Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Comparative assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron for overactive bladder: an indirect treatment comparison
  1. Nick Freemantle1,
  2. David A Ginsberg2,
  3. Rachael McCool3,
  4. Kelly Fleetwood4,
  5. Mick Arber3,
  6. Kristin Khalaf5,6,
  7. Clara Loveman7,
  8. Quanhong Ni8,9,
  9. Julie Glanville3
  1. 1Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
  2. 2USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, California, USA
  3. 3York Health Economics Consortium, University of York, York, UK
  4. 4Quantics, Edinburgh, UK
  5. 5Allergan, Inc., Irvine, California, USA
  6. 6Xcenda, Palm Harbor, Florida, USA
  7. 7Allergan Holdings Ltd, Marlow, UK
  8. 8Allergan, Inc., Bridgewater, New Jersey, USA
  9. 9Celgene, Summit, New Jersey, USA
  1. Correspondence to Professor Nick Freemantle; nicholas.freemantle{at}


Context OnabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron have recently gained marketing authorisation to treat symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB).

Objective To evaluate the relative efficacy of mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA in patients with idiopathic OAB.

Design Network meta-analysis.

Data sources A search of 9 electronic databases, review documents, guidelines and websites.

Methods Randomised trials comparing any licensed dose of onabotulinumtoxinA or mirabegron with each other, anticholinergic drugs or placebo were eligible (19 randomised trials were identified). 1 reviewer extracted data from the studies and a second reviewer checked the data. Candidate trials were assessed for similarity and networks were developed for each outcome. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. When there were differences in mean baseline values between mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA trials they were adjusted for using network meta-regression (NMR).

Results No studies directly comparing onabotulinumtoxinA to mirabegron were identified. A network was created for each of the 7 outcomes, with 3–9 studies included in each individual network. The trials included in the networks were broadly similar. Patients in the onabotulinumtoxinA trials had more urinary incontinence and urgency episodes at baseline than patients in the mirabegron trials and these differences were adjusted for using NMR. Both onabotulinumtoxinA and mirabegron were more efficacious than placebo at reducing the frequency of urinary incontinence, urgency, urination and nocturia. OnabotulinumtoxinA was more efficacious than mirabegron (50 and 25 mg) in completely resolving daily episodes of urinary incontinence and urgency and in reducing the frequency of urinary incontinence, urgency and urination. NMR supported the results of the network meta-analysis.

Conclusions In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing onabotulinumtoxinA to mirabegron, this indirect comparison indicates that onabotulinumtoxinA may be superior to mirabegron in improving symptoms of urinary incontinence, urgency and urinary frequency in patients with idiopathic OAB.

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See:

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.