Skip to main content
. 2017 Jun 8;2017(6):CD011741. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011741.pub2

RAVE.

Methods Study design: stated as randomised, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, phase II trial. Randomisation 1:1:1
Recruitment: no data (USA)
Participants People with unilateral exercise‐limiting intermittent claudication (N randomised and received treatment = 105)
 Age (mean): 68 years (control), 66 (low‐dose), 64 years (high‐dose)
 Sex (N males/females): 91%/9% (control), 81%/19% (low‐dose), 67%/33% (high‐dose)
Severity: ABI (index leg): 0.6 (placebo), 0.6 (low‐dose), 0.6 (high‐dose)
Interventions AdVEGF121 ‐ recombinant adenovirus encoding vascular endothelial growth factor
  • 4 × 1010 particle units AdVEGF121, n = 40; MITTa: 40 participants at week 12, 38 at week 26.

  • 4 × 109 particle units AdVEGF121, n = 32; MITTa: 31 participants at week 12, 24 at week 26.

  • Placebo, n = 33; MITTa: 30 participants at week 12, 25 at week 26.


Delivered as 20 × 1‐mL IM injections
Outcomes
  • Change in peak walking time to week 12 (primary), to week 26

  • Change in claudication onset time to week 12, to week 26

  • Ankle‐brachial index (ABI) at 12 weeks, at 26 weeks

  • Quality of life measures at 12 weeks, at 26 weeks

Notes ITT analysis: missing data analysed using the last observation carried forward procedure. Peak walking time and claudication onset time recorded as 0 after mechanical intervention (revascularisation) or inability to walk on the treadmill
aModified ITT (MITT) analysis: missing data and data collected after revascularisation or treatment with cilostazol were excluded
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Procedure is not reported
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Procedure is not reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Blinding procedure is not explicitly reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 Objective outcomes Low risk Outcome measurement is not likely to be influenced by lack of blinding
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 Subjective outcomes Unclear risk Blinding procedure is not explicitly reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Death Low risk Data for almost all participants
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Limb amputation Low risk Data for almost all participants
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Ulceration Unclear risk The study did not address this outcome
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Rest pain Unclear risk The study did not address this outcome
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Walking ability Low risk N missing data at week 12 low (< 5%), at week 26 higher (< 20%); results are not likely to be influenced.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Haemodynamic measures Unclear risk No data for number of participants with measurements
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Adverse events /severe complications Low risk Data for almost all participants (no aggregate data)
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk The study protocol is not available, but results for all relevant outcomes are provided
Other bias Low risk The study appears to be free of other sources of bias