TADALAFIL VERSUS SILDENAFIL CITRATO NEL TRATTAMENTO DELLA DISFUNZIONE ERETTILE (DE): LA PREFERENZA DEI PAZIENTI ITALIANI E LE MOTIVAZIONI DELLA LORO SCELTA

ABSTRACT: This is an open, multicentre, randomized, crossover study having the aim to evaluate the preference for sildenafil citrate or tadalafil in a population of Italian patients affected by ED, and to compare the efficacy and safety of these two drugs. MATERIAL AND METHODS. From October 2003 to November 2004, thirteen Italian centers enrolled ED patients (age >18) being in steady and naïve relation to ED treatment, both through PDE5 inhibitors and any other treatment option. These patients were randomized to sildenafil or tadalafil for 12 weeks, after which they were switched to the alternative treatment for a further 12 weeks. The preference was evaluated through the Treatment Preference Question (TPQ): “During this clinical trial you have taken tadalafil and sildenafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Which medication do you prefer to take for the next 8 weeks of treatment?”. Moreover, patients were asked to express their preference as “strong” or “moderate” and to answer some questions to clarify the reasons behind their preference. SEP and IIEF-EF questionnaires were used for a comparison of efficacy. RESULTS. 167 patients were enrolled, 144 of whom completed both treatment periods. On being asked the TPQ, 75% of patients (n=108) decided to continue treatment with tadalafil, in particular because it made it possible to have an erection many hours after taking the medication (first or second preference reason for 64.8% of patients), while 25% (n=36) preferred sildenafil (p=0.001). Both drugs improved the IIEF-EF and SEP scores compared to baseline, with a slightly but significantly greater improvement with tadalafil for both parameters. CONCLUSIONS. Tadalafil and sildenafil are both effective and well tolerated. Most of the patients prefer tadalafil thanks to the possibility of having sexual intercourse many hours after taking the medication. (Urologia 2008; 75: 24-31)