Hartmut Porst1, Andrea Burri1. 1. Private Institute for Urology, Andrology and Sexual Medicine, Hamburg - Germany.
Abstract
Premature ejaculation (PE) is a common complaint of male sexual dysfunction affecting men and their partners and consequently causing significant personal and interpersonal distress. Increased sensitivity of the glans penis and abnormalities of the afferent-efferent reflex pathway within the ejaculatory process are involved in the occurrence of PE. Drugs that either selectively reduce penile sensitization or modify the afferent-efferent reflex are well established therapeutic options for PE. Fortacin™ is the first topical treatment to be officially approved for the treatment of primary PE in adult men, and is mentioned as an experimental aerosol (as TEMPE) in the current European Association of Urology guidelines. It was approved for use in the European Union and launched in the United Kingdom in November 2016. Fortacin™ is a eutectic-like mixture of lidocaine 150 mg/mL and prilocaine 50 mg/mL that meets the requirements of an ideal treatment for PE because it is fast acting (within 5 minutes), has durable effects, can be easily used "on-demand", and shows minimal side-effects. The metered-dose spray delivery system allows the desensitizing agents to be deposited in a dose-controlled, concentrated film onto the glans penis consequently reducing its sensitivity. This is translated into a delaying of the ejaculatory latency time without adversely affecting the sensation of ejaculation and orgasmic pleasure. The efficacy and safety of Fortacin™ have been proven by means of increased ejaculatory latency, control, and sexual satisfaction in large scale studies demonstrating the significant benefits for both patients and their partners.
Premature ejaculation (PE) is a common complaint of male sexual dysfunction affecting men and their partners and consequently causing significant personal and interpersonal distress. Increased sensitivity of the glans penis and abnormalities of the afferent-efferent reflex pathway within the ejaculatory process are involved in the occurrence of PE. Drugs that either selectively reduce penile sensitization or modify the afferent-efferent reflex are well established therapeutic options for PE. Fortacin™ is the first topical treatment to be officially approved for the treatment of primary PE in adult men, and is mentioned as an experimental aerosol (as TEMPE) in the current European Association of Urology guidelines. It was approved for use in the European Union and launched in the United Kingdom in November 2016. Fortacin™ is a eutectic-like mixture of lidocaine 150 mg/mL and prilocaine 50 mg/mL that meets the requirements of an ideal treatment for PE because it is fast acting (within 5 minutes), has durable effects, can be easily used "on-demand", and shows minimal side-effects. The metered-dose spray delivery system allows the desensitizing agents to be deposited in a dose-controlled, concentrated film onto the glans penis consequently reducing its sensitivity. This is translated into a delaying of the ejaculatory latency time without adversely affecting the sensation of ejaculation and orgasmic pleasure. The efficacy and safety of Fortacin™ have been proven by means of increased ejaculatory latency, control, and sexual satisfaction in large scale studies demonstrating the significant benefits for both patients and their partners.
Premature ejaculation (PE) is a frequent complaint of male sexual dysfunction and a
major source of sexual distress (1). Increased sensitivity of the glans penis and abnormalities of the
afferent-efferent reflex pathway within the ejaculatory process are implicated in
the occurrence of PE and may contribute to penile hypersensitivity and PE (2). Therefore, a reduction in
penile sensitivity is anticipated to prolong intravaginal ejaculation latency time
(IELT) without affecting the sensation of ejaculation and orgasmic feelings (3).There are several definitions of PE and how to accurately capture the phenomenon
remains a major debate. Although there is little consensus amongst different
organizations and societies regarding the definition and classification of PE, most
include the three main accepted dimensions of this condition: short IELT, inability
to control ejaculation, and both personal and interpersonal distress.In 2014, the International Society for Sexual Medicine (ISSM) introduced a new
definition of lifelong and acquired PE, representing the first evidence-based, in
contrast to purely expert-based, definition (4). According to this definition, PE (lifelong or
acquired) is a male sexual dysfunction characterized by: (1) ejaculation that always or nearly always occurs
prior to or within about 1 minute of vaginal penetration starting at time of the
first sexual experience (lifelong PE) or a clinically significant and bothersome
reduction in IELT, often to about 3 minutes or less (acquired PE); (2) the inability to delay
ejaculation during all or nearly all vaginal penetrations; and, (3) negative personal consequences,
such as distress, bother, frustration, and/or the avoidance of sexual intimacy
(4, 5).
Epidemiology of PE and quality of life
PE is more than just a short time to ejaculation and the determinants of PE are
complex and multifactorial (6).
IELT, control over ejaculation, and the sexual satisfaction of the man and his
partner have been identified as important interrelated determinants of PE (7). By causing significant
personal and interpersonal distress for both the patient and partner, a vicious
cycle can develop where the emotional reactions to PE by both parties can exacerbate
or perpetuate the problem (6).
Indeed, men with PE report having more interpersonal difficulties and higher levels
of personal distress than men without PE, and partners of men with PE report having
higher levels of relationship problems compared with partners of men without PE
(5). Importantly, men with
PE feel they are “letting their partner down” and that the quality of their
relationship would improve without PE (8).Apart from interpersonal friction and distress, PE is also associated with
significant sexual and psychological comorbidities. The Premature Ejaculation
Prevalence and Attitudes (PEPA) survey (9), a comprehensive Internet-based survey conducted on 12,133 men aged
18-70 years in the United States, Germany, and Italy, for example, found that the
percentage of men self-reporting comorbid conditions including sexual dysfunctions
(e.g., anorgasmia, low libido, erectile dysfunction) and psychological disturbances
(e.g., depression, anxiety, excessive stress), was significantly higher in men with
PE (22.7% of the total sample) than in men without PE (all p<0.05) (9). In the survey, men were
classified as having PE based on self-reporting of low or absent control over
ejaculation, resulting in distress for them, their sexual partner, or both, with
similar prevalence rates among the participating countries (United States 24%,
Germany 20.3 %, Italy 20%).Despite the fact that PE can have serious effects on the psychological well-being and
overall quality of life of the sufferer and his partner, only a minority of men seek
professional help. The PEPA survey, for example, showed that only 9% of men with
self-reported PE had consulted a doctor (9). Embarrassment and a belief that there is no
effective treatment available are the main reasons for not discussing PE with their
physician (10).
Neurophysiology of ejaculation
The male sexual-response cycle consists of four phases: desire, arousal (erection),
orgasm (ejaculation), and resolution (Fig. 1) (11). The
process of ejaculation is classified by two distinct phases, “emission” and
“expulsion”. Sympathetic, parasympathetic, and somatic nervous systems are involved
in the ejaculatory response and are coordinated by the spinal ejaculatory generator
(SEG) (12, 13). Sensory afferents received
by the SEG are coordinated with inhibitory and excitatory influences from
supra-spinal sites, as well as biochemical or mechanical information from the
accessory sex organs (14). The
ejaculatory process starts with the emission of semen into the posterior urethra,
induced by increased activity of the sympathetic efferent fibers causing sequential
contractions of the epididymis, vas deferens, seminal vesicles, and prostate,
alongside the closure of the bladder neck (15). Emission of the semen with dilation of the
posterior urethra results in the forceful expulsion of semen out of the urethral
orifice induced by activation of the somatic pudendal nerve with subsequent
contractions of the bulbospongiosus, bulbocavernosus, and perineal muscles (16). The rhythmical expulsion is
mainly influenced by the somatic nervous system and represents an involuntary spinal
cord reflex (13). Various
neurotransmitters also play a major role in the control of ejaculation, such as the
excitatory role of dopamine and the inhibitory role of serotonin or nitric oxide
(13).
Fig. 1
Normal male sexual response compared with premature ejaculation. Figure
adapted from Kirby 2014 (11).
Normal male sexual response compared with premature ejaculation. Figure
adapted from Kirby 2014 (11).Although numerous preclinical and clinical studies in recent years have been able to
provide a better understanding of the ejaculatory process, many details remain
unknown regarding the exact physiology of the ejaculatory process. At present, it is
commonly accepted that PE is the result of a dysregulation of the normal ejaculatory
process with either over-activation of ejaculation stimulatory or inhibition of
ejaculation delaying 5-HT (serotonin) receptors, leading to an involuntary lack of
control over ejaculation (17).
Clearly, a more in-depth understanding of the normal physiological ejaculatory
reflex (Fig. 2) is essential in
order to determine the exact underlying pathophysiology of PE.
Fig. 2
The physiological ejaculatory reflex. Ejaculation results from coordinated
contractile activity organized by the spinal ejaculatory generator (SEG).
Sensory afferent information is received by the SEG which, alongside
supra-spinal information arising from specific brain regions, triggers the
ejaculatory mechanism during sexual activity. Topical anesthetics applied to
the glans penis inhibit penile sensory receptors. Figure adapted from Saitz
and Serefoglu 2015 (12).
The physiological ejaculatory reflex. Ejaculation results from coordinated
contractile activity organized by the spinal ejaculatory generator (SEG).
Sensory afferent information is received by the SEG which, alongside
supra-spinal information arising from specific brain regions, triggers the
ejaculatory mechanism during sexual activity. Topical anesthetics applied to
the glans penis inhibit penile sensory receptors. Figure adapted from Saitz
and Serefoglu 2015 (12).
Rationale for the use of topical anesthetics
The use of drugs that selectively reduce penile sensitization or which modify the
afferent-efferent reflex could provide effective therapy for PE, as has been shown
with the off-label use of topical desensitizing creams (2). Due to the variable nature of sexual
intercourse, spontaneity is an important factor in the treatment of PE. The ideal
treatment for PE should therefore be characterized, among others, by a rapid on-set
of action, which is effective for “on-demand” use from the first dose, and which is
reversible (18). An ideal PE
medication should also demonstrate high efficacy on IELT reflected in
patient-reported outcomes and, in addition, should show a good safety profile with
minimal side-effects and no undesirable effects on the sexual partner.The use of topical anesthetics to reduce sensitivity of the glans penis has been
shown to improve ejaculatory latency without having any adverse effects on the
sensation of ejaculation and impairment of orgasmic capacity (19, 20). Unlike the majority of systemic treatments for PE, topical
treatments can be used “on-demand” and are unlikely to have systemic side-effects
(20). There are, however, a
number of disadvantages to some topical treatments including difficult dosing with
the potential of either over- or under-dosing causing either erectile difficulties
or lack of efficacy, which may interfere with spontaneity (20). Some topical treatments may also need to be
used with a condom or washed off prior to intercourse, and again may potentially
interfere with spontaneity and arousal.The paucity of approved pharmacological treatments for PE, has led to an increased
“off-label” use of oral antidepressants and local anesthetics.Clearly, an approved treatment that can be used “on-demand” and which is effective
from first use with minimal systemic side-effects is essential (2, 21).
Existing treatments for PE
Of the oral and locally acting topical therapies currently used to manage PE in
Europe, only Fortacin™ and dapoxetine have been officially approved for the
treatment of PE.
Oral therapies
Dapoxetine, a short-acting selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), was the
first oral pharmacological agent developed for the treatment of PE and
officially approved for “on-demand” use in adult men aged 18 to 64 years (22). Its mechanism of action
in the treatment of PE is presumed to be linked to the inhibition of neuronal
reuptake of serotonin and the subsequent potentiation of the neurotransmitter's
action at pre- and post-synaptic receptors (23). The recommended starting dose for all
patients is 30 mg, taken approximately 1 to 3 hours prior to sexual activity,
with no more than one dose taken every 24 hours (23).Dapoxetine was shown to significantly improve all aspects of PE, including
prolonging stopwatch-measured IELT (as primary outcome) and increasing
patient-reported outcome measures (i.e. the Premature Ejaculation Profile [PEP]
questionnaire and the clinical global impression of change [CGIC] as secondary
outcomes), in four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter,
phase III studies of 12-24 weeks' duration in men with PE (n = 4,843) (24–26). A pooled analysis of these studies showed that oral dapoxetine
30 mg or 60 mg (taken as needed) induced significantly greater improvements from
baseline in the geometric mean IELT at all time points measured, compared with
placebo (27). At week 12,
the geometric mean IELT increased from a baseline of approximately 0.8 minutes
to 2.0 and 2.3 minutes with dapoxetine 30 mg and 60 mg, respectively, compared
with 1.3 minutes for placebo (both p<0.001), corresponding to a 2.5-fold and
3.0-fold increase in the geometric mean IELT respectively (vs. a 1.6-fold
increase for placebo; p<0.0001 for both) (27). Significant improvements in PEP items
and CGIC were also shown with both doses of dapoxetine (all p<0.001 vs.
placebo) (27).Despite its efficacy in the treatment of PE, dapoxetine has also been associated
with dose-related systemic adverse effects (AEs), with nausea, dizziness,
headache, diarrhea, insomnia, and fatigue as the most frequently reported
drug-related adverse events in five randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase III studies in men with PE (n = 6,081)
(24–26, 28). Indeed, an integrated analysis of these
studies showed that AEs were reported in 47.0% and 60.3% of patients receiving
30 mg and 60 mg dapoxetine, respectively, with AE-related discontinuation
occurring in 3.5% and 8.8% of these patients (27). In addition, the Summary of Product
Characteristics states that orthostatic vital signs (blood pressure and heart
rate) must be measured prior to starting dapoxetine, which should not be used in
patients using PDE5 inhibitors due to possible reduced orthostatic tolerance
(23).High discontinuation rates of this drug have also been reported in the setting of
real clinical practice. In a study by Mondaini et al. (n = 120), 20% of patients
decided not to start dapoxetine with fear of using a “drug” being the most
frequently reported reason (29). Moreover, of the 80% who started therapy, 26% stopped taking
dapoxetine after 1 month due to side effects and lack of efficacy. Only 10.4% of
patients continued the treatment for over one year. The main reasons for
discontinuing the treatment were: effect below expectation, costs, side effects,
loss of interest in sex, and lack of efficacy.The off-label use of other SSRIs (including paroxetine, sertraline, and
citalopram) in the treatment of PE is based on the side-effect of delayed
ejaculation that was observed in depressedpatients with normal sexual function
who were treated with SSRIs for their depression. This increase in IELT is most
likely the consequence of increased concentrations of serotonin in the synaptic
cleft, causing an inhibition in the ejaculatory reflex and therefore a delay or
even absence of ejaculation (2). Although doses of prescribed SSRIs tend to be generally lower
for PE than for depression, the AEs are similar and there is also the potential
for serious drug interaction that may result in rare cases of the so-called
serotonin syndrome and suicidal ideation (30).
Locally acting topical therapies
Topical therapies that can be applied directly to the glans penis in order to
produce some degree of penile desensitization are directed to the
hypersensitivity aspect of PE. These topical treatments can be used “on-demand”
with minimal systemic effects but may interfere with sexual spontaneity and have
dosing difficulties with the potential of either over-or under-dosing, which may
either cause penile hypoesthesia with subsequent erectile dysfunction and/or
transvaginal transmission resulting in vaginal numbness and anorgasmia or lack
of efficacy, respectively (20). Their ease of application and tolerability is further limited
by the presence of a number of excipients in the formulation of the majority of
creams and topical products causing difficulties in applying the correct
measured dose.Creams/ointments that have been frequently used in clinical practice, but that
have not been specifically approved for the management of PE, include a local
anesthetic cream containing lidocaine and prilocaine (2.5% each) that was
developed for the topical anesthesia of intact skin. Although studies have shown
some efficacy of lidocaine/prilocaine cream 5% in preventing PE (31, 32), it is slow-acting and cumbersome to use,
with genital hypoesthesia reported in both sexual partners (20). In addition,
difficulties in applying the cream have been reported along with a decrease in
penile and vaginal sensitivity, penile hypoesthesia and loss of erection, and
penile irritation (31,
32). Local anesthetic
creams may also contain a mixture of base and ionized forms of local anesthetics
where only the uncharged base forms are able to penetrate skin or mucous
membranes (33).Fortacin™ (Lidocaine/Prilocaine, Recordati) is the first officially approved
topical therapy for PE. It is indicated for the treatment of primary PE in adult
men and was approved for use in the European Union in 2013 and launched in the
United Kingdom in November 2016 (34, 35). During
its clinical development, Fortacin™ was referred to by two separate names,
Topical Eutectic Mixture for Premature Ejaculation (TEMPE)
and PSD502, with both names having been used in the published
literature. Notably, Fortacin™ (denoted as TEMPE) is mentioned as an
experimental aerosol in current European Association of Urology Guidelines
(10).
Overview of Fortacin™
Fortacin™ is a metered-dose aerosol spray that delivers topical anesthesia to the
glans penis. It contains purely base (uncharged) forms of the local anesthetics
lidocaine 150 mg/mL and prilocaine 50 mg/mL, with no excipients except the spray
propellant (norflurane) (34).
This offers a potential advantage over other existing topical anesthetics in terms
of a reduced risk of allergic reaction due to excipients. Although lidocaine and
prilocaine are crystalline solids at room temperature, they form a eutectic mixture
when mixed together, resulting in an oily liquid that remains in liquid form at
temperatures that are lower than their individual melting points (33). Deployment of the
metered-dose chamber causes the instant vaporization of the propellant forcing the
lidocaine and prilocaine out of the solution and into a eutectic-like mixture. This
forms a slightly oily substance that enhances adherence to the penile surface by
creating a thin layer of local anesthetic molecules on the glans mucosa.
Consequently, the absorption of the active components in their free-base form
through the non- or poorly-keratinized tissue of the glans penis can be optimized
(33, 36), the extent of neural blockage maximized, and
the onset of numbness minimized.Furthermore, in contrast to the application of creams, the metered-dose spray
delivery system allows the desensitizing agents to be deposited in a
dose-controlled, concentrated film onto the glans penis (33). Due to its formulation, the uncharged base
forms of lidocaine and prilocaine are readily absorbed through the glans penis
mucous membrane, but not through normal keratinized skin (i.e. the shaft of the
penis); this minimizes absorption through normal skin so that a full sensation can
be maintained in the shaft of the penis (33, 36). Furthermore, by reducing the permeability of the neuronal membranes
to sodium ions, Fortacin™ produces localized reversible inhibition of nerve
conduction (33). The active
substances, lidocaine and prilocaine, block transmission of nerve impulses in the
glans penis, reducing its sensitivity, which is then translated into a delaying of
the ejaculatory latency time without adversely affecting the sensation of
ejaculation and orgasm (34).
Efficacy of Fortacin™
The clinical efficacy of Fortacin™ in the treatment of primary PE in adult men has
been evaluated in five studies: one proof-of-concept phase II study (3): one supportive phase II study
(37): two pivotal phase III
studies (38, 39); and, combined data from the
two pivotal phase III studies, including the open-label extension of 5 and 9 months
(2, 40).Positive outcomes in terms of increased IELT, sexual satisfaction, and minimal local
AEs were initially shown from the proof-of-concept and supportive phase II studies.
In the prospective, open-label, proof-of-concept study, a significant increase in
IELT (p = 0.008 versus baseline), improved sexual satisfaction, and minimal local
AEs were demonstrated in 11 men with self-reported PE who applied Fortacin™ to the
glans penis 15 minutes prior to intercourse (3). Similarly, the supportive phase II study
(37) conducted on 54 men
with PE (according to DSM-IV criteria) also showed positive outcomes with an
increased IELT, better ejaculatory control, and improved sexual quality of life
compared with the placebo group (41).Primary evidence for the efficacy of Fortacin™ in the treatment of patients with PE
was derived from two pivotal phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled studies, with open-label follow-up in patients with lifelong PE
and their sexual partners (38,
39). In both studies, the
3-month treatment phase with 30 mg Fortacin™ was followed by a 9-month open-label
treatment phase in the first study (39) and a 5-month open-label treatment phase in the second study (38). Inclusion criteria for both
studies were heterosexual men aged ≥18 years in stable, monogamous relationships
with lifelong PE diagnosed according to both the DSM-IV criteria (41) and the ISSM definition
(42), and a baseline IELT
of ≤1 minute for at least two of the first three sexual encounters during the 4-week
screening period. Men taking tricyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors
or short-acting SSRIs, in which the dose had changed within the 4-week screening
period or was expected to change, were excluded from the trials, as were those with
erectile dysfunction.Fortacin™ (or matched placebo) was applied to the glans penis (after retracting any
foreskin) approximately 5 minutes before intercourse with excess spray wiped off
prior to penetration. Patients recorded stop-watch measured IELT during each sexual
encounter and completed the Index of Premature Ejaculation (IPE) and PEP
questionnaires at study entry and monthly visits.The 10-item IPE questionnaire assesses subjective aspects of PE, covering three
domains: ejaculatory control (four questions), sexual satisfaction (four questions),
and distress (two questions) (43). Each question is answered on a 6-point Likert-type scale with final
scores for control/satisfaction and distress ranging from 4-20 points and 2-10
points, respectively (38). The
PEP questionnaire consists of four questions relating to perceived control over
ejaculation, personal distress related to ejaculation, satisfaction with sexual
intercourse, and interpersonal difficulty related to ejaculation. Each question is
answered on a 5-point Likert-type scale (44).Primary efficacy outcome variables for the pivotal studies included the change from
baseline to study end in mean IELT and in the IPE questionnaire domains of
ejaculatory control, sexual satisfaction, and distress (distress was a primary
efficacy variable for the second study only). Secondary efficacy outcome variables
included the proportion of patients with a mean IELT of >1 minute and >2
minutes during the 3-month double-blind treatment period, the change in the IPE
domain of distress from baseline to month 3 (first study only), and the PEP
questionnaire at months 1, 2, and 3. As drug-induced ejaculatory performance has
been shown to disclose a positively skewed IELT distribution, the geometric mean
IELT and the fold increase of the geometric mean IELT were used in order to avoid
overestimation of treatment efficacy (45).The first pivotal phase III study (n = 290; 191 patients treated with Fortacin™ and
99 with placebo) produced significant, clinically meaningful improvements in
ejaculatory latency, control, and sexual satisfaction with active treatment (39). The geometric mean IELT
increased from a baseline of 0.6 minutes in both treatment groups to 3.8 minutes in
the Fortacin™ group vs. 1.1 minutes in the placebo group at study end after 3 months
(Fig. 3). After adjusting for
treatment-group imbalances, these numbers effectively represent a 6.3-fold and
1.7-fold increase in adjusted geometric mean IELT, demonstrating a significant
between-treatment difference in favor of the active treatment (p<0.001), which
was also efficacious in restoring control with significantly greater increases from
baseline to month 3 for the IPE domain scores of ejaculatory control, sexual
satisfaction, and distress (7.0, 5.9, and 2.8 point difference between active
treatment and placebo, respectively; all p<0.001) (Fig. 4).
Fig. 3
Geometric mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT) at baseline and
at the end of the 3-month treatment period in patients treated with
Fortacin™ or placebo. *p<0.001 versus baseline. Figure adapted from
Dinsmore and Wyllie 2009 (39) and Carson and Wyllie 2010 (38).
Fig. 4
Change from baseline to month 3 in the adjusted mean Index of Premature
Ejaculation (IPE) domain scores for ejaculatory control, sexual
satisfaction, and distress in patients treated with Fortacin™ or placebo.
*p<0.001 versus placebo. Figure adapted from Dinsmore and Wyllie 2009
(39) and Carson and
Wyllie 2010 (38).
Geometric mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT) at baseline and
at the end of the 3-month treatment period in patients treated with
Fortacin™ or placebo. *p<0.001 versus baseline. Figure adapted from
Dinsmore and Wyllie 2009 (39) and Carson and Wyllie 2010 (38).Change from baseline to month 3 in the adjusted mean Index of Premature
Ejaculation (IPE) domain scores for ejaculatory control, sexual
satisfaction, and distress in patients treated with Fortacin™ or placebo.
*p<0.001 versus placebo. Figure adapted from Dinsmore and Wyllie 2009
(39) and Carson and
Wyllie 2010 (38).Fortacin™ was well received with 65.9% (of 182) patients rating the medication as
“good” or “excellent”, as opposed to 14.6% (of 96) patients in the placebo group. In
addition, the topical spray improved sexual satisfaction for both patients and their
partners at the end of the 3-month double-blind phase, with significantly more
patients and partners reporting improvements of at least one point in each of the
PEP domains compared with those using placebo (p<0.001 for all between-treatment
comparisons) (Fig. 5).
Fig. 5
Percentage of patients (A) and female sexual partners (B) reporting an
improvement of at least one point in Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP)
domains after 3 months' treatment with Fortacin™ or placebo. *p<0.001 for
all between-treatment comparisons. **p<0.0001 for all between-treatment
comparisons. Figure adapted from Dinsmore and Wyllie 2009 (39) and Carson and Wyllie
2010 (38).
Percentage of patients (A) and female sexual partners (B) reporting an
improvement of at least one point in Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP)
domains after 3 months' treatment with Fortacin™ or placebo. *p<0.001 for
all between-treatment comparisons. **p<0.0001 for all between-treatment
comparisons. Figure adapted from Dinsmore and Wyllie 2009 (39) and Carson and Wyllie
2010 (38).The advantageous effects of Fortacin™ were replicated and reinforced by the findings
from the second pivotal phase III study (n = 249; 167 patients with active treatment
and 82 with placebo) (38). In
this study, greater improvements in the geometric mean IELT from baseline to month 3
were observed for the active treatment group compared with placebo (0.56 to 2.6
minutes vs. 0.53 to 0.8 minutes, respectively), with a significant between-treatment
difference in the adjusted geometric mean IELT in favor of the active treatment (4.7
vs. 1.5 for placebo; p<0.0001) (Fig.
3). Scores for the IPE domains of ejaculatory control, sexual
satisfaction, and distress in the active treatment group were also significantly
higher than in the placebo group (all p<0.001) (Fig. 4) (38). Similarly, significantly more patients and
partners reported improvements of at least one point for all four domains of the PEP
questionnaire at 3 months with use of the topical spray (all p<0.0001 vs. the
placebo group) (Fig. 5).A higher proportion of patients treated with Fortacin™ had a mean IELT of >1
minute, >2 minutes, >3 minutes or >4 minutes compared with placebo based on
combined data of the intent-to-treat population during the 3-month double-blind
treatment period from both pivotal studies (Fig. 6) (40). Most patients (85.2%) in the active
treatment group achieved a mean IELT of >1 minute versus only 46.4% in the
placebo group.
Fig. 6
Proportion of patients with mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT)
>1 minute, >2 minutes, >3 minutes, or >4 minutes during the 3
month double-blind treatment with Fortacin™ or placebo [combined data of the
intent-to-treat population from both pivotal phase III studies (38, 39)]. Figure adapted from the 2013
Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use assessment report on
Lidocaine/Prilocaine (40).
Proportion of patients with mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT)
>1 minute, >2 minutes, >3 minutes, or >4 minutes during the 3
month double-blind treatment with Fortacin™ or placebo [combined data of the
intent-to-treat population from both pivotal phase III studies (38, 39)]. Figure adapted from the 2013
Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use assessment report on
Lidocaine/Prilocaine (40).Participants in both pivotal studies had the option to enter the open-label treatment
phase in which all patients received Fortacin™. In total, 497 patients (98.4% of
those completing the double-blind phase) entered the open-label extension; of these,
326 subjects had received active treatment and 171 had received placebo in the
double-blind phase (40).Fortacin™ was shown to be as effective for the treatment of PE at the end of the
open-label phase as it was at the end of the double-blind treatment phase, with no
evidence of tachyphylaxis despite repeated use. The positive changes in the
geometric mean IELT observed during the double-blind phase were maintained and
augmented during the open-label phase, with a marked improvement in geometric mean
IELT in patients who converted from placebo to active treatment (Fig. 7) (2). The effectiveness of the topical spray
increased with repeated use over time (Fig. 8), and improvements could be observed for all IPE domain scores
(mean change from baseline for ejaculatory control, sexual satisfaction, and
distress scores were 12.3, 10.9, and 5.3 points, respectively, at the end of the
open-label phase) (40).
Fig. 7
Change in the geometric mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT)
over 12 months in patients treated with Fortacin™ or placebo [combined data
from the double-blind and open-label phases of both pivotal phase III
studies (38, 39)]. Figure adapted from
Wyllie and Powell 2012 (2).
Fig. 8
Geometric mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT) over time in
patients treated with Fortacin™ in both the double-blind and open-label
phases of the pivotal phase III studies (38, 39). Figure adapted from the 2013
Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use assessment report on
Lidocaine/Prilocaine (40).
Change in the geometric mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT)
over 12 months in patients treated with Fortacin™ or placebo [combined data
from the double-blind and open-label phases of both pivotal phase III
studies (38, 39)]. Figure adapted from
Wyllie and Powell 2012 (2).Geometric mean intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT) over time in
patients treated with Fortacin™ in both the double-blind and open-label
phases of the pivotal phase III studies (38, 39). Figure adapted from the 2013
Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use assessment report on
Lidocaine/Prilocaine (40).
Tolerability of Fortacin™
In all studies, Fortacin™ has shown a good safety profile with only a low incidence
of mild-to-moderate local AEs according to a combined evaluation of 596 male
patients and 584 female partners who participated in the clinical trials (40). In general, most
treatment-related AEs occurred immediately or within 24 hours and most were mild or
moderate in intensity (40). The
incidence of treatment-related AEs was low in both patients (9.6%) and their female
partners (6.0%) (40). The most
frequent adverse reactions reported in male patients were local effects of genital
hypoesthesia (4.5%) and erectile dysfunction (4.4%), with discontinuation of
treatment in 0.2% and 0.5% of patients, respectively. The most frequent adverse
reactions reported in female partners were vulvovaginal burning sensation (3.9%),
and genital hypoesthesia (1.0%). Vulvovaginal discomfort or burning sensation caused
discontinuation of treatment in 0.3% of subjects. In addition to moderate-to-low
AEs, there was little or no desensitization of the genitalia neither in the patient
nor in their partner with the topical spray, which did not detract from sexual
satisfaction as evidenced by the increase in IPE and PEP scores after 3-months'
treatment compared with baseline. It is also noteworthy that the topical spray was
unlikely to be associated with systemic AEs (46).
Positioning Fortacin™ in the treatment of PE
Due to the easy application of Fortacin™ and short time to efficacy (i.e. within 5
minutes) this new treatment is unlikely to interfere with spontaneity of sexual
activities. After retraction of the foreskin, the topical spray is applied to the
glans penis 5 minutes before intercourse using three successive actuations of the
aerosol to deliver the approved dose and ensure complete coverage, with any excess
spray easily removed prior to sexual intercourse minimizing transmission to the
sexual partner (27, 28). A maximum of 3 doses can be
used within 24 hours, with a minimum interval of 4 hours between doses.Based on results from clinical trials, which have shown significant benefits for both
patients and their female partners in ejaculatory latency, control, and sexual
satisfaction, Fortacin™ should be recommended as a first-line topical treatment of
PE. It is also noteworthy that the pivotal phase III studies demonstrated increased
effectiveness of the topical spray over time, which was most likely due to improved
sexual confidence (2). By
prolonging IELT with repeated use of the topical spray, presumably via activity on
neuro-biogenic factors, a patient's psychological mindset may be positively
influenced, which may improve his confidence and ability to control ejaculation with
further improvement in the signs and symptoms of PE (2).PE involves a complex sensory pathway controlled by the SEG, which can be targeted
for the treatment of PE at two main sites: in the CNS, where SSRIs increase
serotonin levels, leading to a delay in the transmission of ejaculation processing
neural stimuli, and at the level of penile sensory receptors, where topical
anesthetics can reduce penile sensitivity and afferent sensory neural stimuli.
Hence, Fortacin™ could be considered not only as an alternative therapy to SSRIs but
also, because of their different site of action, as an adjunctive therapy to oral
SSRIs in severe PE patients. It is also apparent that patients with PE are sometimes
not satisfied when treated regularly with SSRIs and therefore the addition of
Fortacin™ to a patients' regular SSRI regimen may be advantageous.
Conclusions
PE can have detrimental effects on the quality of life of the patient and his partner
with a negative impact on emotions, habits, and behavior, ultimately affecting the
relationship and even leading to relationship break-ups. It is obvious that adequate
and efficient medical help is needed to address this debilitating condition.
Fortacin™ is the first officially approved topical prescription therapy for the
treatment of primary PE in adult men. Its formulation optimizes fast penetration
through the glans surface while the metered-dose spray delivery system allows the
desensitizing agents, lidocaine and prilocaine, to be deposited in a
dose-controlled, concentrated film onto the glans penis. This leads to a reduction
in penile sensitivity, thus delaying the ejaculatory latency time without adversely
affecting the sensation of ejaculation. The efficacy and safety of Fortacin™ have
been proven in numerous large scale studies with improvements demonstrated in
ejaculatory latency, control, and sexual satisfaction. The topical spray has a good
safety profile with only a low incidence of mild-to-moderate local AEs seen in
patients and partners, and is unlikely to be associated with systemic side effects.
Overall, Fortacin™ significantly improves the quality of the sexual performance, has
a durable effect over time, and may help break the vicious cycle of PE.
Authors: Ege Can Serefoglu; Chris G McMahon; Marcel D Waldinger; Stanley E Althof; Alan Shindel; Ganesh Adaikan; Edgardo F Becher; John Dean; Francois Giuliano; Wayne J G Hellstrom; Annamaria Giraldi; Sidney Glina; Luca Incrocci; Emmanuele Jannini; Marita McCabe; Sharon Parish; David Rowland; R Taylor Segraves; Ira Sharlip; Luiz Otavio Torres Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Luca Boeri; Edoardo Pozzi; Giuseppe Fallara; Francesco Montorsi; Andrea Salonia Journal: Int J Impot Res Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 2.896