FULL DETAILS (Read-only)  -> Click Here to Create PDF for Current Dataset of Trial
CTRI Number  CTRI/2019/11/021996 [Registered on: 13/11/2019] Trial Registered Prospectively
Last Modified On: 08/11/2019
Post Graduate Thesis  Yes 
Type of Trial  Interventional 
Type of Study   Drug 
Study Design  Randomized, Parallel Group Trial 
Public Title of Study   Comparison of Silodosin & tamsulosin in management of prostate enlargement 
Scientific Title of Study   Efficacy of Silodosin versus Tamsulosin in lower urinary tract (LUTS) symptoms due to BPH- A Randomised Open Label Clinical Study 
Trial Acronym   
Secondary IDs if Any  
Secondary ID  Identifier 
NIL  NIL 
 
Details of Principal Investigator or overall Trial Coordinator (multi-center study)  
Name  Dr Iqbal Singh  
Designation  Professor CAS  
Affiliation  University College of Medical Sciences University of Delhi and GTBH  
Address  Department of Surgery(Urology) Dilshad Garden Shahadara Delhi 95

North East
DELHI
110095
India 
Phone  22586262   
Fax  911122590495  
Email  iqbalsinghp@yahoo.co.uk  
 
Details of Contact Person
Scientific Query
 
Name  Dr Prashali Chauhan 
Designation  Post Graduate Junior Resident  
Affiliation  University College of Medical Sciences University of Delhi GTBH  
Address  University College of Medical Sciences University of Delhi GTBH
Department of Surgery Dilshad Garden Shahadara Delhi 95
North East
DELHI
110095
India 
Phone  8588953901  
Fax  91-11-22590495  
Email  prashali.chauhan6795@gmail.com  
 
Details of Contact Person
Public Query
 
Name  Dr Prashali Chauhan 
Designation  Post Graduate Junior Resident  
Affiliation  University College of Medical Sciences University of Delhi GTBH  
Address  University College of Medical Sciences University of Delhi GTBH
Department of Surgery Dilshad Garden Shahadara Delhi 95

DELHI
110095
India 
Phone  8588953901  
Fax  91-11-22590495  
Email  prashali.chauhan6795@gmail.com  
 
Source of Monetary or Material Support  
No Monetary support used.  
 
Primary Sponsor  
Name  University College of Medical Sciences University of Delhi 
Address  University College of Medical Sciences (University of Delhi) Delhi-110095 
Type of Sponsor  Government medical college 
 
Details of Secondary Sponsor  
Name  Address 
NIL   
 
Countries of Recruitment     India  
Sites of Study  
No of Sites = 1  
Name of Principal Investigator  Name of Site  Site Address  Phone/Fax/Email 
Dr Iqbal Singh   University College of Medical Sciences and GTB Hospital  Room No 127/124 Wed/Sat Dept of Surgery(Urology Div) UCMS & GTBH
North East
DELHI 
22586262

iqbalsinghp@yahoo.co.uk 
 
Details of Ethics Committee  
No of Ethics Committees= 1  
Name of Committee  Approval Status 
Institutional Ethics Committee (EC)-HUMAN RESEARCH(IEC-HR), University College of Medical Sciences, Delhi-110095. India Independent Ethics Committee   Approved 
 
Regulatory Clearance Status from DCGI  
Status 
Not Applicable 
 
Health Condition / Problems Studied  
Health Type  Condition 
Patients  (1) ICD-10 Condition: N401||Benign prostatic hyperplasia withlower urinary tract symptoms,  
 
Intervention / Comparator Agent  
Type  Name  Details 
Intervention  Silodosin (S)Test  One Tablet Silodosin 8mgs once a day at bed time after meals with sips of water. 
Comparator Agent  Tamsulosin (T)   One Tablet or capsule Tamsulosin Hydrochloride 0.4 mgs once a day at bed time after meals. 
 
Inclusion Criteria  
Age From  45.00 Year(s)
Age To  80.00 Year(s)
Gender  Male 
Details  1.All patients aged 45-80 years giving informed
consent to participate in the study.
2.Patients with LUTS/ IPSS>8 due to BPH without
any absolute indication for surgery.
3.Patients with enlarged prostate gland less than
or equal to 30gm on either clinical examination
or ultrasound assessment.
4.Patients with previously diagnosed BPH not on
any medical therapy (patients on alpha blockers
will be given 2-week drug washout prior to
enrollment).
 
 
ExclusionCriteria 
Details  1.Patients with mental disorders or illness who
cannot understand or comply with the study
protocol.
2. BPH with complications like CRF,
hydronephrosis, acute bacterial prostatitis,
hematuria.
3.Patients with LUTS and or bladder outlet
obstruction due to causes other than BPH.
4.Patients with known drug allergy/
contraindications to tamsulosin & or silodosin. 5.Patients taking nitrates for CYP3A4 inhibitors
(ketoconazole, ritonavir) and CYP3A4 inducers
(rifampicin). Patients with previous history of
prostate surgery, diagnosed cancer prostate.
6. Patients on 5 alpha reductase inhibitor
therapy.
7.Patients with severe cardiac, hepatic or renal
insufficiency.
8.Patients with active untreated UTI,
urolithiasis, PVR >200mls, patients in whom
cystoscopy or biopsy has been done from urinary
tract in the past 2 weeks urethral stricture
disease, neurogenic bladder, prostate or
urethral surgery, any previous history of
continuous intermittent catheterization, h/o
postural hypotension, patients with uncontrolled
severe hypertension. H/O treatment with
verapamil, androgens, anti androgens, diuretics,
cholinergics, anticholinergics, phytotherapy in
the past 3 months, h/o alcohol abuse,malignancy.
9.Patients with h/o any conditions exposing them
to increased risk of adverse effects of
silodosin including any serious life threatening
cardiovascular, renal, neurological, hepatic.
10. Any other disease or condition and any other
systemic illness or disorder which in the
clinical judgement of the investigator is/are
deemed risky.
 
 
Method of Generating Random Sequence   Computer generated randomization 
Method of Concealment   Case Record Numbers 
Blinding/Masking   Open Label 
Primary Outcome  
Outcome  TimePoints 
Improvement of IPSS, QOL Index scores objectively by uroflow parameters (PFR) and post void residual volume (PVR) at end of 8 weeks  Improvement of IPSS, QOL Index scores and objectively by uroflow parameters (PFR) at and post void residual volume (PVR) in 8 weeks 
 
Secondary Outcome  
Outcome  TimePoints 
1. To document the safety of Silodosin and Tamsulosin therapy by recording the frequency of treatment emergent adverse events(TEAE)in the chosen clinical and lab parameters, if any.

2. Compliance to administered therapy will be assessed by asking patient to ring empty strips consumed in last 60 days at all visits. Assessment of derangement in any of our laboratory reports and via history and clinical examination 
All visits with the final end point up to eight weeks. 
 
Target Sample Size   Total Sample Size="100"
Sample Size from India="100" 
Final Enrollment numbers achieved (Total)= "Applicable only for Completed/Terminated trials"
Final Enrollment numbers achieved (India)="Applicable only for Completed/Terminated trials" 
Phase of Trial   N/A 
Date of First Enrollment (India)   15/11/2019 
Date of Study Completion (India) Applicable only for Completed/Terminated trials 
Date of First Enrollment (Global)  Date Missing 
Date of Study Completion (Global) Applicable only for Completed/Terminated trials 
Estimated Duration of Trial   Years="1"
Months="8"
Days="0" 
Recruitment Status of Trial (Global)   Not Applicable 
Recruitment Status of Trial (India)  Not Yet Recruiting 
Publication Details   Nil 
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement

Will individual participant data (IPD) be shared publicly (including data dictionaries)?  

Brief Summary  

STUDY TITLE: Efficacy of silodosin versus tamsulosin in lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia- A randomized open label parallel group clinical study

AIM:  To study the efficacy of silodosin versus tamsulosin in lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia in a tertiary care teaching institution.

OBJECTIVES:  (A) PRIMARY OBJECTIVE:   To evaluate the efficacy ofsilodosin versus tamsulosin in lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. (B) SECONDARY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the drug study safety and compliance to administered therapy.

RATIONALE:  To evaluate the efficacy of silodosin versus tamsulosin for BPH occurring in our hospital setting which to the best of our knowledge has not been documented or studied before in our Institution. To the best of our knowledge there is a scarcity of such comparative study published/documented in the Indian literature too. Silodosin is more selective towards alpha receptors than other alpha blockers like tamsulosin and alfuzosin(2) receptors than other alpha blockers like tamsulosin and alfuzosin(2)

BRIEF REVIEW OF LITERATURE:  Rossi et al(1)conducted a study titled silodosin in the treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. The study showed that Silodosin is extremely efficacious not only in subjectively improving the symptoms but also in objectively helping in relieving the obstruction as seen by measuring peak flow rates due to its selectivity on alpha 1a receptors. Manohar et al(2) conducted a study   regarding Safety and efficacy of tamsulosin, alfuzosin or silodosin as monotherapy for LUTS in BPH – a double-blind randomized trial. The study concluded that silodosin was the most efficacious alpha blocker amongst the three as it is more selective towards the alpha receptors.  Hui et al(3) conducted a study titled silodosin is effective for treatment of LUTS in men with BPH: a systematic review. The study revealed that silodosin is very effective in the treatment of LUTS though the adverse effect of retrograde ejaculation is more with silodosin. It also concluded that more RCTs are required to establish this conclusion having greater adverse effect of retrograde ejaculation with silodosin as compared to tamsulosin. Jung et al(4) conducted a study titled silodosin for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasiaThe study concluded that Silodosin may reduce urological symptoms in a significant number of men when compared with placebo and also improves the flow rates though in terms of efficacy it is similar to other alpha blockers

Cho et al (5) conducted a study  titled Silodosin for the treatment of clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia: safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability.  A study conducted by Hideki et al(6)titled Randomized Crossover Comparison of the Short-Term Efficacy and Safety of Single Half-Dose Silodosin and Tamsulosin Hydrochoride in Men With Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia(6)the authors concluded that giving a single half dose of silodosin had same efficacy as tamsulosin single full dose in Japanese men. Pande et al (7)conducted a study titled Evaluation of silodosin in comparison to tamsulosin in benign prostatic hyperplasia: A randomized controlled trial  which concluded that silodosin was similar to tamsulosin in terms of safety and retrograde ejaculation occurred mainly with silodosin and postural hypotension mainly with tamsulosin.

SETTING: Outpatient and Inpatient Department of Surgery(Urology), UCMS & GTB Hospital.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective interventional randomized open label parallel clinical study

TIME FRAME: November 2019 to April 2021

NUMBER OF PATIENTS: 100 (50 in each group)

CONSENT & ETHICS: Written informed consent (Bilingual) & and Institutional Ethical Clearance.

INCLUSION CRITERIA:  All patients aged 45-80years giving informed consent to participate in the study. Patients with LUTS/ IPSS>8due to BPH with no absolute indication for surgery.Patients with enlarged prostate gland less than 30gms on either clinical examination or by ultrasound. Patients with previously diagnosed BPH not on any medical therapy (patients on alpha blockers will be given 2-week drug washout prior to enrolment).

EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients with mental disorders or illness who cannot understand or comply with the study protocol. BPH withcomplications (like CRF, hydronephrosis,acute bacterial prostatitis, hematuria. Patients with LUTS and or bladder outlet obstruction due to causes other than BPH. Patients with known drug allergy/contraindications to tamsulosin/ silodosin. Patients taking nitrates for CYP3A4 inhibitors(ketoconazole,ritonavir) and CYP3A4 inducers(rifampicin).Patients with previous history of prostate surgery, diagnosed cancer prostate. Patients on 5 alpha reductase inhibitor therapy. Patients with severe cardiac, hepatic or renal insufficiency. Patients with active untreated UTI, urolithiasis, PVR >200mls, patients in whom cystoscopy or biopsy has been done from urinary tract in the past 2 weeksurethral stricture disease, neurogenic bladder, prostate or urethral surgery, any previous history of continuous intermittent catheterization, h/o postural hypotension, patients with uncontrolled severe hypertension. H/O treatment with verapamil, androgens, anti androgens, diuretics, cholinergics, anticholinergics, phytotherapy in the past 3 months, h/o alcohol abuse, malignancy. Patients with h/o any conditions exposing them to increased risk of adverse effects of silodosin including any cardiovascular, renal, neurological, hepatic or any other systemic illness or disorder. Any other condition deemed as high risk in the clinical judgement/opinion of the investigator. 

METHODS: All patients with symptomatic LUTS due to BPH will be screened at the first visit for inclusion in this study, as per protocol entry criteria. After administering a written bilingual informed consent and local institutional ethics committee clearance, eligible patients will be counseled for enrolment in this study. Screening visit will comprise a detailed history, postural blood pressure measurement, focused urological examination and baseline investigations, uroflowmetry, IPSS,and QOL scores as per protocol.Eligible patients shall be computerrandomizedthrough draw of lots to receive therapy with either tab tamsulosin 0.4mg (comparator arm) or silodosin 8mg OD HS (intervention arm). Patients will be followed up as per protocol with outcome parameters for 2 months.

OUTCOME: (A) Primary Outcome: Efficacy outcome parameters will be assessed by (i)change inInternational prostatic symptom score (IPSS) uroflowstudy (peak flow rate) and (iii) Quality of life(QOL) indexat end of 2 months therapy. (B) Secondary Outcome: Safety outcome parameters will be assessed by (i) monitoringof treatment emergent adverse effects (TEAE), adverse drug reactions, side effects and adverse events and serious adverse effects of the drugs being administered, as per proforma, along with (ii) assessment of derangement in any of biochemistry/laboratory reports and (iii) Drug compliance will be assessed by asking the patient to present be all empty strips at each visit upto 2 months.

DATA ANALYSIS: Since both the drugs are alpha blockers the expected sample size to detect outcome differences based primarily on the basis of change in IPSS (change in 3 or 4 points) or peak flow rate(1 ml/sec) is likely to be about 25 per group (50 patients) for 80% power according to one such similar published study(7). However, based on this study with outcome parameters almost similar to the above referenced study(7) we have chosen 50 patients for each group after (assuming a dropout rate of 20%) which should be adequate for >80% power. Statistical analysis in the study would be done quantitatively by student t test and qualitatively by the mean, median and mode of the data.

REFERENCES

1. Rossi M, Roumeguère T. Silodosin in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2010 27;4:291–7.

2. Manohar CMS, Nagabhushana M, Karthikeyan VS, Sanjay RP, Kamath AJ, Keshavamurthy R. Safety and efficacy of tamsulosin, alfuzosin or silodosin as monotherapy for LUTS in BPH - a double-blind randomized trial. Cent Eur J Urol. 2017  30;70(2):148–53.

3. Ding H, Du W, Hou Z-Z, Wang H-Z, Wang Z-P. Silodosin is effective for treatment of LUTS in men with BPH: a systematic review. Asian J Androl. 2013 ;15(1):121–8.

4. Jung JH, Kim J, MacDonald R, Reddy B, Kim MH, Dahm P. Silodosin for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 22;11:CD012615.

5. Cho HJ, Yoo TK. Silodosin for the treatment of clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia: safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability. Res Rep Urol. 2014;6:113–9.

6. Takeshita H, Moriyama S, Arai Y, Washino S, Saito K, Chiba K, et al. Randomized Crossover Comparison of the Short-Term Efficacy and Safety of Single Half-Dose Silodosin and Tamsulosin Hydrochoride in Men With Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to BPH. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2016;8(1):38–43.

7. Pande S, Hazra A, Kundu AK. Evaluation of silodosin in comparison to tamsulosin in BPH: a randomized controlled trial. Indian J Pharmacol. 2014 ;46(6):601–7.

8. The American Urological Association Symptom Index for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia | J.Urol [2019]. Available from: https://www.auajournals.org/article/S0022-5347(16)31615-9/abstract

9. Michael P O’Leary. Validity of the “Bother Score” in the Evaluation and Treatment of symptomatic BPH. Rev Urol 2008;7(1):1-10.

    

 
Close