Pennell 2014.
Methods | Prospective, multinational, randomised, open‐label, parallel‐group, phase 2 study; Non‐inferiority study. | |
Participants | 197 participants were randomised 160 participants completed one year of treatment Age (mean (SD)): 19.8 (6.4) years (range: 10 ‐ 40 years) Gender (male/female): 115/82 Setting and countries: 22 centres across 11 countries Inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria:
Follow‐up: 12 months |
|
Interventions | Two groups:
|
|
Outcomes |
Furthermore, safety, compliance, dose interruptions/reductions and laboratory parameters (serum creatinine, blood creatinine, ALT) were measured. |
|
Notes | Study was sponsored by Novartis Pharma AG. Novartis Pharma AG was involved in design of the study, conducted the statistical analysis and paid a medical writer who assisted with writing the article. Some of the authors received research grant funding, honoraria or lecture fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals and/or other pharmaceutical companies. | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | "[...]patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio [...]" "Randomization was based on permuted blocks; stratification by centre was not conducted." |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No details given with regard to concealment of allocation. |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | "Core laboratories were blinded to treatment allocation." "In order to eliminate potential unrecognised biases, the core clinical trial team was blinded to the treatment assignment prior to the database lock for the primary analysis." "Open‐label trial" No placebo treatment mentioned. Due to different administration routes, blinding is not likely in particular of performance bias. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | ITT was done regarding myocardial T2*, but the number of included patients (n=180) was lower than the number of randomised patients (n=197) Apart from that, per‐protocol analysis was done for the other outcomes. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Only most common AE (≥ 5%) and drug related AE ≥ 2 participants were reported |
Other bias | Low risk | No other bias detected. |