Tanioka 2013.
Study characteristics | ||
Methods |
Randomised, placebo‐controlled, phase 2 study with 2 arms
Study period: January 2011 to September 2012
Masking: double‐blind Baseline patient characteristics: reported Follow‐up: n.r. |
|
Participants |
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Median age, years: 53 (36 to 67) in aprepitant group, 59 (33 to 69) in placebo group Gender: female Tumour/cancer type: ovarian cancer (early/advanced), endometrial cancer, other, ascites or peritoneal dissemination Chemotherapy regimen: carboplatin + intravenous cytotoxic anti‐tumour drugs such as paclitaxel and pemetrexed; carboplatin + paclitaxel; carboplatin + liposomal doxorubicin; irinotecan + fluorouracil, bevacizumab, or cetuximab Country: Japan (multi‐centre) |
|
Interventions |
Experimental: arm A: aprepitant Day 1: aprepitant 125 mg p.o. + granisetron 1 mg i.v. + dexamethasone 12 mg i.v. Days 2 to 3: aprepitant 80 mg p.o. + dexamethasone 4 mg i.v. Experimental: arm B: placebo Day 1: placebo 0 mg p.o. + granisetron 1 mg i.v. + dexamethasone 20 mg i.v. Days 2 to 3: placebo 0 mg p.o. + dexamethasone 8 mg i.v. |
|
Outcomes |
Primary endpoint
Secondary endpoint(s)
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "... randomly assigned to the aprepitant group or placebo group according to a computer‐generated, blinded allocation schedule" |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: precise allocation concealment not reported |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Blinding of participants | Low risk | Quote: "... double‐blind ..." |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Blinding of personnel | Low risk | Quote: "... double‐blind ..." |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Subjective outcomes (Patient reported outcomes) | Low risk | Comment: both patients and personnel were blinded towards the intervention and thus had no influence on outcome assessment |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Objective outcomes (including mortality and safety) | Low risk | Comment: both patients and personnel were blinded towards the intervention and thus had no influence on outcome assessment |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Subjective outcomes (Patient reported outcomes) | Low risk | Quote: "of these, 91 patients were included in the full analysis set" |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Objective outcomes (including mortality and safety data) | Low risk | Quote: "safety was evaluated in all the 92 subjects who were assigned to treatment, including the patient who discontinued chemotherapy due to a hypersensitivity reaction" |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Comment: all outcome measures were reported in the results section |
Other bias | Low risk | Comment: no information to suggest other sources of bias |