CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial*

Similar documents
CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial*

Details on the procedure and devices used for assessment and calculation of

Supplementary Online Content

a) Subjects must be willing and able to give signed and dated written informed consent.

Title 1 Descriptive title identifying the study design, population, interventions, and, if applicable, trial acronym

Appendices. Appendix A Search terms

From protocol to publication: ensuring quality in the reporting of continence research Workshop 20 Monday, August 23rd 2010, 14:00 17:00

Guidelines for Reporting Non-Randomised Studies

Supplementary appendix

Randomized Controlled Trial

Reviewer No. 1 checklist for application of: inclusion of Nifurtimox + eflornithine in the WHO Essential Medicines List

CHECK-LISTS AND Tools DR F. R E Z A E I DR E. G H A D E R I K U R D I S TA N U N I V E R S I T Y O F M E D I C A L S C I E N C E S

CONSORT 2010 Statement Annals Internal Medicine, 24 March History of CONSORT. CONSORT-Statement. Ji-Qian Fang. Inadequate reporting damages RCT

The QUOROM Statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of systematic reviews

Department of Medical Oncology. Department of Biostatistics Cancer Institute (WIA), Chennai, India

Guidance Document for Claims Based on Non-Inferiority Trials

1. Draft checklist for judging on quality of animal studies (Van der Worp et al., 2010)

Critical Appraisal Series

Study No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives: Primary Outcome/Efficacy Variable:

Study No: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives: Primary Outcome/Efficacy Variable:

Original Article. and non-consort-endorsing

4/10/2018. Choosing a study design to answer a specific research question. Importance of study design. Types of study design. Types of study design

Comparison of Single versus Double Drains after Modified Radical Mastectomy: a Randomized Clinical Trial

Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Methodological Guidelines

FINAL CDEC RECOMMENDATION

Supplementary Appendix

Sponsor / Company: Sanofi Drug substance(s): Docetaxel (Taxotere )

Eldridge, SM, Chan, CL, Campbell, MJ, Bond, CM, Hopewell, S, Thabane, L and Lancaster, GA

Antiemetic Prophylaxis with Ondansetron and Methylprednisolone vs Metoclopramide and Methylprednisolone in Mild and Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy

The influence of CONSORT on the quality of reports of RCTs: An updated review. Thanks to MRC (UK), and CIHR (Canada) for funding support

EMEND (aprepitant) CAPSULES

Study No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives: Primary Outcome/Efficacy Variable:

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 31 January Date of marketing authorisation: 22 March 2005 (centralised marketing authorisation)

Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Systematic Reviews

2.0 Synopsis. ABT-358 M Clinical Study Report R&D/06/099. (For National Authority Use Only) to Item of the Submission: Volume:

Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Individual Study Table Referring to Part of the Dossier. Page:

Individual Study Table Referring to Part of the Dossier. Page:

Detrusor contraction during rapid bladder filling: Caused by cold or warm water? A randomized controlled double-blind trial

GSK Medicine: Study Number: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:

Cabometyx. (cabozantinib) New Product Slideshow

COMMITTEE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS FOR HUMAN USE (CHMP) DRAFT

EMEND PRODUCT MONOGRAPH. aprepitant capsules. 80 and 125 mg. Neurokinin 1 (NK 1 ) receptor antagonist

CONSORT: missing missing data guidelines, the effects on HTA monograph reporting Yvonne Sylvestre

Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Systematic Reviews

CABAZITAXEL Prostate Cancer

Downloaded from:

Garbage in - garbage out? Impact of poor reporting on the development of systematic reviews

Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)

ARCHE Risk of Bias (ROB) Guidelines

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, moderately and/or highly emetogenic chemotherapy; Prophylaxis

CHL 5225 H Advanced Statistical Methods for Clinical Trials. CHL 5225 H The Language of Clinical Trials

Issues to Consider in the Design of Randomized Controlled Trials

ATTUALITÀ NEL CONTROLLO DELL EMESI

Comorbidome, Pattern, and Impact of Asthma-COPD Overlap Syndrome in Real Life

How to carry out health technology appraisals and guidance. Learning from the Scottish experience Richard Clark, Principal Pharmaceutical

The RoB 2.0 tool (individually randomized, cross-over trials)

Subcutaneous Rituximab with or without Ibrutinib, Maintenance Period - ENRICH Study

PFIZER INC. Study Initiation Date and Completion Dates: Information not available (Date of Statistical Report: 16 May 2004)

SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS WITH YONDELIS (trabectedin)

Use of nicorandil is Associated with Increased Risk for Gastrointestinal Ulceration and Perforation- A Nationally Representative Populationbased

Conducting and managing randomised controlled trials (RCTs)

Study No.: ADF Title: Phase III study of adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) tablets in patients with compensated chronic hepatitis B -comparative study

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies (MOOSE): Checklist.

PFIZER INC. Study Initiation Date and Completion Dates: 09 March 2000 to 09 August 2001.

Drug Name: Aprepitant (Emend ) Manufacturer: Merck & Co., Inc.

Study group SBS-AE. Version

Sponsor/Company: sanofi-aventis Drug substance: Elitek/Fasturtec (rasburicase, SR29142)

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in otolaryngology: review of adherence to the CONSORT statement

Κριτική αξιολόγηση τυχαιοποιημένης κλινικής δοκιμής Άρης Λιάκος, MD MSc Ειδικευόμενος Παθολογίας, Υποψήφιος Διδάκτωρ

Clinical Review Report

Chemotherapy and Immunotherapy in Combination Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

Traumatic brain injury

CHECKLIST FOR EVALUATING A RESEARCH REPORT Provided by Dr. Blevins

IBRUTINIB + Rituximab, Treatment Period - ENRICH Study

Ivyspring International Publisher. Introduction. Journal of Cancer 2017, Vol. 8. Abstract

The comparison or control group may be allocated a placebo intervention, an alternative real intervention or no intervention at all.

Supplementary Appendix

The clinical trial information provided in this public disclosure synopsis is supplied for informational purposes only.

SAMSCA (tolvaptan) oral tablet

Dose: Metoclopramide -0.1 mg/kg (max 10 mg) IV, over 15 minutes

Systematic and critical review of research studies. Prof. dr Tiny Jaarsma

Setting The setting was secondary care. The economic study was carried out in Hawaii, USA.

Study No.: SAM40012 Title: A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group comparison of three treatments : 1)

BCCA Protocol Summary for Treatment of Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Cancer Using Fluorouracil and Platinum

Results. NeuRA Mindfulness and acceptance therapies August 2018

FDA SUMMARY OF SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS DATA (SSED) CLINICAL SECTION CHECKLIST OFFICE OF DEVICE EVALUATION

CINVANTI dosing, preparation, and storage guide

Package leaflet: Information for the user. EMEND 125 mg hard capsules aprepitant

Korea-China Editorial Workshop

Medicare Part C Medical Coverage Policy

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF BIOMEDICAL LITERATURE

Problem solving therapy

Protocol Development: The Guiding Light of Any Clinical Study

BRL /RSD-101C0D/1/CPMS-704. Report Synopsis

CTRI Dataset and Description

Clinical Study Design: From Pilot to Randomized Controlled Trials

Study No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives: Primary Outcome/Efficacy Variable:

Breast Pathway Group Everolimus in Advanced Breast Cancer

Transcription:

Supplemental Figures for: Ramosetron Versus Ondansetron in Combination with Aprepitant and Dexamethasone for the Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Trial, KCSG PC10-21 Jin-Hyoung Kang et al. Figure S1. CONSORT diagram. m-itt: modified intention-to-treat. CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial* Section/Topic Title and abstract Introduction Background and objectives Item No Checklist item 1a Identification as a randomised trial in the title 1 1b Structured summary of trial design, methods, results, and conclusions (for specific guidance see CONSORT for abstracts) 4 2a Scientific background and explanation of rationale 6 2b Specific objectives or hypotheses 6 Reported on page No Methods Trial design 3a Description of trial design (such as parallel, factorial) including allocation ratio 8,9 3b Important changes to methods after trial commencement (such as eligibility criteria), with reasons Not applicable Participants 4a Eligibility criteria for participants Suppl 4b Settings and locations where the data were collected 8 Interventions 5 The interventions for each group with sufficient details to allow replication, including how and when they were actually 8 administered Outcomes 6a Completely defined pre-specified primary and secondary outcome measures, including how and when they were 8,9 assessed 6b Any changes to trial outcomes after the trial commenced, with reasons Not applicable Sample size 7a How sample size was determined 9

Randomisation: Sequence generation Allocation concealment mechanism 7b When applicable, explanation of any interim analyses and stopping guidelines Not applicable 8a Method used to generate the random allocation sequence 8 8b Type of randomisation; details of any restriction (such as blocking and block size) 8 9 Mechanism used to implement the random allocation sequence (such as sequentially numbered containers), describing any steps taken to conceal the sequence until interventions were assigned Implementation 10 Who generated the random allocation sequence, who enrolled participants, and who assigned participants to interventions Blinding 11a If done, who was blinded after assignment to interventions (for example, participants, care providers, those assessing 8 outcomes) and how 11b If relevant, description of the similarity of interventions Statistical methods 12a Statistical methods used to compare groups for primary and secondary outcomes 9 12b Methods for additional analyses, such as subgroup analyses and adjusted analyses 9 Results Participant flow (a 13a For each group, the numbers of participants who were randomly assigned, received intended treatment, and were Suppl fig 1 diagram is strongly recommended) 13b analysed for the primary outcome For each group, losses and exclusions after randomisation, together with reasons Suppl fig 1 Recruitment 14a Dates defining the periods of recruitment and follow-up 10 14b Why the trial ended or was stopped Not applicable Baseline data 15 A table showing baseline demographic and clinical characteristics for each group Table 1 Numbers analysed 16 For each group, number of participants (denominator) included in each analysis and whether the analysis was by original assigned groups Suppl fig 1 Outcomes and 17a For each primary and secondary outcome, results for each group, and the estimated effect size and its precision (such 10, 11 & table2 estimation as 95% confidence interval) 17b For binary outcomes, presentation of both absolute and relative effect sizes is recommended Ancillary analyses 18 Results of any other analyses performed, including subgroup analyses and adjusted analyses, distinguishing prespecified 10, 11 from exploratory Harms 19 All important harms or unintended effects in each group (for specific guidance see CONSORT for harms) 11,12, table3 Discussion Limitations 20 Trial limitations, addressing sources of potential bias, imprecision, and, if relevant, multiplicity of analyses 14 Generalisability 21 Generalisability (external validity, applicability) of the trial findings Not applicable Interpretation 22 Interpretation consistent with results, balancing benefits and harms, and considering other relevant evidence 14, 15 Other information

Registration 23 Registration number and name of trial registry 8 Protocol 24 Where the full trial protocol can be accessed, if available 8 Funding 25 Sources of funding and other support (such as supply of drugs), role of funders 16 *We strongly recommend reading this statement in conjunction with the CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration for important clarifications on all the items. If relevant, we also recommend reading CONSORT extensions for cluster randomised trials, non-inferiority and equivalence trials, non-pharmacological treatments, herbal interventions, and pragmatic trials. Additional extensions are forthcoming: for those and for up to date references relevant to this checklist, see www.consortstatement.org. Criteria Inclusion Criteria: 1. Age > 19 years and a diagnosis of a malignancy that can be treated with highly emetogenic chemotherapeutic agents (NCCN guideline v1.0 2011 anti-emesis). 2. ECOG performance status of 0 2. 3. Ability to receive orally administered study drugs. 4. Submission of informed consent for indicating an awareness of the investigational nature of the study in keeping with the policy of the hospital. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Severe hypertension, severe heart disease, kidney disease (serum creatinine > 3 mg/dl), or liver disease (AST or ALT level > 3 times the upper normal range, ALP level > 2 times the upper normal range). 2. GI obstruction, active gastric ulcer, or other diseases that could cause nausea and vomiting. 3. Nausea and vomiting during the week before chemotherapy. 4. Use of steroids, antiemetics, pimozide, terfenadine, astemizole, cisapride, rifampin, carbamazepine, phenytoin, ketoconazole, itraconazole, nefazodone, troleandomycin, clarithromycin, ritonavir, or nelfinavir for the treatment of other diseases. 5. A brain tumor, brain metastasis, or seizure. 6. Chemotherapy treatment within 12 months before enrollment. 7. A need for radiation therapy during the study period or treatment with radiation therapy within 2 weeks before chemotherapy. 8. Development of known allergies or severe side effects in response to drugs used in this study. 9. Pregnant or lactating women, or women who wish to become pregnant. 10. Patients judged inappropriate as subjects for this study by the investigator.

Figure S2. Frequency of vomiting (A) and usage of rescue medication (B) in the modified intention-to-treat (m- ITT) population (n = 299). There was no significant difference between the RAD and OAD groups (A: Wilcoxon rank-sum test, B: Chi-squared test). RAD: ramosetron, aprepitant, and dexamethasone; OAD: ondansetron, aprepitant, and dexamethasone. Error bars show standard deviation.

Figure S3. Daily nausea, vomiting, and retching by the Rhodes index (INV-2) (14) in the modified intention-totreat (m-itt) population (n = 299). There was no significant difference in the proportion of nausea, vomiting, and retching incidents between the RAD and OAD groups by Fisher s exact test. RAD: ramosetron, aprepitant, and dexamethasone; OAD: ondansetron, aprepitant, and dexamethasone.