Skip to content

Dysport® Treatment of Urinary Incontinence in Adults Subjects With Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity (NDO) Due to Spinal Cord Injury or Multiple Sclerosis - Study 2

A Phase III, Multicentre, Randomised, Double Blind, Parallel Group, Placebo Controlled Study To Assess The Efficacy And Safety Of One Or More Intradetrusor Treatments Of 600 Or 800 Units Of Dysport® For The Treatment Of Urinary Incontinence In Subjects With Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity Due To Spinal Cord Injury Or Multiple Sclerosis

Status
Terminated
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02660359
Acronym
CONTENT2
Enrollment
258
Registered
2016-01-21
Start date
2016-07-08
Completion date
2019-07-04
Last updated
2022-09-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Overactive Bladder, Urinary Incontinence

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to provide confirmatory evidence of the safety and efficacy of two Dysport® doses (600 units \[U\] and 800 U), compared to placebo in reducing urinary incontinence (UI) in adult subjects treated for neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) due to spinal cord injury (SCI) or multiple sclerosis (MS).

Interventions

BIOLOGICALBotulinum toxin type A

600 U intra detrusor injection in two treatment periods (Initial and Retreatment phase) delivered at 30 injection points.

DRUGPlacebo

AbobotulinumtoxinA Placebo 600 U intra detrusor injection in two treatment periods (Initial and Retreatment phase) delivered at 30 injection points

Sponsors

Ipsen
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Key Inclusion Criteria: * Urinary Incontinence for at least 3 months prior to Screening as a result of Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity due to Spinal Cord Injury or Multiple Sclerosis. * Subjects with Spinal Cord Injury must have a stable neurological injury at T1 level or below which occurred at least 6 months prior to Screening. * Subjects with Multiple Sclerosis must be clinically stable in the investigator's opinion, with no exacerbation (relapse) of MS for at least 3 months prior to Screening. * Subjects must have had an inadequate response after at least 4 weeks of oral medications used in the treatment of NDO (e.g. anticholinergics, beta-3 agonists) and/or have intolerable side-effects. * Routinely performing Clean Intermittent Catheterization (CIC) to ensure adequate bladder emptying. * An average of at least two episodes per day of Urinary Incontinence recorded on the screening bladder diary. Key

Exclusion criteria

* Any current condition (other than NDO) that may impact on bladder function. * Previous or current, tumour or malignancy affecting the spinal column or spinal cord, or any other unstable cause of SCI. * Any condition that will prevent cystoscopic treatment administration or CIC usage, e.g. urethral strictures. * Current indwelling bladder catheter, or removal of indwelling bladder catheter less than 4 weeks prior to Screening. * BTX-A treatment within 9 months prior to Screening for any urological condition (e.g. detrusor or urethral sphincter treatments). * Any neuromodulation/electrostimulation usage for urinary symptoms/incontinence within 4 weeks prior to Screening. Any implanted neuromodulation device must be switched off at least 4 weeks prior to Screening.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mean Change From Baseline in Weekly Number of UI Episodes at Week 6 of DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleThe weekly number of UI episodes was measured using a 7-day bladder diary. Bladder diaries that contained data recorded on at least 5 days were included in the analysis. The least square (LS) mean of the change in weekly number of UI episodes at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Subjects With No Episodes of UI at Week 6 of DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleThe weekly number of UI episodes was measured using a 7-day bladder diary. Bladder diaries that contained data recorded on at least 5 days were included in the analysis. The number of subjects with no UI episodes at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was recorded. Percentage of subjects with no episodes of UI (≥100% Improvement) was calculated as: Total number of subjects with no weekly number of UI episodes at Week 6 / Total number of subjects with any number of UI events at Week 6.
Percentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleThe weekly number of UI episodes was measured using a 7-day bladder diary. Bladder diaries that contained data recorded on at least 5 days were included in the analysis. The percentage of subjects showing an improvement of ≥30%, ≥50% and ≥75% was calculated as: Total number of subjects with UI response level \>=30% or \>=50% or \>=75% improvement at Week 6 / Total number of subjects with any UI response at Week 6.
Median Time Between TreatmentsDay of first treatment (baseline) to day of retreatment, up to 2 yearsDuration of effect for time between treatments was calculated by: (the date of the first retreatment visit - date of first treatment administration in the DBPC cycle). The median number of days between treatments was determined and subjects with no retreatment were censored at the last visit.
Mean Change From Baseline in Volume Per Void at Week 6 of DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleThe volume per void was measured during one 24-hour period of the 7-day bladder diary. The LS mean of the change in volume per void at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using a MMRM analysis.
Mean Change From Baseline in Maximum Detrusor Pressure (MDP) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleSubjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the MDP. The LS mean of the change in MDP at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using an ANCOVA.
Mean Change From Baseline in Volume at First Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (Vol@1stIDC) at Week 6 of DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleSubjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the Vol@1stIDC which is the instilled volume when first IDC commences. Subjects who did not exhibit a post-treatment IDC at Week 6 had Vol@1stIDC imputed using the recorded corrected MCC volume at Week 6. The LS mean of the change in Vol@1stIDC at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using an ANCOVA.
Percentage of Subjects With No Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (IDCs) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleSubjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the occurrence of IDCs. The percentage of subjects without IDCs at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was recorded.
Mean Change From Baseline in Maximum Cystometric Capacity (MCC) at Week 6 of DBPC CycleBaseline and Week 6 of DBPC CycleSubjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the MCC. The LS mean of the change in MCC at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

Countries

Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, France, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, Mexico, Peru, Russia, Spain, Ukraine, United Kingdom

Participant flow

Recruitment details

A total of 258 subjects with urinary incontinence (UI) caused by neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) due to spinal cord injury (SCI) or multiple sclerosis (MS) were enrolled at 67 study sites worldwide. One of the 258 randomised subjects did not receive any treatment. The study was terminated early by the sponsor due to lack of recruitment.

Pre-assignment details

Subjects were randomised to 1 of 4 sequences: A) placebo in a double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) cycle then Dysport® 600 Units (U) in subsequent double-blind cycles: B) placebo in DBPC cycle then Dysport® 800 U in subsequent cycles: C) Dysport® 600 U in all cycles: D) Dysport® 800 U in all cycles. The minimum retreatment interval was 12 weeks.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Placebo
Subjects were administered placebo on Day 1 of the DBPC cycle. All study treatments were injected into the detrusor muscle via cystoscopy in a total volume of 15 mL divided into 30 injection points of 0.5 mL each. Subjects were followed-up by telephone at Week 1 and Week 4; and attended clinic visits at Week 2, Week 6 (primary study timepoint), and Week 12. Thereafter telephone visits were scheduled every 12 weeks until end of study, or until retreatment was required.
86
Dysport® 600 U
Subjects were administered Dysport® 600 U on Day 1 of the DBPC cycle. All study treatments were injected into the detrusor muscle via cystoscopy in a total volume of 15 mL divided into 30 injection points of 0.5 mL each. Subjects were followed-up by telephone at Week 1 and Week 4; and attended clinic visits at Week 2, Week 6 (primary study timepoint), and Week 12. Thereafter telephone visits were scheduled every 12 weeks until end of study, or until retreatment was required.
86
Dysport® 800 U
Subjects were administered Dysport® 800 U on Day 1 of the DBPC cycle. All study treatments were injected into the detrusor muscle via cystoscopy in a total volume of 15 mL divided into 30 injection points of 0.5 mL each. Subjects were followed-up by telephone at Week 1 and Week 4; and attended clinic visits at Week 2, Week 6 (primary study timepoint), and Week 12. Thereafter telephone visits were scheduled every 12 weeks until end of study, or until retreatment was required.
85
Total257

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002
Overall StudyAdverse Event010
Overall StudyLack of Efficacy111
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up330
Overall StudyOther213
Overall StudyProtocol Deviation001
Overall StudySponsor Decision to Terminate Study737571
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject758

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPlaceboDysport® 600 UDysport® 800 UTotal
Aetiology of NDO
MS
24 Participants22 Participants20 Participants66 Participants
Aetiology of NDO
SCI
62 Participants64 Participants65 Participants191 Participants
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
6 Participants4 Participants8 Participants18 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
80 Participants82 Participants77 Participants239 Participants
Age, Continuous42.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.16
42.5 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.1
42.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.72
42.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.31
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
8 Participants13 Participants9 Participants30 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
2 Participants4 Participants4 Participants10 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
7 Participants5 Participants3 Participants15 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
14 Participants12 Participants12 Participants38 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
55 Participants52 Participants56 Participants163 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
36 Participants29 Participants30 Participants95 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
50 Participants57 Participants55 Participants162 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 851 / 870 / 85
other
Total, other adverse events
34 / 8540 / 8742 / 85
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 859 / 878 / 85

Outcome results

Primary

Mean Change From Baseline in Weekly Number of UI Episodes at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

The weekly number of UI episodes was measured using a 7-day bladder diary. Bladder diaries that contained data recorded on at least 5 days were included in the analysis. The least square (LS) mean of the change in weekly number of UI episodes at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the mITT population (all randomised subjects who received at least 1 administration of study treatment). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Weekly Number of UI Episodes at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle-12.86 Weekly UI episodesStandard Error 1.95
Dysport® 600 UMean Change From Baseline in Weekly Number of UI Episodes at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle-21.83 Weekly UI episodesStandard Error 1.91
Dysport® 800 UMean Change From Baseline in Weekly Number of UI Episodes at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle-22.62 Weekly UI episodesStandard Error 1.88
Comparison: Treatment group, visit (Week 6), treatment-by-visit interaction, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[Botulinum toxin \[BTX\]-naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and study baseline value (weekly number of UI episodes) as fixed effect variables, and subject as a random effect.p-value: 0.000195% CI: [-13.5, -4.44]MMLM
Comparison: Treatment group, visit (Week 6), treatment-by-visit interaction, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[Botulinum toxin \[BTX\]-naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and study baseline value (weekly number of UI episodes) as fixed effect variables, and subject as a random effect.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-14.41, -5.12]MMLM
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Maximum Cystometric Capacity (MCC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Subjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the MCC. The LS mean of the change in MCC at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the urodynamic population (all subjects in the mITT population included in the urodynamic subset at randomisation). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Maximum Cystometric Capacity (MCC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle3.5 mLStandard Error 22.83
Dysport® 600 UMean Change From Baseline in Maximum Cystometric Capacity (MCC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle178.5 mLStandard Error 21.38
Dysport® 800 UMean Change From Baseline in Maximum Cystometric Capacity (MCC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle171.9 mLStandard Error 21.58
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX- naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and baseline value of MCC as covariates.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [122.9, 227]ANCOVA
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX- naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and baseline value of MCC as covariates.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [113.6, 223.1]ANCOVA
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Maximum Detrusor Pressure (MDP) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Subjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the MDP. The LS mean of the change in MDP at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using an ANCOVA.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the urodynamic population (all subjects in the mITT population included in the urodynamic subset at randomisation). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Maximum Detrusor Pressure (MDP) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle-3.7 centimetres of waterStandard Error 3.84
Dysport® 600 UMean Change From Baseline in Maximum Detrusor Pressure (MDP) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle-36.7 centimetres of waterStandard Error 3.48
Dysport® 800 UMean Change From Baseline in Maximum Detrusor Pressure (MDP) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle-36.2 centimetres of waterStandard Error 3.51
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX- naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and baseline value of MDP as covariates.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-41.5, -24.4]ANCOVA
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX- naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and baseline value of MDP as covariates.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-41.5, -23.4]ANCOVA
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Volume at First Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (Vol@1stIDC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Subjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the Vol@1stIDC which is the instilled volume when first IDC commences. Subjects who did not exhibit a post-treatment IDC at Week 6 had Vol@1stIDC imputed using the recorded corrected MCC volume at Week 6. The LS mean of the change in Vol@1stIDC at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using an ANCOVA.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the urodynamic population (all subjects in the mITT population included in the urodynamic subset at randomisation). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Volume at First Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (Vol@1stIDC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle15.9 mLStandard Error 23.34
Dysport® 600 UMean Change From Baseline in Volume at First Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (Vol@1stIDC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle168.7 mLStandard Error 22.09
Dysport® 800 UMean Change From Baseline in Volume at First Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (Vol@1stIDC) at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle185.5 mLStandard Error 22.8
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX- naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and baseline value of Vol@1stIDC as covariates.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [99.2, 206.5]ANCOVA
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX- naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and baseline value of Vol@1stIDC as covariates.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [111.7, 227.6]ANCOVA
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Volume Per Void at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

The volume per void was measured during one 24-hour period of the 7-day bladder diary. The LS mean of the change in volume per void at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was calculated using a MMRM analysis.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the mITT population (all randomised subjects who received at least 1 administration of study treatment). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Volume Per Void at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle-6.00 mLStandard Error 17.8
Dysport® 600 UMean Change From Baseline in Volume Per Void at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle90.14 mLStandard Error 17.45
Dysport® 800 UMean Change From Baseline in Volume Per Void at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle84.78 mLStandard Error 17.22
Comparison: Treatment group, visit (Week 6), treatment-by-visit interaction, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX-naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and study baseline value (total volume per void) as fixed effect variables, and subject as a random effect.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [53.1, 139.19]MMRM
Comparison: Treatment group, visit (Week 6), treatment-by-visit interaction, recorded stratification factors (aetiology of NDO \[SCI or MS\], prior intradetrusor \[BTX-naïve or BTX-non-naïve\]) and study baseline value (total volume per void) as fixed effect variables, and subject as a random effect.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [47.07, 134.48]MMRM
Secondary

Median Time Between Treatments

Duration of effect for time between treatments was calculated by: (the date of the first retreatment visit - date of first treatment administration in the DBPC cycle). The median number of days between treatments was determined and subjects with no retreatment were censored at the last visit.

Time frame: Day of first treatment (baseline) to day of retreatment, up to 2 years

Population: Results are presented for the mITT population (all randomised subjects who received at least 1 administration of study treatment). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment).

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboMedian Time Between Treatments132.0 Days
Dysport® 600 UMedian Time Between Treatments238.5 Days
Dysport® 800 UMedian Time Between Treatments210.0 Days
Secondary

Percentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle

The weekly number of UI episodes was measured using a 7-day bladder diary. Bladder diaries that contained data recorded on at least 5 days were included in the analysis. The percentage of subjects showing an improvement of ≥30%, ≥50% and ≥75% was calculated as: Total number of subjects with UI response level \>=30% or \>=50% or \>=75% improvement at Week 6 / Total number of subjects with any UI response at Week 6.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the mITT population (all randomised subjects who received at least 1 administration of study treatment). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥50% Improvement38.2 Percentage of Subjects
PlaceboPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥30% Improvement55.3 Percentage of Subjects
PlaceboPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥75% Improvement17.1 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 600 UPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥50% Improvement72.0 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 600 UPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥30% Improvement81.7 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 600 UPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥75% Improvement62.2 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 800 UPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥30% Improvement76.7 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 800 UPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥75% Improvement50.7 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 800 UPercentage of Subjects With a UI Response at Improvement Levels ≥30%, ≥50%, and ≥75% at Week 6 of the DBPC Cycle≥50% Improvement61.6 Percentage of Subjects
Comparison: Treatment comparison at ≥30% Improvement Level: Dysport® 600 U versus Placebo.p-value: 0.000795% CI: [1.72, 7.34]GLMM
Comparison: Treatment comparison at ≥30% Improvement Level: Dysport® 800 U versus Placebop-value: 0.003795% CI: [1.43, 6.07]GLMM
Comparison: Treatment comparison at ≥50% Improvement level: Dysport® 600 U versus Placebop-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.03, 7.79]GLMM
Comparison: Treatment comparison at ≥50% Improvement level: Dysport® 800 U versus Placebop-value: 0.003495% CI: [1.4, 5.33]GLMM
Comparison: Treatment comparison at ≥75% Improvement level: Dysport® 600 U versus Placebop-value: <0.000195% CI: [3.5, 15.58]GLMM
Comparison: Treatment comparison at ≥75% Improvement level: Dysport® 800 U versus Placebop-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.48, 11.24]GLMM
Secondary

Percentage of Subjects With No Episodes of UI at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

The weekly number of UI episodes was measured using a 7-day bladder diary. Bladder diaries that contained data recorded on at least 5 days were included in the analysis. The number of subjects with no UI episodes at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was recorded. Percentage of subjects with no episodes of UI (≥100% Improvement) was calculated as: Total number of subjects with no weekly number of UI episodes at Week 6 / Total number of subjects with any number of UI events at Week 6.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the mITT population (all randomised subjects who received at least 1 administration of study treatment). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Subjects With No Episodes of UI at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle1.3 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 600 UPercentage of Subjects With No Episodes of UI at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle36.6 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 800 UPercentage of Subjects With No Episodes of UI at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle26.0 Percentage of Subjects
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, study baseline- by-visit interaction and study baseline weekly number of UI episodes as fixed effect.p-value: 0.000295% CI: [6.09, 340.69]Generalised linear mixed model (GLMM)
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, study baseline-by-visit interaction and study baseline weekly number of UI episodes as fixed effect.p-value: 0.000995% CI: [4.17, 240.58]GLMM
Secondary

Percentage of Subjects With No Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (IDCs) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Subjects included in the urodynamic subset (84.9% of randomised subjects) had a standardised urodynamic filling cystometry assessment at baseline (Screening) and again at Week 6 to determine the occurrence of IDCs. The percentage of subjects without IDCs at 6 weeks after the first study treatment was recorded.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 6 of DBPC Cycle

Population: Results are presented for the urodynamic population (all subjects in the mITT population included in the urodynamic subset at randomisation). Subjects were analysed as randomised (planned treatment). Only subjects with data available for analysis at Week 6 of DBPC cycle are presented.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Subjects With No Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (IDCs) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle3.4 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 600 UPercentage of Subjects With No Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (IDCs) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle52.7 Percentage of Subjects
Dysport® 800 UPercentage of Subjects With No Involuntary Detrusor Contraction (IDCs) During Storage at Week 6 of DBPC Cycle50.0 Percentage of Subjects
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, study baseline-by-visit interaction and study baseline weekly number of UI episodes as fixed effect.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [7.05, 137.09]GLMM
Comparison: Treatment group, recorded stratification factors, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, study baseline-by- visit interaction and study baseline weekly number of UI episodes as fixed effect.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [6.24, 126.25]GLMM

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 18, 2026