| Literature DB >> 27266867 |
Jinzhou Tian1, Jing Shi2, Mingqing Wei2, Renan Qin3, Jingnian Ni2, Xuekai Zhang2, Ting Li2, Yongyan Wang4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vascular dementia (VaD) is the second most common subtype of dementia after Alzheimer's disease (AD). Currently, there are no medications approved for treating patients with VaD. Fufangdanshen (FFDS) tablets (Radix Salviae miltiorrhizae formula tablets) are a traditional Chinese medicine that has been reported to improve memory. However, the existing evidence for FFDS tablets in clinical practice derives from methodologically flawed studies. To further investigate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of FFDS tables in the treatment of mild to moderate VaD, we designed and reported the methodology for a 24-week randomized, double-blind, parallel, multicenter study. METHODS/Entities:
Keywords: Chinese medicine; Fufangdanshen tablets; Randomized controlled trial; Vascular dementia
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27266867 PMCID: PMC4897894 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1410-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Trials ISSN: 1745-6215 Impact factor: 2.279
Fig. 1Schedule of enrollment. ITT intent to treat
Study timeline and endpoints
| Items | −2 weeks (run-in) | 0 week (baseline) | 12 weeks (mid-term follow-up) | 24 weeks (endpoint) | 36 weeks (follow-up) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inclusion criteria | √ | ||||
| Exclusion criteria | √ | ||||
| MRI scan | √ | ||||
| Informed consent | √ | ||||
| General information | √ | ||||
| Vital signs | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| MMSE | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| HAMD | √ | ||||
| HIS | √ | ||||
| ADAS-cog | √ | √ | √ | √ | |
| CIBIS | √ | ||||
| CIBIC-plus | √ | √ | √ | ||
| ADL | √ | √ | √ | √ | |
| Safety measure | √ | √ | √ | ||
| Adverse event | √ | √ | √ | ||
| Concomitant drugs | √ | √ | √ | √ |
CIBIS Clinician Interview-Based Impression of Severity, CIBIC-plus Clinician Interview-Based Impression of Change
Proposed elaborations of CONSORT items for randomized, controlled trials of FFDS tablets interventions
| Paper section and topic | Item number | Descriptor | Reported on page number |
|---|---|---|---|
| Title and Abstract | 1 | How participants were allocated to interventions (e.g., “random allocation,” “randomized,” or “randomly assigned”) | 1,3 |
| Either the title or abstract, or both, should state the herbal medicinal product’s Latin binomial, the part of the plant used, and the type of preparation | |||
| Introduction | |||
| Background | 2 | Scientific background and explanation of rationale | 4,5 |
| Including a brief statement of reasons for the trial with reference to the specific herbal medicinal product being tested and, if applicable, whether new or traditional indications are being investigated | |||
| Methods | |||
| Participants | 3 | Eligibility criteria for participants and the settings and locations where the data were collected | 5,6 |
| If a traditional indication is being tested, a description of how the traditional theories and concepts were maintained. For example, participant inclusion criteria should reflect the theories and concepts underlying the traditional indication | |||
| Interventions | 4 | Precise details of the interventions intended for each group and how and when they were actually administered | |
| 4A: Herbal medicinal product name | 1. The Latin binomial name and the botanical authority and family name for each herbal ingredient; common name(s) should also be included | 6 | |
| 2. The proprietary product name (i.e., brand name) or the extract name (e.g., EGb-761) and the name of the manufacturer of the product | |||
| 3. Whether the product used is authorized (licensed, registered) in the country in which the study was conducted | |||
| 4B: Characteristics of the herbal product | 1. The part(s) of plant used to produce the product or extract | ||
| 2. The type of product used (e.g., raw [fresh or dry], extract) | |||
| 3. The type and concentration of extraction solvent used (e.g., 80 % ethanol, 100 % H2O, 90 % glycerin, etc.) and the ratio of herbal drug to extract (e.g., 2 to 1) | |||
| 4. The method of authentication of raw material (i.e., how done and by whom) and the lot number of the raw material. State if a voucher specimen (i.e., retention sample) was retained and, if so, where it is kept or deposited, and the reference number | |||
| 4C: Dosage regimen and quantitative description | 1. The dosage of the product, the duration of administration, and how these were determined | 6,7 | |
| 2. The content (e.g., as weight, concentration; may be given as range where appropriate) of all quantified herbal product constituents, both native and added, per dosage unit form. Added materials, such as binders, fillers, and other excipients (e.g., 17 % maltodextrin, 3 % silicon dioxide per capsule), should also be listed) | |||
| 3. For standardized products, the quantity of active/marker constituents per dosage unit form | |||
| 4D: Qualitative testing | 1. Product’s chemical fingerprint and methods used (equipment and chemical reference standards) and who performed the chemical analysis (e.g., the name of the laboratory used). Whether a sample of the product (i.e., retention sample) was retained and if so, where it is kept or deposited | No | |
| 2. Description of any special testing/purity testing (e.g., heavy metal or other contaminant testing) undertaken; which unwanted components were removed and how (methods) | |||
| 3. Standardization: what to standardize (e.g., which chemical components of the product) and how (e.g., chemical processes, or biological/functional measures of activity) | |||
| 4E: Placebo/control group | The rationale for the type of control or placebo used | 6,7 | |
| 4 F: Practitioner | A description of the practitioners (e.g., training and practice experience) who are a part of the intervention | 8 | |
| Objectives | 5 | Specific objectives and hypotheses | |
| Outcomes | 6 | Clearly defined primary and secondary outcome measures and, when applicable, any methods used to enhance the quality of measurements (e.g., multiple observations, training of assessors) | 8,9 |
| Outcome measures should reflect the intervention and indications tested considering, where applicable, underlying theories and concepts | |||
| Sample size | 7 | How sample size was determined and, when applicable, explanation of any interim analyses and stopping rules | 7 |
| Randomization Sequence allocation | 8 | Method used to generate the random allocation sequence, including details of any restriction (e.g., blocking, stratification) | 7 |
| Allocation concealment | 9 | Method used to implement the random allocation sequence (e.g., numbered containers or central telephone), clarifying whether the sequence was concealed until interventions were assigned | 7 |
| Implementation | 10 | Who generated the allocation sequence, who enrolled participants, and who assigned participants to their groups | 7 |
| Blinding (masking) | 11 | Whether or not participants, those administering the interventions, and those assessing the outcomes were blinded to group assignment. If done, how the success of blinding was evaluated | 7 |
| Statistical methods | 12 | Statistical methods used to compare groups for primary outcome(s); methods for additional analyses, such as subgroup analyses and adjusted analyses | 10 |