Portenoy et al. (2012): Nabiximols for Opioid-Treated Cancer Patients With Poorly-Controlled Chronic Pain: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Graded-Dose Trial: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Reference=Publication: Nabiximols for Opioid-Treated Cancer Patients With Poorly-Controlled Chronic Pain: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Graded-Dose Trial | |Reference=Publication: Nabiximols for Opioid-Treated Cancer Patients With Poorly-Controlled Chronic Pain: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Graded-Dose Trial | ||
}} | }} | ||
=Brief summary= | =Brief summary= | ||
In this study, the effect of nabiximol, a cannabis-containing oral spray, on the personal perception of pain in patients with various advanced cancers and moderate to severe tumor pain was investigated as a function of dose. The study compared four different arms, namely three different nabiximols arms (low dose, medium dose, high dose) and a placebo arm. With regard to the primary endpoint, namely the number of patients in whom treatment with nabiximols led to a significant improvement in pain perception (≥30%), there were no significant differences between the arms. However, it was found that patients with the low dose in particular, but in some cases also with the medium dose, responded better overall to the treatment compared to the placebo arm and reported a significantly greater improvement in pain and sleep disturbances on average over the course of the study. In addition, patients with the low dose of nabiximols required less opioids depending on the pain compared to the placebo arm.The large international sample was a positive aspect of this study, but there are also some points of criticism. In particular, the differences in treatment adherence between the arms, the lack of clarity as to whether the arms were comparable at the start of the study and the high drop-out rate during the course of the study should be mentioned. For this reason, the results of this study can only be interpreted with caution. | In this study, the effect of nabiximol, a cannabis-containing oral spray, on the personal perception of pain in patients with various advanced cancers and moderate to severe tumor pain was investigated as a function of dose. The study compared four different arms, namely three different nabiximols arms (low dose, medium dose, high dose) and a placebo arm. With regard to the primary endpoint, namely the number of patients in whom treatment with nabiximols led to a significant improvement in pain perception (≥30%), there were no significant differences between the arms. However, it was found that patients with the low dose in particular, but in some cases also with the medium dose, responded better overall to the treatment compared to the placebo arm and reported a significantly greater improvement in pain and sleep disturbances on average over the course of the study. In addition, patients with the low dose of nabiximols required less opioids depending on the pain compared to the placebo arm.The large international sample was a positive aspect of this study, but there are also some points of criticism. In particular, the differences in treatment adherence between the arms, the lack of clarity as to whether the arms were comparable at the start of the study and the high drop-out rate during the course of the study should be mentioned. For this reason, the results of this study can only be interpreted with caution. | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
{{Characteristics of participants | {{Characteristics of participants | ||
|Setting= | |Setting=Palliative, NI | ||
|Types of cancer=Breast Cancer, Gastrointestinal Cancers, Lung Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Other Cancers | |Types of cancer=Breast Cancer, Gastrointestinal Cancers, Lung Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Other Cancers | ||
|Stage cancer=Advanced Stage | |Stage cancer=Advanced Stage | ||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
|Side Effects / Interactions=Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis; weight loss | |Side Effects / Interactions=Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis; weight loss | ||
|Order number=1 | |Order number=1 | ||
|Arm topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Arm | {{Arm | ||
Line 96: | Line 97: | ||
|Side Effects / Interactions=Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis; weight loss | |Side Effects / Interactions=Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis; weight loss | ||
|Order number=2 | |Order number=2 | ||
|Arm topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Arm | {{Arm | ||
Line 112: | Line 114: | ||
|Side Effects / Interactions=Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis weight loss | |Side Effects / Interactions=Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis weight loss | ||
|Order number=3 | |Order number=3 | ||
|Arm topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Arm | {{Arm | ||
Line 128: | Line 131: | ||
|Side Effects / Interactions=NI | |Side Effects / Interactions=NI | ||
|Order number=4 | |Order number=4 | ||
|Arm topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Arm Overview}} | {{Arm Overview}} | ||
Line 156: | Line 160: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | |Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | ||
|Order number=1 | |Order number=1 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome | {{Outcome | ||
Line 181: | Line 186: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | |Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | ||
|Order number=2 | |Order number=2 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome | {{Outcome | ||
Line 225: | Line 231: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | |Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | ||
|Order number=3 | |Order number=3 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome | {{Outcome | ||
Line 253: | Line 260: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | |Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | ||
|Order number=4 | |Order number=4 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome | {{Outcome | ||
Line 282: | Line 290: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | |Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | ||
|Order number=5 | |Order number=5 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome | {{Outcome | ||
Line 308: | Line 317: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | |Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | ||
|Order number=6 | |Order number=6 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome | {{Outcome | ||
Line 325: | Line 335: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | |Overall RoB judgment=some concerns | ||
|Order number=7 | |Order number=7 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome | {{Outcome | ||
Line 342: | Line 353: | ||
|Overall RoB judgment=high risk | |Overall RoB judgment=high risk | ||
|Order number=8 | |Order number=8 | ||
|Outcome topic=Cannabinoids | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Outcome Overview}} | {{Outcome Overview}} |
Latest revision as of 13:48, 22 November 2024
Reference ↗ | |
---|---|
Title | Nabiximols for Opioid-Treated Cancer Patients With Poorly-Controlled Chronic Pain: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Graded-Dose Trial |
Topic | Cannabinoids |
Author | Portenoy, K, Ganae-Motan, ED, Allende, S, Yanagihara, R, Shaiova, L, Weinstein, S, McQuade, R, Wright, S, Fallon, MT |
Year | 2012 |
Journal | The Journal of Pain |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2012.01.003 |
Brief summary
In this study, the effect of nabiximol, a cannabis-containing oral spray, on the personal perception of pain in patients with various advanced cancers and moderate to severe tumor pain was investigated as a function of dose. The study compared four different arms, namely three different nabiximols arms (low dose, medium dose, high dose) and a placebo arm. With regard to the primary endpoint, namely the number of patients in whom treatment with nabiximols led to a significant improvement in pain perception (≥30%), there were no significant differences between the arms. However, it was found that patients with the low dose in particular, but in some cases also with the medium dose, responded better overall to the treatment compared to the placebo arm and reported a significantly greater improvement in pain and sleep disturbances on average over the course of the study. In addition, patients with the low dose of nabiximols required less opioids depending on the pain compared to the placebo arm.The large international sample was a positive aspect of this study, but there are also some points of criticism. In particular, the differences in treatment adherence between the arms, the lack of clarity as to whether the arms were comparable at the start of the study and the high drop-out rate during the course of the study should be mentioned. For this reason, the results of this study can only be interpreted with caution.
In dieser Studie wurde in Abhängigkeit der Dosis die Wirkung von Nabiximol, einem cannabishaltigen Mundspray, hinsichtlich der persönlichen Wahrnehmung von Schmerzen bei Patienten mit verschiedenen, vorangeschrittenen Krebserkrankungen und mittleren bis schweren Tumorschmerzen untersucht. In der Studie wurden vier verschiedene Gruppen verglichen, nämlich drei verschiedene Nabiximol-Arme (niedrige Dosis, mittlere Dosis, hohe Dosis) und eine Placebogruppe. Hinsichtlich des primären Endpunkts, nämlich der Anzahl an Patienten, bei denen die Behandlung mit Nabiximol zu einer deutlichen Verbesserung der Schmerzwahrnehmung (≥30%) geführt hat, zeigten sich keine bedeutsamen Unterschiede zwischen den Gruppen. Es wurde jedoch gefunden, dass vor allem Patienten mit der niedrigen Dosis, teilweise aber auch mit der mittleren Dosis im Vergleich zur Placebogruppe insgesamt besser auf die Behandlung ansprachen und im Mittel eine bedeutsam stärkere Verbesserung der Schmerzen und der Schlafstörungen im Verlauf der Studie berichteten. Zudem benötigen Patienten mit der niedrigen Nabiximoldosis weniger Opiode in Abhängigkeit der Schmerzen im Vergleich zur Placebogruppe. Positiv an dieser Studie war die große internationale Stichprobe, es lassen sich jedoch auch einige Kritikpunkte nennen. Dabei sind vor allem die Unterschiede in der Therapietreue zwischen den Armen, die Unklarkeit, ob die Gruppen zum Beginn der Studie vergleichbar waren zu nennen und die hohe Ausfallrate im Verlauf der Studie zu nennen. Deswegen lassen sich die Ergebnisse dieser Studie nur mit Vorsicht interpretieren.
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 | Multicentric |
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 | 4 |
Study characteristics
Inclusion criteria | Adult patients with active cancer and chronic pain (moderate or severe despite a stable opioid regimen that could not be made more effective by further opioid dose titration); stable, average pain: NRS: ≥4≤ 8 (no change in 3 days > 2 points) |
---|---|
Exclusion criteria | Patients receiving long-term methadone therapy for pain; major psychiatric or cardiovascular disorder; epilepsy; significant renal or hepatic impairment; pregnant, lactating or not using adequate contraception; patients, who had received or who were due to receive therapies expected to change the pain (such as radiotherapy, or chemotherapy or hormonal therapy); marijuana use, cannabinoid-based medications or rimonabant within 30 days of study entry, and unwilling to abstain for the duration of the study |
N randomized | 360 |
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. | ITT Analysis |
Specifications on analyses | Missing data for the efficacy endpoints were imputed using the last observation carry forward (LOCF) method.
The proportions of responders were compared between the treatments using logistic regression, with region (North America/Rest of the World) and treatment used as factors. The cumulative response to treatment was shown by plotting cumulative response rates against increasing thresholds for response, ie, percentage changes from baseline in the mean 11-point NRS pain score that defined a response. The cumulative response curves for each of the active treatment groups were compared with placebo using pairwise Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. The Hodges-Lehmann estimates and 95% CI for the median also were performed. The analysis of all the secondary efficacy assessments was considered supportive and no formal adjustments for multiple comparisons were made. The change in mean pain NRS scores, BPI-SF, sleep disruption NRS, PAC-QoL questionnaire, and MADRS were all analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), with the baseline value as a covariate and region and treatment group as factors. An analysis also was performed on the mean pain NRS scores to assess the time course of the treatment effect using repeated measure analysis. Additionally, the difference in time required to establish baseline was investigated as a possible moderator of treatment effect by using the number of days until the patient became eligible for randomization and total number of days in the baseline period as covariates in the analysis of change in the mean daily NRS score for average pain. |
Countries of data collection | Europe, South Africa, North America, Latin America |
LoE Level of evidence | Level 2 Oxford 2011 |
Outcome timeline Data collection times | T1: baseline (3 days)
T2: day 21 T3: day 35 (end of intervention) T4: 14 days after treatment |
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. | Palliative, NI |
---|---|
Types of cancer "Other Cancers" means that only a subpopulation was specified, but further unspecified cancer types were included | Breast Cancer, Gastrointestinal Cancers, Lung Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Other Cancers |
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 | Advanced Stage |
Specifications on cancer stages | Mean (SD) duration = 3.6 (4.8) years |
Comorbidities | Chronic, therapy-resistant tumor pain (treated with opioids) |
Current cancer therapies | No therapy |
Specifications on cancer therapies | NA |
Previous cancer therapies | NI |
Gender | Mixed |
Gender specifications | Female n (%): 174 (48.3)
Male n (%): 186 (51.7) |
Age groups | Adults (18+) |
Age groups specification | Mean (SD) age = 58 (12.2) years
Range = 20-93 years |
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 | 91 |
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date | 20 |
Drop-out reasons | Side effects (n=5); consent withdrawn (n=1); progression of the disease (n=7); other reasons (n=3) |
Intervention | Nabiximol |
Dosage and regime | Nabiximol via oral spray (self-applied by patient, one spray 2.7 mg THC and 2.5 mg CBD)
Week 1: dose finding; week 2-5: stable dose Maximal number of sprays: 1-4 (low dose) |
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. | 35 |
Side effects / Interactions | Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis; weight loss |
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 | 88 |
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date | 21 |
Drop-out reasons | Side effects (n=6); consent withdrawn (n=5); progression of the disease (n=7); other reasons (n=3) |
Intervention | Nabiximol |
Dosage and regime | Nabiximol via oral spray (self-applied by patient, one spray 2.7 mg THC and 2.5 mg CBD)
Week 1: dose finding; week 2-5: stable dose Maximal number of sprays: 6-10 (medium dose) |
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. | 35 |
Side effects / Interactions | Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis; weight loss |
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 | 90 |
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date | 31 |
Drop-out reasons | Side effects (n=20); consent withdrawn (n=4); progression of the disease (n=7) |
Intervention | Nabiximol |
Dosage and regime | Nabiximol via oral spray (self-applied by patient, one spray 2.7 mg THC and 2.5 mg CBD)
Week 1: dose finding; week 2-5: stable dose Maximal number of sprays: 11-16 (high dose) |
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. | 35 |
Side effects / Interactions | Cognitive functions: negative effect of nabiximols (no values given); nausea and vomiting; dizziness; drowsiness; disorientation; anorexia, constipation; dry mouth; anemia; diarrhea; dysgeusia headache; asthenia hallucinations; reduced appetite; fatigue; pain; insomnia; stomatitis weight loss |
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 | 91 |
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date | 25 |
Drop-out reasons | Side effects (n=9); consent withdrawn (n=6); progression of the disease (n=7): no effect (n=1); other reasons (n=1); no follow-up (n=1) |
Intervention | Placebo |
Dosage and regime | Placebo via oral spray (self-applied by patient)
Week 1: dose finding; week 2-5: stable dose Maximal number of sprays: variable (1-4, 6-10, 11-16) |
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. | 35 |
Side effects / Interactions | NI |
Outcomes
Pain
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Primary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Number of responders (≥ 30% pain reduction Numeric Rating Scale for average pain during the last 3 days of week 5 compared with the mean during the 3-day baseline period) |
Type of measurement | NRS (Numeric Rating Scale) |
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". | Baseline to 5 weeks: no group differences; OR in each case
|
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | some concerns |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | some concerns |
Pain
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Secondary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Number per improvement level (10%, 20% etc.-100%) |
Type of measurement | Observation |
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". | Over the course of the sudy significant difference between intervention combined arms and placebo: full spectrum 0-100% responders (OR in each case):
|
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | some concerns |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | some concerns |
Pain
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Secondary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Change in NRS value for moderate pain |
Type of measurement | NRS (Numeric Rating Scale) |
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". | Baseline to 5 weeks:
No significant group differences between intervention groups combined and placebo:
|
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | some concerns |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | some concerns |
Pain
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Secondary |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Change in NRS value for the worst pain |
Type of measurement | NRS (Numeric Rating Scale) |
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". | Baseline to 5 weeks:
Significant difference between nabiximol (1-4 sprays) and placebo: mean difference (95% CI)
|
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | some concerns |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | some concerns |
Sleep
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Others |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Extent of sleep disturbance |
Type of measurement | NRS (Numeric Rating Scale) |
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". | Significant difference between nabiximol (1-4 sprays) and placebo: mean difference (95% CI)
|
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | some concerns |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | some concerns |
Pain
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | NI |
---|---|
Outcome specification | Opiod consumption: score from change in self-assessed pain in relation to opiod consumption in morphine-equivalent milligrams) |
Type of measurement | Observation |
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". | No significant group differences between intervention groups combined and placebo: OR (95% CI)
|
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | some concerns |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | some concerns |
Pain
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Others |
---|---|
Outcome specification | NA |
Type of measurement | BPI-SF (Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form) |
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". | After 5 weeks: No significant differences. |
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | some concerns |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | some concerns |
Quality of life
Outcome type As specificed by the authors | Others |
---|---|
Outcome specification | NA |
Type of measurement | EORTC QLQ (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core/ Quality of Life questionnaire), MADRS (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale), PAC-QoL (Patient Assessment of Constipation - Quality of Life) |
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". | After 5 weeks: Small effect of nabiximol on EORTC-QCQ-C30 (no values given), otherwise no significant differences for questionnaires. |
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". | NA |
Risk of Bias Assessment: Cochrane RoB tool 2.0 | |
---|---|
Bias arising from the randomization process | some concerns |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (assignment to intervention) | low risk |
Bias due to deviation from intended intervention (adhering to intervention) | NA |
Bias due to missing outcome data | low risk |
Bias in measurement of the outcome | high risk |
Bias in selection of the reported result | some concerns |
Other sources of bias | NA |
Overall RoB judgment | high risk |
Funding and Conflicts of Interest
Funding | Supported in part by the Huntsman Cancer Foundation (S.W.). GW Pharmaceuticals produces nabiximols, which is licensed in Canada as an adjunctive analgesic treatment in adult patients with advanced cancer.
This study was funded by GW Pharmaceuticals and Otsuka. |
---|---|
Conflicts of Interest | NI |
Further points for assessing the study
Sample
Power analysis performed | Yes |
---|---|
- Sample size corresponds to power analysis | Yes |
- Reasons for insufficient sample size based on power analysis | NA |
If no power analysis performed: at least moderate sample size (n >= 30 per arm) | NA |
Ethnicity mentioned | Yes |
Alternative Explanation
Other explanations for an effect besides the investigated intervention | Yes |
---|---|
- Possibility of attention effects | NA |
- Possibility of placebo effects | NA |
- Other reasons | Compliance different in arms 94.5%, 85.1%, 62.2%, placebo NI
Post-hoc analyses show confounding variables that lead to increased deaths in intervention arms: High level of white blood cells, low level of calcium, hemoglobin and lymphocytes --> doubts about comparability of the arms In the analyses of subjective perception of pain, no control of changes in opiod consumption |
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 | Yes |
Measurement of compliance | Yes |
Consistent reporting in numbers (figures, flowchart, abstract, results) | Yes |
Comprehensive and coherent reporting | No |
Cross-over | No |
- Sufficient washout period | NA |
- Tested for carry-over effects | NA |
- Tested for sequence effects | NA |
Interpretation of results
Effect sizes reported (clinical vs. statistical significance) | No |
---|---|
Side effects systematically recorded | No |
Side effects considered in result interpretation | NI |
Ethics votum | Yes |
Additional Notes
PRO:
- Ethical approval
- Intent-to-treat analysis
- Power analysis
CONTRA:
- Differences in treatment adherence
- Some descriptive differences at baseline without p-values provided (e.g., pain duration)
- Post-hoc analyses reveal confounding variables associated with higher mortality rates in intervention arms: high white blood cell count, low calcium, hemoglobin, and lymphocyte levels, raising doubts about group comparability.
- In analyses of subjective pain perception, changes in opioid consumption were not controlled for.
- Mostly one-dimensional pain parameters were considered.
- Results in the text are reported unclearly, with some values missing or not precisely specified.
- No information on cancer stage.
- Poor reporting quality.
- Correction for multiple comparison only for primary endpoints