In making treatment decisions for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), physicians have to rely on the efficacy data published in the literature and adapt this to individual patient’s needs. Criticism can be made, however, of the randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that are performed, as the patients enrolled are not an adequate reflection of the general patient population. Although internal validity is high in RCTs with regard to inclusion criteria, external validity is reduced. Another failing of RCTs is the way in which patients are assessed. Typically in many studies, symptom improvement is expressed as a percentage of the Symptom Index improvement. This can be misleading if the results of two trials are compared as this value depends on the pre-treatment Symptom Index. Other methods of evaluation should be considered, such as the presentation of direct symptom outcomes (threshold improvement), the cumulative frequency distribution of threshold improvements or linear regression analysis of individual IPSS. All of these means of expressing the results focus clinical evaluation on the patient himself.

1.
Holtgrewe HL, Bay-Nielsen H, Carlsson P, Coast J, Echtle D, Fitzpatrick F, Lanson Y, Melchior H, Standaert B, Vallancien G: The economics of the management of lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic hyperplasia; in Denis L, Griffiths K, Khoury S, Cockett ATK, McConnell J, Chatelain C, Murphy G, Yoshida O (eds): The Fourth International Consultation on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH), Paris July 2–5, 1997. Health Publication Ltd., 1998, pp 63–81.
2.
Boyle P, Gould A, Roehrborn C: Prostate volume predicts outcomes of treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with finasteride: Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Urology 1996;48:398–405.
3.
Roehrborn CG, Nordling J, van Kerrebroek P, Naadimuthu A, Beffy JL: Prostate volume assessment is unnecessary in α-blocker clinical trials in symptomatic BPH patients (based on pooled results of alfuzosin OD studies. J Urol 2001;165(suppl): abstract no. 1550.
4.
Roehrborn CG, Bartsch G, Kirby R, Andriole G, Boyle P, de la Rosette J, Perrin P, Ramsey E, Nordling J, de Campos Freire G, Arap S: Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of BPH: A comparative, international overview. Urology 2001 (in press).
5.
Eri LM, Tveter KJ: Patient recruitment to and cost of a prospective trial of medical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol 1992;22:9–13.
6.
Michel MC, Goepel M: Treatment satisfaction of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: Randomised controlled trials vs. real life practice. Eur Urol 2000;38:40–47.
7.
Freidberg M, Saffran B, Stinson TJ, Nelson W, Bennett CL: Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA 1999;282:1453–1457.
8.
Barry MJ, Fowler FJ Jr, O’Leary MP, Bruskewitz RC, Holtgrewe HL, Mebust WK, Cockett AT: The American Urological Association Symptom Index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Measurement Committee of the American Urological Association. J Urol 1992;148:1549–1557.
9.
El Din KE, Koch WF, de Wildt MJ, Kiemeney LA, Debruyne FM, de la Rosette JJ: Reliability of the International Prostate Symptom Score in the assessment of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and/or benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 1996;155:1959–1964.
10.
Roehrborn CG: The American Urological Association symptom index–concerns and confirmation. J Urol 1996;155:1975–1976.
11.
De Mey C: α1-blockers therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of BPO: What are the relevant differences in randomised control trials? Eur Urol 2000;38:25–39.
12.
Barry MJ et al: Benign prostatic hyperplasia specific health status measures in clinical research: How much change in the American Urological Association symptom index and the benign prostatic hyperplasia impact index is perceptible to patients? J Urol 1995;154(5):1770–1774.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.