Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2020
PEG vs. sennosides for opioid-induced constipation in cancer care.
Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05216328 (OMAMA-study - Prevention of Opioid-induced Constipation in Patients With Advanced Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
OMAMA-study - Prevention of Opioid-induced Constipation in Patients With Advanced Cancer
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Constipation in Cancer Patients - an Update of Clinical Evidence.Current treatment options in oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis randomized double-blind, double-dummy, 2-treatment, 2-period crossover study aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of polyethylene glycol (PEG) and sennosides in ambulatory cancer patients with opioid-induced constipation.
methodsOutpatients ≥ 18 years old with cancer, at risk of or already experiencing opioid-induced constipation, were randomly assigned to begin a standard bowel protocol of escalating doses of sennosides or PEG, plus a dummy preparation. After 3 weeks, the patients switched to the alternate active product and dummy preparation. Constipation was assessed using the revised Victoria Bowel Performance Scale (rBPS) at the end of each of the 2 consecutive 21-day study periods for the number of days with a satisfactory bowel movement, the time in days to goal rBPS (G), and the treatment preference of each patient.
resultsSeventy patients were recruited, with 42 completing their first treatment period and 28 completing both treatment periods. For the typical patient, the expected number of days with a satisfactory bowel movement per days of treatment was found to be 1.21 times higher on PEG than on sennosides in a particular period (95% credible interval 0.96 to 1.55). Patients taking PEG were 1.47 times more likely to reach a rBPS of G before patients taking sennosides in the first period (95% confidence interval 0.74 to 2.94). There was no evidence of a difference in patient preference between laxatives.
conclusionOur study found weak evidence that PEG is superior to sennosides with respect to overall effectiveness in cancer patients with opioid-induced constipation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.