Kehoe 2015.
Study characteristics | ||
Methods | Multi‐centre international RCT non‐inferiority trial (CHORUS) | |
Participants | 552 women with stage IIIc/IV EOC enrolled in the UK and New Zealand | |
Interventions | Primary surgery then 6 cycles of platinum‐based chemotherapy or 3 cycles of platinum‐based chemotherapy, surgery, then a further 3 cycles of platinum‐based chemotherapy | |
Outcomes | OS, PFS, QoL Surgery scheduled after 3 cycles of chemotherapy in NACT group. Chemotherapy details: Single agent carboplatin: NACT = 63 (23%); PDS = 66 (24%); Carboplatin paclitaxel: NACT = 210 (77%); PDS = 207 (75%); Carboplatin plus other chemotherapy agent: NACT = 1 (<1%); PDS = 3 (1%). Dose modification required: NACT = 100 (39%); PDS = 87 (38%). PDS group: 251 (91%) of 276 women started treatment as allocated; 212 (77%) had adjuvant chemotherapy.
NACT group: 253 (92%) of 274 women started treatment as allocated and 217 (79%) had IDS. Median duration of treatment was 22 weeks in both groups (NACT inter quartile range (IQR) 19 to 24 weeks; PDS IQR 17 to 24 weeks).
|
|
Notes | www.ctu.mrc.ac.uk/plugins/StudyDisplay/protocols/CHORUS protocol Version 2.0 ‐ 05 June 2008.pdf Additional age and survival details: < 50: OS 22.8 months (18.5 to 34.4); PFS 13.2 months (9.9 to 17.1) 50 to 70: OS 24.1 (20.6 to 28.4); PFS 11.4 (10.5 to 12.5) >70: OS 20.8 (14.7 to 25.8); PFS 10.4 (8.8 to 12.0) |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Random assignment centrally at the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit by telephone using a minimisation method with a random element. Women stratified according to randomising centre, largest radiological tumour size, clinical FIGO stage, and pre‐specified chemotherapy regimen with equal probability of assignment to each treatment arm. 2 women who had been randomised were subsequently excluded. One woman had been randomised by mistake as an administrative error and one woman was found not to have capacity to consent and was therefore ineligible for the trial |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Central randomisation by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit by telephone |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Unblinded, therefore high risk for some outcomes assessed by investigators involved with patient care (e.g. optimal debulking). |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Not reported |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | All women accounted for and analysed by ITT analysis |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | All pertinent outcomes appear to have been reported in some capacity. Pre‐specified outcomes as per clinicaltrials.gov protocol for OS; PFS and QoL ‐ see outcomes section in methods and clinical trials.gov website Only global QoL outcomes reported at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. |
Other bias | Unclear risk | 64 centres surgery performed by specialist gynaecological oncologists, further 23 registered centres only non‐surgical management provided. Supplementary data in table 7 shows that hysterectomy/bilateral salpingo‐oophorectomy (BSO) and omentectomy not performed in varying proportions. Unclear what effect this might have on outcomes |