Refractory Overactive Bladder: Sacral NEuromodulation v. BoTulinum Toxin Assessment (ROSETTA) (ROSETTA)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01502956|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : January 2, 2012
Results First Posted : March 8, 2018
Last Update Posted : May 2, 2018
The purpose of this randomized, open-label, active-control trial is to compare the effectiveness of intra-detrusor botulinum toxin A (Botox A®, Allergan) versus sacral neuromodulation (InterStim®, Medtronic) for the treatment of refractory urge urinary incontinence. In addition, the study will evaluate select technical attributes of the interventions as well as the effect of these two interventions on other lower urinary tract and pelvic floor symptoms.
Hypothesis: InterStim® therapy will result in a greater reduction in daily urge urinary incontinence episodes over the 6-month follow-up period as compared to Botox A® injection.
A supplemental study investigates whether biological markers including those related to inflammation and connective tissue remodeling change following treatments with Botox A® and Interstim®.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Urinary Incontinence, Urge||Device: InterStim® device Drug: Botox® injection||Phase 3|
To compare the change from baseline in the number of urge urinary incontinence episodes (UUIE) over 6 the six month follow-up period in women randomized to sacral neuromodulation (InterStim®) therapy, versus those randomized to intra-detrusor injection with 200 units of botulinum toxin A (Botox A®).
- Long Term Efficacy: To compare the long-term (12 and 24 month) efficacy outcomes in women randomized to sacral neuromodulation(InterStim®) therapy, versus those randomized to intra-detrusor injection with 200 units of botulinum toxin A (Botox A®). Secondary efficacy outcomes, collected at 12 and 24 months as well as 6 months,include adequate control of their urge urinary incontinence, change in bothersome symptoms of urinary urge incontinence (UUI), severity of urge incontinence, urinary frequency, nocturia, subject satisfaction with therapy, quality of life measures and bowel and sexual function.
- Cost Effectiveness: To compare utilization of medical resources for cost effectiveness analysis and cost-utility between treatment groups.
- Treatment Safety and Burden: To assess safety profile and treatment burden of both interventions by comparing adverse event incidence between treatment arms, and also by obtaining estimates of incidence of treatment-specific safety and burden outcomes. Safety and burden outcomes for Botox A® injections include receipt of additional injections and intermittent catheterization due to voiding dysfunction/partial urinary retention. Safety and burden outcomes for InterStim® device include infection, pain, lead migration, reprogramming (and reasons for) and surgical revision (and reasons for).
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||386 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||Refractory Overactive Bladder: Sacral NEuromodulation v. BoTulinum Toxin Assessment (ROSETTA)|
|Study Start Date :||February 2012|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||July 2016|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||July 2016|
Active Comparator: InterStim® device
The FSLP InterStim® device is to be done within 3 months of enrolling/consenting. The 1st stage is lead placement into the S3 foramen with best response to stimulation. The 4 electrodes will be tested and set to an amplitude that achieves comfortable stimulation in the vaginal, perineal, or rectal sensation. If =/>50% improvement, participant will then have the 2nd stage IPG implantation, 8-18 days after last FSLP. If there is a technical problem with lead on 1st FSLP, then the participant can have a 2nd FSLP and may go on to have IPG implantation with lead replacement. The 2nd FSLP must be initiated no longer than 1 month since the initiation of the 1st FSLP. If the participant is a non-responder and there is no technical problem, then the lead is removed.
Device: InterStim® device
Eligible subjects will complete baseline assessments, be randomized and scheduled for first stage lead placement (FSLP) InterStim®. The criterion for an initial clinical response to InterStim® therapy will be defined as a ≥50% improvement in the mean number of UUIE/day on a minimum 3 day bladder diary, completed during the 7-14 days following the first stage lead placement (FSLP). Subjects with a ≥ 50% improvement mean number of UUIE/day will be eligible to proceed with implantation of the implantable pulse generator (IPG). Subjects will then be followed monthly to determine the response to therapy.
Active Comparator: Botox® injection
Total of 200 units of Botox A will be dissolved into 10mL of saline and injected into the bladder within 3 months of enrolling/consenting. Participants determined to have a clinical response at the 1 month visit (post 1st injection) may receive additional injections between 6-24 months.
Drug: Botox® injection
Eligible subjects will complete baseline assessments, be randomized and scheduled for Botox A® injection visit. Subjects who received a Botox A® injection will be assessed for a clinical response, at 1 month from injection, using the same clinical criterion (≥50% improvement in the mean number of UUIE/day on a 3 day bladder diary completed prior to the 1 month visit). Those subjects that experience a clinical response, at one month, will be eligible for a repeat Botox A® injection after 6 months, if they experience degradation of clinical effect, using the PGSC.
Other Name: Botox
- Number of Urge Urinary Incontinence (UUI) Episodes [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]The primary outcome is the change from baseline in mean number of UUI episodes over the first 6-month visit period (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 month assessments); and is measured using 3-day bladder diaries administered monthly for the first 6 month visit period.
- Number of Participants With Improvement of Bladder Function and Urinary Leakage [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Proportion of subjects who report adequate improvement of their bladder function and urinary leakage with the Patient Global Impression of Improvement Questionnaire (PGI-I) at 6 months. Adequate improvement is defined as a rating of 1, 2, or 3 (better) on the patient-reported measure of perceived improvement with treatment on a scale of 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse).
- Change in Overactive Bladder [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Change in mean Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (OABq-SF) score throughout baseline to the first 6-month visit (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6-month assessments). Values range from 0 to 100 with higher scores on the symptom scale indicating greater severity of symptoms and higher scores on the quality of life scale indicating a better quality of life.
- Urinary Frequency and Nocturia [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Change in mean number of urinary incontinence episodes (any type) and nocturia episodes from baseline over the first 6-month visit period (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6-month assessments) as measured by the 3 day bladder diary.
- Severity of Urge Incontinence Symptoms [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Severity of urge incontinence symptoms at 6 month visit period as measured by the Sandvik questionnaire. The Sandvik score is a patient-reported measure of incontinence severity as assessed on a scale of slight (1-2), moderate (3-6), severe (8-9), very severe (12) to severe (10-12) using a standard scoring algorithm.
- Treatment Satisfaction (OAB-SATq Treatment Satisfaction, Adverse Effects, Treatment Endorsement, and Convenience) [ Time Frame: 6 months ]Treatment satisfaction as measured by the mean Overactive Bladder Satisfaction of Treatment Questionnaire (OAB-SATq) score at 6 months (6 month assessment). The OAB-SATq score ranges from 0 to 100 and includes 5 subscales: treatment satisfaction, side effects, treatment endorsement, convenience, and treatment preference, with higher scores reflecting better satisfaction.
- Treatment Satisfaction (OAB-SATq Treatment Preference) [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Treatment preference as measured by the Overactive Bladder Satisfaction of Treatment Questionnaire (OAB-SATq) at 6 months (6 month assessment).OAB-SATq treatment preference is a binary outcome that is classified as yes if a participant answers either "Slight preference for the treatment I am receiving now" or "Definitely prefer the treatment I am receiving now" to the question "Do you prefer the treatment that you received since entering this study to the treatment you received before the study?"
- Quality of Life (UDI-SF) [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Change from baseline in quality of life measures over the first 6 month visit period (6 month assessment) as measured by the change in mean Urinary Distress Inventory Short Form (UDI-SF) score. The UDI-SF scale has a range from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating greater distress.
- Quality of Life (IIQ-SF) [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Change from baseline in quality of life measures over the first 6 month visit period (6 month assessment) as measured by the change in the mean Incontinence Impact Questionnaire short form (IIQ-SF) score. The IIQ-SF scale has a range from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating a worse quality of life.
- Quality of Life (HUI-3) [ Time Frame: 6 Months ]Change from baseline in quality of life measures over the first 6 month visit period (6 month assessment) as measured by the Health Utility Index, Version 3 (HUI-3). The HUI 3 scale has a range from 0 to 1 with higher scores representing better health.
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01502956
|United States, Alabama|
|University of Alabama at Birmingham, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology|
|Birmingham, Alabama, United States, 35249-7333|
|United States, California|
|University of California, San Diego, Women's Pelvic Medicine Center|
|La Jolla, California, United States, 92037|
|United States, New Mexico|
|University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center|
|Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States, 87131-0001|
|United States, North Carolina|
|Duke Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery|
|Durham, North Carolina, United States, 277707|
|United States, Ohio|
|Cleveland Clinic, Obstretric and Gynecology and Women Health Institute|
|Cleveland, Ohio, United States, 44194|
|United States, Oregon|
|Oregon Health and Science University, Kohler Pavilion|
|Portland, Oregon, United States, 97239|
|United States, Pennsylvania|
|University of Pennsylvania|
|Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19104|
|Univesity of Pittsburgh, Magee-Womens Hospital|
|Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, 15213|
|United States, Rhode Island|
|Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Center for Women's Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery|
|Providence, Rhode Island, United States, 02903|
|Study Chair:||Cindy Amundsen, MD||Duke University|
|Principal Investigator:||Holly Richter, PhD, MD||University of Alabama at Birmingham|
|Principal Investigator:||Shawn A. Menefee, MD||Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, CA|
|Principal Investigator:||Sandip Vasada, MD||The Cleveland Clinic|
|Principal Investigator:||Deborah L. Myers, MD||Brown/Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island|
|Principal Investigator:||Yoko Kumesu, MD||University of New Mexico|
|Principal Investigator:||Lily Arya, MD||University of Pennsylvania|
|Principal Investigator:||Jerry Lowder, MD||University of Pittsburgh|
|Principal Investigator:||W. Thomas Gregory, MD||Oregon Health and Science University|
|Principal Investigator:||Dennis Wallace, PhD||RTI International|
|Principal Investigator:||Susan Meikle, MD, MSPH||Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)|