Jump to content

Salihah et al. (2016): The effectiveness of inhaled ginger essential oil in improving dietary intake in breast-cancer patients experiencing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: Difference between revisions

From CAMIH
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 46: Line 46:
|Comorbidity=NI
|Comorbidity=NI
|Current cancer therapy=Chemotherapy
|Current cancer therapy=Chemotherapy
|Specifications on cancer therapies=Chemoregime:
|Specifications on cancer therapies=In all patients:  
5-Flouracil + Epi-rubicin + Cyclo-phosphamid/Docetaxel + Do-xo¬¬rubicin + Cyclo-phosphamid
High (>90%) emetic risk
bzw. Docetaxel high (87%), low (13%) emetogen


Antiemetika: Granisetron (3 mg) + Dexamet-hason (8 mg) + Metoclopramid
* 5-Flouracil + epirubicin + cyclophosphamide (FEC): 45% (SD 75.0)
|Previous cancer therapies=NI
 
* Docetaxel + doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (TAC): 7% (SD 11.7)
 
Low (10—30%) emetic risk
 
* Docetaxel: 8% (SD 13.3)
|Previous cancer therapies=Chemotherapy
|Gender=Female
|Gender=Female
|Gender specifications=100 % female
|Gender specifications=100 % female
|Age groups=Adults (18+)
|Age groups=Adults (18+)
|Age groups specification=47.9.26 years;
|Age groups specification=Mean(SD): 47.3(9.26) years
20-39 years: n=14;
40-59 years: n=40;
60-70 years: n=6
}}
}}
=Arms=
=Arms=


{{Arm
{{Arm
|Arm type=Intervention, Placebo
|Arm type=Placebo
|Number of participants (arm)=30
|Number of participants (arm)=37
|Drop-out=N=7
|Drop-out=7
|Drop-out reasons=Delayed chemotherapy >2 weeks: n=3;
|Drop-out reasons=Reasons:
Time problem: n=1;
* delayed chemotherapy > 2 weeks: n = 3  
Declined further study participation: n=3
 
|Intervention=Ginger fragrance oil (FO) (placebo), after washout: Ginger essential oils (EO)
* time problem: n = 1  
|Dosage and regime=5 days of placebo, then washout period about 2 weeks, afterwards 5 days of intervention
 
Antiemetics + bottle with 2 drops of ginger oil
* decline further study participation: n = 3
Glass pendant (in the form of a small flask), to be hung approx. 20 cm from the nose,
|Intervention=Ginger fragrance oil (placebo)
the bottle was held directly under the nose and inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 2 minutes each time
|Dosage and regime=Antiemetics + bottle  
Start: Day 1 of chemo
Glass pendant (in the form of a small flask), to be hung approx. 20 cm from the nose, the bottle was held directly under the nose and inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 2 minutes each time
 
Start: Day 1 of chemotherapy
|One-time application=No
|One-time application=No
|Duration in days=5
|Duration in days=5
|Side Effects / Interactions=NI
|Side Effects / Interactions=No side effects were reported
|Order number=5
|Order number=2
}}
}}
{{Arm
{{Arm
|Arm type=Intervention, Placebo
|Arm type=Intervention
|Number of participants (arm)=30
|Number of participants (arm)=38
|Drop-out=N=8
|Drop-out=8
|Drop-out reasons=Delayed chemotherapy >2 weeks: n=3;
|Drop-out reasons=Reasons:
Very mild dizziness: n=1;
* delayed chemotherapy > 2 weeks: n = 3  
Declined further study participation: n=4
 
|Intervention=Ginger essential oils (EO), after washout: Ginger fragrance oil (FO) (placebo)
* very mild dizziness: n = 1
|Dosage and regime=5 days of intervention, then washout period about 2 weeks, afterwards 5 days of placebo
 
Antiemetics + bottle with 2 drops of ginger oil
* decline further study participation: n = 4
Glass pendant (in the form of a small flask), to be hung approx. 20 cm from the nose,
|Intervention=Ginger essential oils
the bottle was held directly under the nose and inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 2 minutes each time
|Dosage and regime=Antiemetics + bottle with 2 drops of ginger oil
Start: Day 1 of chemo
Glass pendant (in the form of a small flask), to be hung approx. 20 cm from the nose, the bottle was held directly under the nose and inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 2 minutes each time
 
Start: Day 1 of chemotherapy
|One-time application=No
|One-time application=No
|Duration in days=5
|Duration in days=5
|Side Effects / Interactions=NI
|Side Effects / Interactions=Very mild dizziness or light-headedness on day-5 of aromatherapy treatment n= 1
|Order number=2
|Order number=1
}}
}}
{{Arm Overview}}
{{Arm Overview}}
Line 103: Line 109:
{{Outcome
{{Outcome
|Outcome type=Primary
|Outcome type=Primary
|Outcome name=CINV (Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting)
|Outcome specification=Severity of CINV
|Type of measurement=VAS (Visual Analogue Scale)
|Results during intervention=NA
|Results after intervention=Ginger flavoring is only superior to placebo on day 1 (acute) in the overall CINV severity score.
MD-3.97, 95%CI -7.76 to -0.17; p=0.040
|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=?
|Order number=1
}}
{{Outcome
|Outcome type=Secondary
|Outcome name=Vomiting
|Outcome specification=Frequency of vomiting
|Type of measurement=Diary questionnaire
|Results during intervention=NA
|Results after intervention=No significant differences between the arms
|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=?
|Order number=2
}}
{{Outcome
|Outcome type=Secondary
|Outcome name=Quality of life
|Outcome specification=NA
|Type of measurement=EORTC QLQ (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core/ Quality of Life questionnaire)
|Results during intervention=NA
|Results after intervention=Day 8 total score: ginger aroma significantly more effective than placebo: MD 4.44, 95%CI 1.13 to 7.76, p<0.001
Ginger flavoring significantly more effective than placebo in the symptom subscales: Fatigue, nausea/vomiting, pain, loss of appetite.
|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=?
|Order number=3
}}
{{Outcome
|Outcome type=Secondary
|Outcome name=Success of blinding
|Outcome specification=NA
|Type of measurement=Observation
|Results during intervention=NA
|Results after intervention=93.3% did not recognize assignment
|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=?
|Order number=4
}}
{{Outcome
|Outcome type=Secondary
|Outcome name=Nutrition status
|Outcome name=Nutrition status
|Outcome specification=Nutritional characteristics at baseline:
|Outcome specification=Nutrition (calorie intake, energy requirements met, proportion of fat, carbohydrates, protein and fiber)
BMI, weight, obese, estimated energy, protein requirement
Dietary intake
|Type of measurement=?
|Results during intervention=NA
|Results after intervention=There were significant differences between the two treatment arms in terms of mean energy intake [F(1,58)=23.88, P<0.001] and percentage meeting energy requirements [F(2,57)=3.26, P<0.001; Table 3]. Energy intakes were significantly higher after patients were treated with ginger EO than ginger FO at day 3 (P=0.015) and day 5 (P=0.002). Significant improvements in energy intake were also observed over time [F(2,57)=54.21, P<0.001], with patients meeting almost 90% of their energy requirements 5 days post-chemotherapy.
Calorie intake on day 3 and 5 in ginger group significantly higher than placebo. Day 3 and 5 ginger group achieved necessary energy intake significantly better (p=0.015; p=0.002)
|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=?
|Order number=5
}}
{{Outcome
|Outcome type=Secondary
|Outcome name=Satisfaction with intervention
|Outcome specification=NA
|Type of measurement=Observation
|Type of measurement=Observation
|Results during intervention=NA
|Results during intervention=Calorie intake:
|Results after intervention=No significant arm differences in the assessment: odor, applicability, helpful therapy
* sign. main effect time and arm; p's< 0.001, no sign. placebo-arm x Time (p=0.638)
 
* kcal (Mean(SD)) intervention-arm vs. placebo-arm sign. difference at day 3 (1262.5(239.6) vs. 1237.8(251.9); p=0.015) and day 5 of chemotherapy (1424.9(233.4) vs. (1392.5(235.0); p=0.002)
 
 
Covered energy requirement:
* Sign. Main effect time and arm; p's< 0.001, no sign. interaction arm x time (p=0.604)
 
* In % (Mean±SD) intervention-arm vs. placebo-arm sign. difference at day 3  (77.9(14.3) vs. 76.3(14.5); p=0.010) and day 5 of chemotherapy (87.8(13.7) vs. 85.9(13.9); p=0.002)
 
 
Proportions of fat, carbohydrates, protein and fiber:
 
* No significant arm difference
|Results after intervention=NA
|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 206: Line 136:
|Other sources of bias=?
|Other sources of bias=?
|Overall RoB judgment=?
|Overall RoB judgment=?
|Order number=6
|Order number=1
}}
}}
{{Outcome Overview}}
{{Outcome Overview}}

Revision as of 15:59, 28 October 2024


Reference ↗
Title The effectiveness of inhaled ginger essential oil in improving dietary intake in breast-cancer patients experiencing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting
Topic Ginger
Author Salihah, N, Mazlan, N, Lua, P
Year 2016
Journal Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies
DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/fct.12236

Study Note

This study includes further endpoints to the study Lua et al. (2015): Effects of inhaled ginger aromatherapy on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and health-related quality of life in women with breast cancer

Brief summary

This study is a so-called cross-over study, i.e. the groups are swapped. 60 breast cancer patients who received chemotherapy with a strong emetic effect were divided into two groups (random selection). All received a glass bottle in the shape of a pendant. Two drops of ginger oil or placebo were placed in the bottle. The bottle was hung approx. 20 cm below the nose and was then held directly under the nose at least 3 times a day. It was to be worn for 5 days during the chemo cycle, including at night. After one cycle, the groups were swapped. The ginger aroma did not influence the frequency of vomiting. However, the patients in the respective ginger group suffered significantly less fatigue, pain, loss of appetite and severity of nausea/vomiting. The participants also reportedly did not notice the difference between the ginger oil and the placebo oil. The participants in the ginger group suffered significantly more often from constipation than those taking the placebo. The study is not well reported, so it is reasonable to assume that the study was not methodologically well conducted and the results must be interpreted with caution.


Diese Studie ist ein sog. Cross-over Studie, i.e. die Gruppen werden getauscht. 60 Brustkrebspatientinnen, die eine stark brechreizauslösende Chemotherapie erhielten, wurden in zwei Gruppen (zufällige Auswahl) geteilt. Alle erhielten einen Glasflakon in Form eines Anhängers. In den Flakon wurden zwei Tropfen Ingweröl oder Plazebo hineingetan. Der Flakon hing ca. 20 cm unterhalb der Nase, wurde dann mind. 3x am Tag direkt unter die Nase gehalten. Er sollte 5 Tage während des Chemozyklus, auch nachts, getragen werden. Nach einem Zyklus wurden die Gruppen getauscht. Das Ingweraroma hat die Häufigkeit des Erbrechens nicht beeinflusst. Allerdings litten die Patientinnen in der jeweiligen Ingwergruppe bedeutsam weniger unter Fatigue, Schmerz, Appetitlosigkeit und Stärke der Übelkeit/Erbrechen. Die Teilnehmerinnen haben angeblich auch den Unterschied zwischen dem Ingwer- und dem Plazeboöl nicht gemerkt. In der jeweiligen Ingwergruppe litten die Teilnehmerinnen bedeutsam häufiger unter Verstopfung als unter Plazebo. Die Studie ist nicht gut berichtet, so dass die Vermutung naheliegt, dass die Studie methodisch nicht gut durchgeführt worden ist und die Ergebnisse mit Vorsicht interpretiert werden müssen.

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 Single
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 Yes
Number of arms 2

Study characteristics

Inclusion criteria Women with a normal sense of smell; had a diagnosis of breast cancer; were receiving chemotherapy and experiencing nausea and/or vomiting of any severity (previously described in our earlier article13); were due to receive at least two further chemotherapy courses using similar chemotherapeutic agents
Exclusion criteria Women with other malignancies, allergies to ginger, perfumes or cosmetics or who were undergoing concurrent radiotherapy
N randomized 75
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. NI
Specifications on analyses ANOVA
Countries of data collection Malaysia
LoE Level of evidence 2b Oxford 2009
Outcome timeline Data collection times NI

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 Breast Cancer
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 Early Stage, Advanced Stage
Specifications on cancer stages Breast cancer:

Stage I: n=5; Stage II: n=35; Stage III: n=15; Stage IV: n=5

Comorbidities NI
Current cancer therapies Chemotherapy
Specifications on cancer therapies In all patients:

High (>90%) emetic risk

  • 5-Flouracil + epirubicin + cyclophosphamide (FEC): 45% (SD 75.0)
  • Docetaxel + doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (TAC): 7% (SD 11.7)

Low (10—30%) emetic risk

  • Docetaxel: 8% (SD 13.3)
Previous cancer therapies Chemotherapy
Gender Female
Gender specifications 100 % female
Age groups Adults (18+)
Age groups specification Mean(SD): 47.3(9.26) 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 38
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date 8
Drop-out reasons Reasons:
  • delayed chemotherapy > 2 weeks: n = 3
  • very mild dizziness: n = 1
  • decline further study participation: n = 4
Intervention Ginger essential oils
Dosage and regime Antiemetics + bottle with 2 drops of ginger oil

Glass pendant (in the form of a small flask), to be hung approx. 20 cm from the nose, the bottle was held directly under the nose and inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 2 minutes each time

Start: Day 1 of chemotherapy

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. 5
Side effects / Interactions Very mild dizziness or light-headedness on day-5 of aromatherapy treatment n= 1
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 37
Drop-out Number of participants who left the study for any reason or did not provide information on every data collection date 7
Drop-out reasons Reasons:
  • delayed chemotherapy > 2 weeks: n = 3
  • time problem: n = 1
  • decline further study participation: n = 3
Intervention Ginger fragrance oil (placebo)
Dosage and regime Antiemetics + bottle

Glass pendant (in the form of a small flask), to be hung approx. 20 cm from the nose, the bottle was held directly under the nose and inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 2 minutes each time

Start: Day 1 of chemotherapy

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. 5
Side effects / Interactions No side effects were reported

Outcomes

Nutrition status

Outcome type As specificed by the authors Primary
Outcome specification Nutrition (calorie intake, energy requirements met, proportion of fat, carbohydrates, protein and fiber)
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". Calorie intake:
  • sign. main effect time and arm; p's< 0.001, no sign. placebo-arm x Time (p=0.638)
  • kcal (Mean(SD)) intervention-arm vs. placebo-arm sign. difference at day 3 (1262.5(239.6) vs. 1237.8(251.9); p=0.015) and day 5 of chemotherapy (1424.9(233.4) vs. (1392.5(235.0); p=0.002)


Covered energy requirement:

  • Sign. Main effect time and arm; p's< 0.001, no sign. interaction arm x time (p=0.604)
  • In % (Mean±SD) intervention-arm vs. placebo-arm sign. difference at day 3 (77.9(14.3) vs. 76.3(14.5); p=0.010) and day 5 of chemotherapy (87.8(13.7) vs. 85.9(13.9); p=0.002)


Proportions of fat, carbohydrates, protein and fiber:

  • No significant arm difference
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 ?
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 Public funding
Conflicts of Interest No significant arm differences in the assessment: odor, applicability, helpful therapy

Further points for assessing the study

Sample

Power analysis performed ?
- Sample size corresponds to power analysis ?
- Reasons for insufficient sample size based on power analysis ?
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 ?
- 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 ?
Correction for multiple testing ?
Measurement of compliance ?
Consistent reporting in numbers (figures, flowchart, abstract, results) ?
Comprehensive and coherent reporting ?
Cross-over ?
- 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

?