Jump to content

Kessels et al. (2017): Topical Sinecatechins, 10%, Ointment for Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma A Randomized Clinical Trial: Difference between revisions

From CAMIH
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
|Reference=Publication: Topical Sinecatechins, 10%, Ointment for Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial
|Reference=Publication: Topical Sinecatechins, 10%, Ointment for Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial
}}
}}
{{Study Note}}
 
=Brief summary=
=Brief summary=
In this study, 42 patients with superficial basal cell carcinoma were randomly assigned to one of two arms. One arm received an ointment containing 55-72mg EGCG per gram, the other arm a placebo ointment. Neither the participants nor the study leaders knew whether they were using the ointment with or without the active ingredient. Tumour size and side effects were examined after 3, 6 and 8 weeks. At the end of the study, the tumour was excised and the tissue sample examined. In addition to laboratory parameters, the extent to which the tumour had regressed was also determined. There was no difference between the arms in terms of tumour size or tumour clearance. However, some side effects occurred with the ointment containing the active ingredient, namely moderate to severe reddening of the skin, oedema, erosions, crusting and itching. The study was conducted by the book. The only lack is a very brief reporting without any indication of the demographic characteristics of the study participants (gender, age, etc.). However, given the otherwise very good study planning and quality, it can be assumed that the comparability of the groups was checked.  
In this study, 42 patients with superficial basal cell carcinoma were randomly assigned to one of two arms. One arm received an ointment containing 55-72mg EGCG per gram, the other arm a placebo ointment. Neither the participants nor the study leaders knew whether they were using the ointment with or without the active ingredient. Tumour size and side effects were examined after 3, 6 and 8 weeks. At the end of the study, the tumour was excised and the tissue sample examined. In addition to laboratory parameters, the extent to which the tumour had regressed was also determined. There was no difference between the arms in terms of tumour size or tumour clearance. However, some side effects occurred with the ointment containing the active ingredient, namely moderate to severe reddening of the skin, oedema, erosions, crusting and itching. The study was conducted by the book. The only lack is a very brief reporting without any indication of the demographic characteristics of the study participants (gender, age, etc.). However, given the otherwise very good study planning and quality, it can be assumed that the comparability of the groups was checked.  




In dieser Studie wurden 42 Patienten mit einem oberflächlichen Basalzellkarzinom zufällig in eine von zwei Armen eingeteilt. Der eine Arm bekam eine Salbe mit 55-72mg EGCG pro Gramm, der andere Arm eine Placebosalbe. Weder die Teilnehmenden noch die Studienleiter wussten, ob sie die Salbe mit oder ohne Wirkstoff benutzten. Tumorgröße und Nebenwirkungen wurden nach 3, 6 und 8 Wochen untersucht. Am Ende der Studie wurde der Tumor herausgeschnitten und die Gewebeprobe untersucht. Hierbei wurden neben der Erhebung von Laborparametern auch festgestellt, inwiefern sich der Tumor zurückgebildet hatte. Dabei zeigte sich kein Unterschied zwischen den Armen in Tumorgröße oder Tumorfreiheit. Allerdings traten bei der Salbe mit Wirkstoff einige Nebenwirkungen auf, nämlich moderate bis ernsthafte Hautrötungen, Ödeme, Erosionen, Verkrustungen und Juckreiz. Die Studie wurde nach allen Regeln der Kunst durchgeführt. Der einzige Mangel ist eine sehr kurze Berichterstattung ohne Angabe der demographischen Merkmale der Studienteilnehmenden (Geschlecht, Alter usw.). Bei der sonst sehr guten Studienplanung und Qualität ist allerdings anzunehmen, dass die Vergleichbarkeit der Gruppen überprüft wurde.
In dieser Studie wurden 42 Patienten mit einem oberflächlichen Basalzellkarzinom zufällig in einen von zwei Armen eingeteilt. Der eine Arm bekam eine Salbe mit 55-72mg EGCG pro Gramm, der andere Arm eine Placebosalbe. Weder die Teilnehmenden noch die Studienleiter wussten, ob sie die Salbe mit oder ohne Wirkstoff benutzten. Tumorgröße und Nebenwirkungen wurden nach 3, 6 und 8 Wochen untersucht. Am Ende der Studie wurde der Tumor herausgeschnitten und die Gewebeprobe untersucht. Hierbei wurden neben der Erhebung von Laborparametern auch festgestellt, inwiefern sich der Tumor zurückgebildet hatte. Dabei zeigte sich kein Unterschied zwischen den Armen in Tumorgröße oder Tumorfreiheit. Allerdings traten bei der Salbe mit Wirkstoff einige Nebenwirkungen auf, nämlich moderate bis ernsthafte Hautrötungen, Ödeme, Erosionen, Verkrustungen und Juckreiz. Die Studie wurde nach allen Regeln der Kunst durchgeführt. Der einzige Mangel ist eine sehr kurze Berichterstattung ohne Angabe der demographischen Merkmale der Studienteilnehmenden (Geschlecht, Alter usw.). Bei der sonst sehr guten Studienplanung und Qualität ist allerdings anzunehmen, dass die Vergleichbarkeit der Gruppen überprüft wurde.


=Study Design=
=Study Design=
Line 37: Line 37:


{{Characteristics of participants
{{Characteristics of participants
|Setting=Neo-adjuvant
|Setting=Curative
|Types of cancer=Skin Cancer - Basal Cell Carcinoma
|Types of cancer=Skin Cancer - Basal Cell Carcinoma
|Stage cancer=NI
|Stage cancer=NI
|Cancer stage specification=NI
|Cancer stage specification=NI
|Comorbidity=NI
|Comorbidity=NI
|Current cancer therapy=Diverse
|Current cancer therapy=Surgery
|Specifications on cancer therapies=NI
|Specifications on cancer therapies=Study setting is prior to surgery.
|Previous cancer therapies=Diverse
|Previous cancer therapies=NI
|Gender=NI
|Gender=NI
|Gender specifications=NI
|Gender specifications=NI
Line 63: Line 63:
|Duration in days=42
|Duration in days=42
|Side Effects / Interactions=Survey by doctor and weekly diary entries by patients
|Side Effects / Interactions=Survey by doctor and weekly diary entries by patients
after 3/6/8 weeks in %:
Side effects in the sinecatechins arm after 3/6/8 weeks in %:
Erythema: 10/12/9
Edema: 2/6/3
Erosion: 5/7/4
Crusts: 3/10/6
Vesicles/Bullae: 3/3/2
Squamae:3/5/4
Itching: 10/13/12
Burning Sensation: 3/5/3


* Erythema: 10/12/9
Use of the sinecatechins ointment led to a statistically significant higher frequency of erythema, edema, erosions, crusts, and itching than the use of placebo ointment.
* Edema: 2/6/3
* Erosion: 5/7/4
* Crusts: 3/10/6
* Vesicles/Bullae: 3/3/2
* Squamae:3/5/4
* Itching: 10/13/12
* Burning Sensation: 3/5/3
 
Use of the sinecatechins ointment led to a statistically significant higher frequency of erythema, edema,erosions, crusts, and itching than the use of placebo ointment
|Order number=1
|Order number=1
|Arm topic=Green tea (EGCG)
}}
}}
{{Arm
{{Arm
Line 88: Line 88:
|Duration in days=42
|Duration in days=42
|Side Effects / Interactions=Survey by doctor and weekly diary entries by patients
|Side Effects / Interactions=Survey by doctor and weekly diary entries by patients
after 3/6/8 weeks in %:


* Erythema: 6/2/2
Side effects in the placebo arm after 3/6/8 weeks in %:
* Edema: 0/0/0
Erythema: 6/2/2
* Erosion: 1/0/0
Edema: 0/0/0
* Crusts: 2/0/0  
Erosion: 1/0/0
* Vesicles/Bullae: 0/1/0  
Crusts: 2/0/0  
* Squamae:0/0/0  
Vesicles/Bullae: 0/1/0  
* Itching: 3/0/1  
Squamae:0/0/0  
* Burning Sensation: 1/1/0
Itching: 3/0/1  
Burning Sensation: 1/1/0


Use of the sinecatechins ointment led to a statistically significant higher frequency of erythema, edema,erosions, crusts, and itching that the use of placebo ointment
Use of the sinecatechins ointment led to a statistically significant higher frequency of erythema, edema,erosions, crusts, and itching than the use of placebo ointment.
|Order number=1
|Order number=2
|Arm topic=Green tea (EGCG)
}}
}}
{{Arm Overview}}
{{Arm Overview}}
Line 108: Line 109:
|Outcome type=Primary
|Outcome type=Primary
|Outcome name=Tumor response
|Outcome name=Tumor response
|Outcome specification=Specifically tumor clearance, i.e. the proportion of patients with complete histological tumor clearance after eight weeks (T3)
|Outcome specification=Specifically tumor clearance, i.e. the proportion of patients with complete histological tumor clearance after eight weeks (time point 3)
|Type of measurement=Histological examination
|Type of measurement=Histological examination
|Results during intervention=NI
|Results during intervention=NI
|Results after intervention=Complete histological tumor clearance was observed in 1 of 21 (5%) and 2 of 21 (10%) patients in the sinecatechins and placebo group, respectively no significant difference in histological tumor clearance between the sinecatechins and placebo groups (p > .99)
|Results after intervention=Complete histological tumor clearance was observed in 1 of 21 (5%) and 2 of 21 (10%) patients in the sinecatechins and placebo group, respectively no significant difference in histological tumor clearance between the sinecatechins and placebo groups (p > .99).
|Bias arising from the randomization process=?
|Bias arising from the randomization process=?
|Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention)=?
|Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention)=?
Line 121: Line 122:
|Overall RoB judgment=?
|Overall RoB judgment=?
|Order number=1
|Order number=1
|Outcome topic=Green tea (EGCG)
}}
}}
{{Outcome
{{Outcome
Line 126: Line 128:
|Outcome name=Tumor response
|Outcome name=Tumor response
|Outcome specification=Specifically tumor size,
|Outcome specification=Specifically tumor size,
examination after three weeks (T1), six weeks (T2) and eight weeks (T3)
examination after three weeks (time point 1), six weeks (time point 2) and eight weeks (time point 3)
|Type of measurement=Histological examination
|Type of measurement=Histological examination
|Results during intervention=NI
|Results during intervention=NI
|Results after intervention=Decrease in tumor size was slightly greater after sinecatechins application, but the difference was nonsignificant (p = .15)
|Results after intervention=Decrease in tumor size was slightly greater after sinecatechins application, but the difference was nonsignificant (p = 0.15).
|Bias arising from the randomization process=?
|Bias arising from the randomization process=?
|Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention)=?
|Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention)=?
Line 138: Line 140:
|Other sources of bias=?
|Other sources of bias=?
|Overall RoB judgment=?
|Overall RoB judgment=?
|Order number=1
|Order number=2
|Outcome topic=Green tea (EGCG)
}}
}}
{{Outcome Overview}}
{{Outcome Overview}}
Line 145: Line 148:
{{Funding and Conflicts of Interest
{{Funding and Conflicts of Interest
|Funding=Support from Willpharma BV for the provision of the ointments. The sponsor was not involved in the design and conduct of the study.
|Funding=Support from Willpharma BV for the provision of the ointments. The sponsor was not involved in the design and conduct of the study.
|Conflicts of Interest=According to authors no conflict of interest
|Conflicts of Interest=According to authors no conflict of interest.
}}
}}
=Further points for assessing the study=
=Further points for assessing the study=


{{Further points for assessing the study
{{Further points for assessing the study
|power analysis performed=?
|Sample size corresponds to power analysis=NI
|Reasons given for samples being too small according to power analysis=NI
|Samples sufficiently large=?
|Samples sufficiently large=?
|power analysis performed=?
|reasons given for samples being too small according to power analysis=?
|Ethnicity mentioned=?
|Ethnicity mentioned=?
|Other explanations for an effect besides the investigated intervention=NI
|Possibility of attention effects=?
|Possibility of attention effects=?
|Possibility of placebo effects=?
|Possibility of placebo effects=?
|Other reasons=?
|Other reasons=?
|Testing for normal distribution=?
|Correct use of parametric and non-parametric tests=NI
|Correct application of statistical tests=?
|Correction for multiple testing=?
|Correction for multiple testing=?
|Measurement of compliance=?
|Measurement of compliance=?
|Blinding reliable=?
|Check whether blinding was successful=?
|Consistent reporting in numbers=?
|Consistent reporting in numbers=?
|Comprehensive and coherent reporting=?
|Cross-over=NI
|sufficient washout period=?
|sufficient washout period=?
|Tested for carry-over effects=?
|Tested for carry-over effects=?
|Were sequence effects tested=?
|Were sequence effects tested=?
|Comprehensive and coherent reporting=?
|Effect sizes reported=?
|Were side effects systematically recorded=?
|Were side effects systematically recorded=?
|Effect sizes reported=?
|Side effects taken into account in the interpretation of the results=?
|Side effects taken into account in the interpretation of the results=?
|Ethics / CoI / Funding=?
|reasons given for samples being too small according to power analysis=?
|Testing for normal distribution=?
|Correct application of statistical tests=?
|Blinding reliable=?
|Check whether blinding was successful=?
|mono- or multicentric=?
|mono- or multicentric=?
|Ethics / CoI / Funding=?
}}
}}
{{Additional Notes}}
{{Additional Notes
=Additional Notes=
|Additional Notes=PRO:
* Ethics vote
* Power analysis performed and criteria met
* 1 week wash-out of green tea before the start of the study
* Control of co-interventions (no further consumption of green tea, immunosuppressive medication)
* Control of adherence to therapy
 
CONTRA:
* No indication of demographic data. Comparability of the groups to the baseline? With such a small sample, randomisation may not be sufficient to ensure comparability
* Intent-to-treat analysis? Not serious due to low drop-out.
* Blinding could have been disturbed by side effects, but the outcomes are objective
}}

Latest revision as of 16:39, 25 November 2024


Reference ↗
Title Topical Sinecatechins, 10%, Ointment for Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Topic Green tea (EGCG)
Author Kessels, J, Voeten, L, Nelemans, P, Cleutjens, J, Hillen, LM, Mosterd, K, Kelleners-Smeets, NWJ
Year 2017
Journal JAMA dermatology
DOI https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.2529

Brief summary

In this study, 42 patients with superficial basal cell carcinoma were randomly assigned to one of two arms. One arm received an ointment containing 55-72mg EGCG per gram, the other arm a placebo ointment. Neither the participants nor the study leaders knew whether they were using the ointment with or without the active ingredient. Tumour size and side effects were examined after 3, 6 and 8 weeks. At the end of the study, the tumour was excised and the tissue sample examined. In addition to laboratory parameters, the extent to which the tumour had regressed was also determined. There was no difference between the arms in terms of tumour size or tumour clearance. However, some side effects occurred with the ointment containing the active ingredient, namely moderate to severe reddening of the skin, oedema, erosions, crusting and itching. The study was conducted by the book. The only lack is a very brief reporting without any indication of the demographic characteristics of the study participants (gender, age, etc.). However, given the otherwise very good study planning and quality, it can be assumed that the comparability of the groups was checked.


In dieser Studie wurden 42 Patienten mit einem oberflächlichen Basalzellkarzinom zufällig in einen von zwei Armen eingeteilt. Der eine Arm bekam eine Salbe mit 55-72mg EGCG pro Gramm, der andere Arm eine Placebosalbe. Weder die Teilnehmenden noch die Studienleiter wussten, ob sie die Salbe mit oder ohne Wirkstoff benutzten. Tumorgröße und Nebenwirkungen wurden nach 3, 6 und 8 Wochen untersucht. Am Ende der Studie wurde der Tumor herausgeschnitten und die Gewebeprobe untersucht. Hierbei wurden neben der Erhebung von Laborparametern auch festgestellt, inwiefern sich der Tumor zurückgebildet hatte. Dabei zeigte sich kein Unterschied zwischen den Armen in Tumorgröße oder Tumorfreiheit. Allerdings traten bei der Salbe mit Wirkstoff einige Nebenwirkungen auf, nämlich moderate bis ernsthafte Hautrötungen, Ödeme, Erosionen, Verkrustungen und Juckreiz. Die Studie wurde nach allen Regeln der Kunst durchgeführt. Der einzige Mangel ist eine sehr kurze Berichterstattung ohne Angabe der demographischen Merkmale der Studienteilnehmenden (Geschlecht, Alter usw.). Bei der sonst sehr guten Studienplanung und Qualität ist allerdings anzunehmen, dass die Vergleichbarkeit der Gruppen überprüft wurde.

Study Design

Prospective / Retrospective Prospective: forward-looking, examples include clinical trials, cohort studies, and long-term observational studies;</br>Retrospective: backward-looking, relying on existing data, examples include case-control studies and retrospective cohort studies Prospective
Monocentric / Multicentric Monocentric: conducted in one center/ hospital; </br>Multicentric: conducted in multiple centers/ hospitals Monocentric
Blinding No: Open, all parties are aware of group assignments;</br>Single: one party is unaware of group assignments (generally participants);</br>Double: two parties are unaware of group assignments (generally the participants and the researchers); </br>Triple: concealing group assignment from additional parties Double
Is randomized Yes
Cross-over Participants alternate between different treatment groups or conditions over a specified period, allowing each participant to serve as their own control No
Number of arms 2

Study characteristics

Inclusion criteria Patients with a primary histologically proven superficial BCC of 4 to 20 mm in greatest diameter
Exclusion criteria Immunosuppressed patients; patients with genetic skin cancer disorders and tumors in the face and/or hairy scalp
N randomized 42
Analysis PP: Per Protocol analysis, i.e. only participants included who adhered to the study protocol.</br>ITT: Intention-to-treat analysis, i.e. all randomized participants included regardless of any drop-outs or changes in assignment.</br>mITT: modified Intention-to-treat analysis can refer to analyses in which participants with missing outcome data are excluded or it can refer to analyses in which only participants who received at least one treatment dose are included. In this case, participants dropped out of the study prematurely for reasons unrelated to the treatment. PP Analysis
Specifications on analyses NI
Countries of data collection Netherlands
LoE Level of evidence 2b Oxford 2009
Outcome timeline Data collection times T0: Baseline

T1: after 3 weeks T2: after 6 weeks T3: after 8 weeks (directly before operation)

Characteristics of participants

Setting Refers to cancer therapy setting.</br>- Curative therapy: aims to completely eradicate a disease and achieve a full recovery; </br>- Neo-adjuvant therapy: form of curative therapy, given before the primary treatment for cancer (usually surgery); </br>- Adjuvant therapy: form of curative therapy, given after the primary treatment for cancer (usually surgery); </br>- Palliative therapy: focuses on providing relief from symptoms and improving the quality of life for patients, without necessarily targeting the underlying disease; </br>- Active surveillance: involves close monitoring of disease progression without any intervention (typically used for prostate cancer);</br>- No therapy setting: Patients who completed therapy/are currently not in cancer treatment, cancer survivors. Curative
Types of cancer "Other Cancers" means that only a subpopulation was specified, but further unspecified cancer types were included Skin Cancer - Basal Cell Carcinoma
Cancer stages Early Stage: generally refers to cancer that is localized to the area where it started, mostly stages I and II;</br>Advanced Stage: cancer that has spread beyond its original site, mostly stages III and IV, with stage IV indicating distant metastasis NI
Specifications on cancer stages NI
Comorbidities NI
Current cancer therapies Surgery
Specifications on cancer therapies Study setting is prior to surgery.
Previous cancer therapies NI
Gender NI
Gender specifications NI
Age groups NI
Age groups specification NI

Arms

Arm type Active control: group receives active treatment; </br>Passive control: for example treatment as usual, waiting control, no treatment Intervention
Number of participants (arm) N randomized 21
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date Not arm specified: 3
Drop-out reasons No reasons reported
Intervention Topical sinecatechins ointment, 10% (with 55-72mg EGCG per 1g ointment)
Dosage and regime The ointment was applied twice daily for six weeks by patients at home

+ all tumors were excised after eight weeks

One-time application No
Duration in days For long-term interventions, the number of days is an estimation.</br>A value of -999 indicates that the exact duration cannot be extracted from the study due to ambiguous or incomplete information. See Outcome timeline or Dosage and regime for further information. 42
Side effects / Interactions Survey by doctor and weekly diary entries by patients

Side effects in the sinecatechins arm after 3/6/8 weeks in %: Erythema: 10/12/9 Edema: 2/6/3 Erosion: 5/7/4 Crusts: 3/10/6 Vesicles/Bullae: 3/3/2 Squamae:3/5/4 Itching: 10/13/12 Burning Sensation: 3/5/3

Use of the sinecatechins ointment led to a statistically significant higher frequency of erythema, edema, erosions, crusts, and itching than the use of placebo ointment.

Arm type Active control: group receives active treatment; </br>Passive control: for example treatment as usual, waiting control, no treatment Placebo
Number of participants (arm) N randomized 21
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date Not arm specified: 3
Drop-out reasons No reasons reported
Intervention Placebo ointment
Dosage and regime The ointment was applied twice daily for six weeks by patients at home

+ all tumors were excised after eight weeks

One-time application No
Duration in days For long-term interventions, the number of days is an estimation.</br>A value of -999 indicates that the exact duration cannot be extracted from the study due to ambiguous or incomplete information. See Outcome timeline or Dosage and regime for further information. 42
Side effects / Interactions Survey by doctor and weekly diary entries by patients

Side effects in the placebo arm after 3/6/8 weeks in %: Erythema: 6/2/2 Edema: 0/0/0 Erosion: 1/0/0 Crusts: 2/0/0 Vesicles/Bullae: 0/1/0 Squamae:0/0/0 Itching: 3/0/1 Burning Sensation: 1/1/0

Use of the sinecatechins ointment led to a statistically significant higher frequency of erythema, edema,erosions, crusts, and itching than the use of placebo ointment.

Outcomes

Tumor response

Outcome type As specificed by the authors Primary
Outcome specification Specifically tumor clearance, i.e. the proportion of patients with complete histological tumor clearance after eight weeks (time point 3)
Type of measurement Histological examination
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". NI
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". Complete histological tumor clearance was observed in 1 of 21 (5%) and 2 of 21 (10%) patients in the sinecatechins and placebo group, respectively no significant difference in histological tumor clearance between the sinecatechins and placebo groups (p > .99).
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0
Bias arising from the randomization process ?
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) ?
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) NA
Bias due to missing outcome data ?
Bias in measurement of the outcome ?
Bias in selection of the reported result ?
Other sources of bias ?
Overall RoB judgment ?

Tumor response

Outcome type As specificed by the authors Secondary
Outcome specification Specifically tumor size,

examination after three weeks (time point 1), six weeks (time point 2) and eight weeks (time point 3)

Type of measurement Histological examination
Results during intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". NI
Results after intervention - Results during intervention means that the time of data collection is during or shortly after the period of the intervention (e.g. on the last day or a few days after). The results therefore still relate to the direct effects of the intervention.</br>- Results after intervention means there is a longer break between the time of data collection and the end of the intervention, e.g. more than a week. The results relate more to long-term effects.</br>- If a categorization in Results during vs. after intervention is not possible (e.g. survival data), the results are summarized under Results after intervention under the headline "Overall". Decrease in tumor size was slightly greater after sinecatechins application, but the difference was nonsignificant (p = 0.15).
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0
Bias arising from the randomization process ?
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) ?
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) NA
Bias due to missing outcome data ?
Bias in measurement of the outcome ?
Bias in selection of the reported result ?
Other sources of bias ?
Overall RoB judgment ?

Funding and Conflicts of Interest

Funding Support from Willpharma BV for the provision of the ointments. The sponsor was not involved in the design and conduct of the study.
Conflicts of Interest According to authors no conflict of interest.

Further points for assessing the study

Sample

Power analysis performed ?
- Sample size corresponds to power analysis NI
- Reasons for insufficient sample size based on power analysis NI
If no power analysis performed: at least moderate sample size (n >= 30 per arm) ?
Ethnicity mentioned ?

Alternative Explanation

Other explanations for an effect besides the investigated intervention NI
- Possibility of attention effects ?
- Possibility of placebo effects ?
- Other reasons ?

Statistics

Correct use of parametric and non-parametric tests Testing for normal distribution only necessary if parametric tests are used, NI: use of parametric tests without report of normal distribution testing NI
Correction for multiple testing ?
Measurement of compliance ?
Consistent reporting in numbers (figures, flowchart, abstract, results) ?
Comprehensive and coherent reporting ?
Cross-over NI
- Sufficient washout period ?
- Tested for carry-over effects ?
- Tested for sequence effects ?

Interpretation of results

Effect sizes reported (clinical vs. statistical significance) ?
Side effects systematically recorded ?
Side effects considered in result interpretation ?
Ethics votum ?


Additional Notes

PRO:

  • Ethics vote
  • Power analysis performed and criteria met
  • 1 week wash-out of green tea before the start of the study
  • Control of co-interventions (no further consumption of green tea, immunosuppressive medication)
  • Control of adherence to therapy

CONTRA:

  • No indication of demographic data. Comparability of the groups to the baseline? With such a small sample, randomisation may not be sufficient to ensure comparability
  • Intent-to-treat analysis? Not serious due to low drop-out.
  • Blinding could have been disturbed by side effects, but the outcomes are objective