were no differences between the two groups in the reported improvement of erection quality, 12/30 sildenafil vs 10/30 placebo (Fisher's test, P=0.79). Sildenafil caused a significant reduction of the postejaculatory refractory time (12/30 vs 4/30) (chi(2) test, P=0.04). Sildenafil does not improve erections in young healthy men. Sildenafil should not be given to young healthy men to improve their erections and patients should be advised against recreational abuse of the drug. In this limited single-dose home study, sildenafil appears to reduce the postorgasmic refractory time. Although controlled studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of erection-enhancing drugs in premature ejaculation, it is possible that sildenafil might be useful for this indication.     

A comparative, crossover study of the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in men with evidence of arteriogenic erectile dysfunction

The aim of the study was to establish and compare the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in men with arteriogenic erectile dysfunction (ED). In all, 43 men with ED and postinjection max penile systolic velocity <25 cm/s in repeated Doppler ultrasonography were included. Of these, 24 men started on apomorphine 2 mg and 19 on sildenafil 50 mg, the doses titrated up to 3 and 100 mg according to effectiveness and tolerability. Safety was evaluated according to adverse events (AEs) and patient withdrawal. Efficacy was the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse, based on event log data. The incidence of AEs with apomorphine 3 mg was higher than with sildenafil 100 mg. Two men on apomorphine 3 mg discontinued treatment due to AEs. The overall success rate of sildenafil was 63.7% compared to 32.1% of apomorphine (Pearson chi(2), P<0.01). Of all men, 25 (58.1%) responded to sildenafil 50 mg without the need for dose increase, while only one responded to apomorphine 2 mg. The response to sildenafil 50 mg was age related (analysis of variance, p=0.04). Satisfaction was reported by 76.75 and 13.95% of patients for sildenafil and apomorphine, respectively, but 20.9% were not satisfied with any of the two drugs. In conclusion, this study provides clear evidence that sildenafil, even at 50 mg dose, is more effective than apomorphine 3 mg in men with arteriogenic ED. The fact that one out of five patients is not satisfied with the above-studied drugs shows that new oral agents need to be evaluated for the treatment of this disorder.