Journal Article
Observational Study
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Persistence and adherence with mirabegron vs antimuscarinics in overactive bladder: Retrospective analysis of a UK General Practice prescription database.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Persistence with antimuscarinic (AM) drugs prescribed for overactive bladder (OAB) is poor. This study aimed to compare persistence and adherence with the beta-3-adrenoceptor agonist mirabegron (MIR) vs AMs over 12 months.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis included patients aged ≥18 years who were prescribed MIR, or any AM. A 12-month look-back was used to assess inclusion eligibility. The primary end-point was persistence, defined as time to first discontinuation of index drug, during 1 year follow-up. The secondary end-point was adherence, estimated by medication possession ratio (MPR).

RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were met by 6189 patients. Those prescribed AMs were mostly treatment-naïve (range 72.9%-95.3%) vs 54.4% of MIR patients. There was greater persistence with MIR vs AM. The median number of days on therapy with MIR was 101, vs 27-56 for AMs. Patients receiving AMs were significantly more likely to discontinue than those receiving MIR (hazard ratio [HR] range 1.24-2.05, P < .01 for each AM vs MIR. In treatment-naïve patients, HRs ranged from 1.25 (solifenacin, P = .012) to 2.07 (oxybutynin IR, P < .001). In treatment-experienced patients, they ranged from 1.10 (fesoterodine, P = NS) to 2.12 (oxybutynin IR, P < .001). Adherence was greater with MIR (mean MPR 48.4%) than with AMs (range 27.6%-40.4%, P < .001). Treatment-experienced patients were significantly less likely to discontinue treatment (HR 0.87, P = .006).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: MIR was associated with a significantly longer time to discontinuation, greater persistence and better adherence than AMs. However, there was a steep decline in persistence with all drugs after 1 month. This is unlikely to be wholly explained by anticholinergic adverse events, as it was also seen with MIR. The lower proportion of MIR patients who were treatment-naive reflects current prescribing guidelines whereby MIR is prescribed after an initial generic AM trial. The study was limited by the small number of MIR patients. Study identifier: ISN 178-MA-3059.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app