The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the supplement PEAPROSTIL 600 (FARMITALIA®) composed of Serenoa Repens combined with PEA in single or combined therapy with alpha-blocker in the reduction of voiding symptoms in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients at low risk of progression to obstructing conditioning that need for surgical therapy. Any adverse events, intolerance, allergic reactions, complications related to the products used will be recorded throughout the study period.
Study design Single-center 3-arm randomized prospective clinical trial. * Arm 1: PEAPROSTIL 600 + Tamsulosin 0.4 mg * Arm 2: PEAPROSTIL 600 * Arm 3: Tamsulosin 0.4 mg At the time of study enrollment, each patient will be randomized into one of the 3 arms described. Randomisation will take place with a 1: 1: 1 scheme. All the variables will be collected by a medical co-investigator of Prof. Alessandro Volpe's team during the follow-up visits at pre-established intervals of 1, 3, 6 and 12 months (respectively T1, T2, T3 and T4) and will be reported in the special data collection folder (CRF). At 1 month (T1) 3 months (T2), 6 months (T3) and 12 months (T4): Personal data: identification number and initials of the patient's name and surname, date of birth, telephone number and e-mail address History: International Prostate Symptoms Score questionnaire, Short Form Health Survey-36 questionnaires Physical examination: abdominal, urological including rectal examination Uroflowmetry: analysis of the morphology of the flow curve, Qmax, volume of urine emptied, post-voiding residue). 250 patients will be recruited. The sample analysis was performed by the Department of Medical, Surgical and Advanced Technologies "Ingrassia" of the University of Catania for a study power of 90% and an Alpha error of 0.05 (statistical significance). In particular, the design involves a 3-arm randomization process 1: 1: 1. Expecting a difference of at least 2 points in the International Prostate Symptoms Score questionnaire and Qmax and a standard deviation of 4. It is necessary to enroll 250 patients to obtain a statistic of 90% at a significance level of 0.05. The statistical analysis of the data collected during the study, according to an intention-to-treat procedure, will be performed using statistical software including IBM SPSS statistics version 23.0. A descriptive analysis of the patients included in the three arms will be performed using the appropriate frequency measurements and central tendency and dispersion indices. Considering a pair of the three arms at a time (1 vs. 2; 1 vs. 3; 2 vs. 3), the qualitative variables will be compared using the chi-squared test; quantitative variables will be compared by Student's t-test. The significance level will be set at p \<0.05. For the variables that will be significant in the univariate analysis, multivariate analyzes will be carried out using appropriate regression models.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
250
PEAPROSTIL 600 mg one sachet oral daily+ Tamsulosin 0.4 mg one tablet oral daily
Tamsulosin 0.4 mg one tablet oral daily
PEAPROSTIL 600 mg one sachet oral daily
Michele Billia
Novara, Italy
RECRUITINGEfficacy of treatment of combination therapy group vs tamsulosin group in International Prostate Symptoms Score questionnaire
comparing patients receiving tamsulosin + peaprostil combination therapy (Arm 1) versus patients receiving tamsulosin monotherapy (Arm 3) in terms of International Prostate Symptoms Score (scale 0-35) at 1,3,6 and 12 months. (0 point no symptoms, 35 points many symptoms)
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment of combination therapy group vs tamsulosin group in Quality of Life questionnaire
comparing patients receiving tamsulosin + peaprostil combination therapy (Arm 1) versus patients receiving tamsulosin monotherapy (Arm 3) in terms of Quality of life (0-6 points) at 1,3,6 and 12 months (0 point good quality of life, 6 points bad quality of life)
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs tamsulosin group in evaluation of Short Form Health Survey-36 questionnaires
comparing patients receiving tamsulosin + peaprostil combination therapy (Arm 1) versus patients receiving tamsulosin monotherapy (Arm 3) in terms of Short Form Health Survey-36 (36 questions) at 1,3,6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs tamsulosin group in evaluation of uroflowmetry with maximum urinary flow (ml/s)
comparing patients receiving tamsulosin + peaprostil combination therapy (Arm 1) versus patients receiving tamsulosin monotherapy (Arm 3) in terms of maximum urinary flow (ml/s) at 1,3,6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs tamsulosin group in evaluation of post voided volume (ml)
comparing patients receiving tamsulosin + peaprostil combination therapy (Arm 1) versus patients receiving tamsulosin monotherapy (Arm 3) in terms of post voided volume (ml) at 1,3,6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs tamsulosin group in evaluation of prostate volume (gr)
comparing patients receiving tamsulosin + peaprostil combination therapy (Arm 1) versus patients receiving tamsulosin monotherapy (Arm 3) in terms of prostate volume (gr) at 6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs peaprostil group and peaprostil group vs tamsulosin group in terms of International Prostate Symptoms Score
comparing patients receiving combination therapy group (Arm1) vs peaprostil group (Arm2) and peaprostil group (Arm2) vs tamsulosin alone (Arm 3) in terms of International Prostate Symptoms Score (scale 0-35) at 1,3,6 and 12 months. (0 point no symptoms, 35 points many symptoms)
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs peaprostil group and peaprostil group vs tamsulosin group in terms of Quality of life
comparing patients receiving combination therapy group (Arm1) vs peaprostil group (Arm2) and peaprostil group (Arm2) vs tamsulosin alone (Arm 3) in terms of Quality of life (QoL) (0-6 points) at 1,3,6 and 12 months (0 point good quality of life, 6 points bad quality of life)
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs peaprostil group and peaprostil group vs tamsulosin group in terms of Short Form Health Survey-36 questionnaires
comparing patients receiving combination therapy group (Arm1) vs peaprostil group (Arm2) and peaprostil group (Arm2) vs tamsulosin alone (Arm 3) in terms of Short Form Health Survey-36 (36 questions) at 1,3,6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs peaprostil group and peaprostil group vs tamsulosin group in terms of uroflowmetry with maximum urinary flow (ml/s)
comparing patients receiving combination therapy group (Arm1) vs peaprostil group (Arm2) and peaprostil group (Arm2) vs tamsulosin alone (Arm 3) in terms of maximum urinary flow (ml/s) at 1,3,6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs peaprostil group and peaprostil group vs tamsulosin group in terms of post voided volume (ml)
comparing patients receiving combination therapy group (Arm1) vs peaprostil group (Arm2) and peaprostil group (Arm2) vs tamsulosin alone (Arm 3) in terms of post voided volume (ml) at 1,3,6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
Efficacy of treatment in combination therapy group vs peaprostil group and peaprostil group vs tamsulosin group in terms of prostate volume (gr)
comparing patients receiving combination therapy group (Arm1) vs peaprostil group (Arm2) and peaprostil group (Arm2) vs tamsulosin alone (Arm 3) in terms of prostate volume (gr) at 6 and 12 months
Time frame: 1 year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.