Methods | RCT, active/placebo‐controlled, double blind Date of study: September 2012‐August 2014 Location: 142 centres worldwide (no sites that were included in the AMAGINE‐2 study) |
|
Participants |
Randomised: 1881 participants (mean age 45 years, 1288 male) Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Dropouts and withdrawals
|
|
Interventions |
Intervention A. Brodalumab (n = 629), SC, 140 mg (2 injections week 0, 1 injection eow) Control intervention B. Brodalumab (n = 624), SC, 210 mg (2 injections week 0, 1 injection eow) C. Ustekinumab (n = 313), SC, 45/90 mg (week 0, week 4 and every 12 weeks) D. Placebo (n = 315), orally (same drug administration) |
|
Outcomes | Assessments at 12 weeks Primary outcomes of the trial
Secondary outcomes of the trial
|
|
Notes | Funding source: Quote (p 1319) “Amgen funded both studies. ... and Amgen conducted the data analyses. All the authors interpreted the data” Declarations of interest (p 1327): "Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org." Dr. Lebwohl reports grant support from Amgen, AbbVie, Janssen Biotech, UCB Pharma, Pfizer, Celgene, Eli Lilly, and Novartis outside the submitted work. |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote (protocol): “The randomisation lists will be generated by Amgen using a permuted block design within each strata... Comment: probably done |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote (protocol): “The randomisation lists will be generated by Amgen using a permuted block design within each strata...via an interactive voice response system” Comment: probably done |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote (protocol, cf 6. Treatment procedure): “This is a double dummy procedure...” Comment: probably done |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote (protocol, cf 6. Treatment procedure): "This is a double dummy procedure...” |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Randomly assigned 1881, analysed 1881 Dealing with missing data Quote (protocol & p 1321) "...with missing data imputed as indicating no response" Comment: well described |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Comment: the protocol for the study was available on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01708629). The pre‐specified outcomes and those mentioned in the methods section appeared to have been reported except for participant‐reported outcome |