AzTrials
AzTrials

Arthritis, RheumatoidPhase 2NCT00413660

Comparison Of 6 CP-690,550 Doses Vs.Placebo, Each Combined With Methotrexate, For The Treatment Of Rheumatoid Arthritis

A Phase 2 study testing CP-690,550 in people with Arthritis, Rheumatoid, run by Pfizer at 82 sites in 13 countries.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness and safety, over 6 months, of 6 dose regimens of CP-690,550, combined with methotrexate, for the treatment of adults with active rheumatoid arthritis. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Arthritis, Rheumatoid
What is being tested?
CP-690,550
Type of treatment
Pill or oral medicine
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
509 participants
Where
82 sitesin 13 countries
Study dates
Jan 2007to Aug 2008
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Active rheumatoid arthritis
  • Inadequate response to stably dosed methotrexate

Who cannot join

  • Current therapy with any DMARD or biologic other than methotrexate

Trial locations and contacts

82 sites in 13 countries.

82 sites in 13 countries

United States33 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Albany, New York, 12206-1043

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Austin, Texas, 78705

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Binghamton, New York, 13905

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Boston, Massachusetts, 02115

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Charlotte, North Carolina, 28210

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Dallas, Texas, 75231

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Dallas, Texas, 75235

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Dayton, Ohio, 45402

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    DeBary, Florida, 32713

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Denver, Colorado, 80204

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Dubuque, Iowa, 52002

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Frederick, Maryland, 21702

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Gilbert, Arizona, 85234

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Greenville, South Carolina, 29601

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Hot Springs, Arkansas, 71913

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Lake Mary, Florida, 32746

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Mesquite, Texas, 75150

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Newark, Delaware, 19713

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Ocala, Florida, 34474

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Onalaska, Wisconsin, 54650

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Orlando, Florida, 32804

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Philladelphia, Pennsylvania, 19118

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Raleigh, North Carolina, 27609

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Rockford, Illinois, 61103-3692

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Rockford, Illinois, 61107

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Seattle, Washington, 98104

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Seattle, Washington, 98122

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Tacoma, Washington, 98405-2308

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Tacoma, Washington, 98405

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Tampa, Florida, 33614

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Upland, California, 91786

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    West Reading, Pennsylvania, 19611-1124

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Zephyrhills, Florida, 33540

Other trials in United States

Poland7 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Bialystok, 15-461

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Bialystok, 15-950

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Grudziądz, 86-300

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Poznan, 60-773

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Sopot, 81-759

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Warsaw, 02-256

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Wroclaw, 50-088

Other trials in Poland

Brazil6 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Curitiba, Paraná, 80060-240

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Curitiba, Paraná, 80060-900

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Goiânia, Goiás, 74043-110

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Goiânia, Goiás, 74110-120

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    São Paulo, São Paulo, 04230-000

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    São Paulo, São Paulo, 05403-010

Other trials in Brazil

Czechia6 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Brno, 656 91

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    České Budějovice, 370 01

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Prague, 128 50

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Prague, 140 59

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Praha 11 - Chodov, 148 00

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Zlín, 760 01

Other trials in Czechia

Argentina4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Buenos Aires, C1013AAR

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Buenos Aires, C1034ACO

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Buenos Aires, C1426ABP

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Capital Federal, Buenos Aires, (C1117ABH)

Other trials in Argentina

Chile4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Providencia, RM

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Santiago, RM, 7500922

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Santiago, Santiago Metropolitan

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Viña del Mar, Valparaiso, 2570017

Other trials in Chile

Hungary4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Budapest, H-1036

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Komárom, H-2921

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Szolnok, H-5000

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Veszprém, H-8200

Other trials in Hungary

Spain4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Guadalajara, Guadalajara, 19002

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Madrid, Madrid, 28046

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, 15706

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Seville, Sevilla, 41014

Other trials in Spain

Turkey (Türkiye)4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Ankara, 06100

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Istanbul, 34098

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Izmir, 35100

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Izmir, 35340

Other trials in Turkey (Türkiye)

Bulgaria3 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Sofia, 1612

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Sofia, 1709

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Sofia

Other trials in Bulgaria

Slovakia3 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Bratislava, 81109

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Piešťany, 921 01

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Žilina, 012 07

Other trials in Slovakia

Mexico2 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Mexico City, Mexico City, 14000

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Morelia, Michoacán, 58070

Other trials in Mexico

Sweden2 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Jönköping, 551 85

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Umeå, 901 85

Other trials in Sweden

About this study

Official title: A Phase 2B, Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Study To Compare 6 Dose Regimens Of CP-690,550 Vs. Placebo, Each Combined With Methotrexate, Administered For 6 Months In The Treatment Of Subjects With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Had An Inadequate Response To Methotrexate Alone

The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness and safety, over 6 months, of 6 dose regimens of CP-690,550, combined with methotrexate, for the treatment of adults with active rheumatoid arthritis.

Being tested
CP-690,550, placebo
Keywords
DMARD therapy
Medical subject headings
Arthritis, Rheumatoid

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • CP-690,550Drug

    4 blinded tablets administered BID

  • CP-690,550Drug

    4 blinded tablets administered BID

  • CP-690,550Drug

    4 blinded tablets administered BID

  • CP-690,550Drug

    4 blinded tablets administered BID

  • CP-690,550Drug

    4 blinded tablets administered BID

  • CP-690,550Drug

    Oral tablets

  • placeboOther

    Placebo

Study groups in NCT00413660
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
CP 690,550 1 mg BIDExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP 690,550 10 mg BIDExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP 690,550 15 mgExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP 690,550 3 mg BIDExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP 690,550 5 mg BIDExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP-690,550 20 mg QDExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
PlaceboPlacebo comparatorDummy tablets
Receives: Other: placebo

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 12

    ACR20 response: >= 20% improvement in tender joints count (TJC); >= 20% improvement in swollen joints count (SJC); and >= 20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP).

    Measured: Week 12

Secondary outcomes (30)
  1. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response

    ACR20 response: >= 20% improvement in TJC; >= 20% improvement in SJC; and >= 20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and CRP.

    Measured: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 16, 20, 24/Early Termination (ET)

  2. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response

    ACR50 response: >= 50% improvement in TJC or SJC and 50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and CRP.

    Measured: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  3. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response

    ACR70 response: >= 70% improvement in TJC or SJC and 70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and CRP.

    Measured: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  4. Area Under the Numeric Index of American College of Rheumatology Response (ACR-n) Curve

    ACR-n: calculated for each participant by taking the lowest percentage improvement in (1) SJC or (2) TJC or (3) the median of the remaining 5 components of the ACR response (participant's assessment of disease activity; participant's global assessment of pain; physician's assessment of disease activity; participant's assessment of physical function; an acute phase reactant value - CRP). Negative numbers indicate worsening. The area under the curve (AUC) for ACR-n is the measure of the area under the curve of the mean change from baseline in ACR-n. The trapezoidal rule was used to compute the AUC.

    Measured: Baseline up to Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12

  5. Tender Joints Count (TJC)

    Number of tender joints was determined by examining 68 joints and identified the joints that were painful under pressure or to passive motion. The number of tender joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no tenderness = 0, tenderness = 1.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  6. Change From Baseline in Tender Joints Count (TJC) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    Number of tender joints was determined by examining 68 joints and identified the joints that were painful under pressure or to passive motion. The number of tender joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no tenderness = 0, tenderness = 1. A negative value in change from baseline indicates an improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  7. Swollen Joints Count (SJC)

    Number of swollen joints was determined by examination of 66 joints and identifying when swelling was present. The number of swollen joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no swelling = 0, swelling =1.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  8. Change From Baseline in Swollen Joints Count (SJC) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    Number of swollen joints was determined by examination of 66 joints and identifying when swelling was present. The number of swollen joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no swelling = 0, swelling =1. A negative value in change from baseline indicates an improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  9. Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain

    Participants rated the severity of arthritis pain on a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) Visual Analog Scale (VAS), where 0 mm = no pain and 100 mm = most severe pain.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  10. Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    Participants rated the severity of arthritis pain on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = no pain and 100 mm = most severe pain.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  11. Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis

    Participants answered: "Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, how are you feeling today?" Participants responded by using a 0 - 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very well and 100 mm = very poorly.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  12. Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    Participants answered: "Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, how are you feeling today?" Participants responded by using a 0 - 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very well and 100 mm = very poorly.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  13. Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis

    Physician global assessment of arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very good and 100 mm = very bad.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  14. Change From Baseline in Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    Physician global assessment of arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm = very good and 100 mm = very bad.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  15. Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)

    HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  16. Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Change = scores at observation minus score at Baseline, and total possible score ranged from -3 to 3. A negative value in change from baseline indicates an improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  17. C-Reactive Protein (CRP)

    The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. Normal range of CRP is 0 milligram per deciliter (mg/dL) to 10 mg/dL. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  18. Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultra-sensitive assay. Normal range of CRP is 0 mg/dL to 10 mg/dL. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  19. Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and C-Reactive Protein (3 Variables) (DAS28-3 [CRP])

    DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3 (CRP) less than or equal to (<=) 3.2 implied low disease activity and more than (>) 3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-3 (CRP) less than (<) 2.6 = remission.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  20. Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and C-Reactive Protein (3 Variables) (DAS28-3 [CRP]) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET

    DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3 (CRP) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-3 (CRP) <2.6 = remission.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  21. Percentage of Participants With Categorization of Disease Improvement Based on DAS28-3 (CRP)

    Disease improvement was classified as good, moderate, and none based on improvement in DAS 28-3 (CRP) from baseline and present DAS 28-3 (CRP) score. Good: an improvement from baseline of >1.2 and a present score of <=3.2; none: an improvement of <=0.6 or >0.6 to <=1.2 with a present score of >5.1; remaining participants were classified as having moderate (Mod) improvement. Scores of good and moderate were considered to have therapeutic response.

    Measured: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  22. Percentage of Participants With Disease Remission Based on DAS28-3 (CRP)

    DAS28-3 (CRP) defined remission was classified as a score of <2.6.

    Measured: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET

  23. 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)

    SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 domains (of 2 components [C]; physical [Ph] and mental [Mn]) of functional health and well being: physical and social (So) functioning (Fn), physical and emotional role (role-physical [R-P], role-emotional [R-E]) limitations, bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (Vit), mental health (MnH). The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET

  24. Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Week 12 and 24/ET

    SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 domains (of 2 components [C]; physical [Ph] and mental [Mn]) of functional health and well being: physical and social (So) functioning (Fn), physical and emotional role (role-physical [R-P], role-emotional [R-E]) limitations, bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (Vit), mental health (MnH). The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET

  25. Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimentions (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score

    EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQoL Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET

  26. Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimentions (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility at Week 12 and 24/ET

    EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQoL Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET

  27. Medical Outcome Study- Sleep Scale (MOS-SS)

    Participant-rated questionnaire to assess key constructs of sleep over the past week. Consists of a 12-item based on 7 subscales: sleep disturbance (SD), snoring (Sno), awakened short of breath (ASOB) or with headache, sleep adequacy (Ade), and somnolence (Som) (range:0-100); sleep quantity (Qua)(range:0-24), and optimal (Opt) sleep (yes: 1, no: 0)and nine item index measures of sleep disturbance were constructed to provide composite scores: sleep problem summary (SPS) and overall sleep problems (OSP). Except sleep adequacy, optimal sleep and quantity, higher scores=greater impairment. Scores are transformed (actual raw score minus lowest possible score divided by possible raw score range* 100); total score range: 0 to 100; higher score = greater intensity of attribute.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET

  28. Change From Baseline in Medical Outcome Study- Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Week 2, 12 and 24/ET

    Participant-rated questionnaire to assess key constructs of sleep over the past week. Consists of a 12-item based on 7 subscales: sleep disturbance (SD), snoring (Sno), awakened short of breath (ASOB) or with headache, sleep adequacy (Ade), and somnolence (Som) (range: 0-100); sleep quantity (Qua) (range: 0-24), and optimal (Opt) sleep (yes: 1, no: 0) and 9 item index measures of sleep disturbance were constructed to provide 2 composite scores: sleep problem summary (SPS) and overall sleep problems (OSP). Except sleep adequacy, optimal sleep and quantity, higher scores=greater impairment. Scores are transformed (actual raw score minus lowest possible score divided by possible raw score range*100); total score range: 0 to 100; higher score = greater intensity of attribute.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET

  29. Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale

    FACIT-Fatigue scale (FS) is a 13-item questionnaire. Participant scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as 4 minus the participant's response. The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-FS score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). A higher score reflected an improvement in the participant's health status.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET

  30. Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale at Week 2, 12 and 24/ET

    FACIT-FS is a 13-item questionnaire. Participant scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as 4 minus the participant's response. The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-FS score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). A higher score reflected an improvement in the participant's health status.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted20 Dec 2006 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2007
  3. Primary completionAug 2008
  4. Study completionAug 2008

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Quadruple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
509 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00413660
Sponsor's protocol ID
A3921025
Status last verified
Jan 2013
First submitted
18 Dec 2006
Last updated
18 Jan 2013
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Wright G, Mysler E, Roberts KD, Shelbaya A, Sweet L, Masri KR. Impact of the Sociodemographic Index on Efficacy/Safety of Tofacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 2/3/3b/4 Studies. Rheumatol Ther. 2026 Oct 16. doi: 10.1007/s40744-026-00881-y. Online ahead of print.

    PubMed 42888330
  • Hetland ML, Strangfeld A, Bonfanti G, Soudis D, Deuring JJ, Edwards RA. Machine learning prediction and explanatory models of serious infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with tofacitinib. Arthritis Res Ther. 2024 Aug 27;26(1):153. doi: 10.1186/s13075-024-03376-9.

    PubMed 39192350
  • Wright GC, Mysler E, Kwok K, Cadatal MJ, Germino R, Yndestad A, Kinch CD, Ogdie A. Impact of Race on the Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Post Hoc Analysis of Pooled Clinical Trials. Rheumatol Ther. 2024 Oct;11(5):1135-1164. doi: 10.1007/s40744-024-00677-y. Epub 2024 Jul 3.

    PubMed 38958913
  • Kristensen LE, Danese S, Yndestad A, Wang C, Nagy E, Modesto I, Rivas J, Benda B. Identification of two tofacitinib subpopulations with different relative risk versus TNF inhibitors: an analysis of the open label, randomised controlled study ORAL Surveillance. Ann Rheum Dis. 2023 Jul;82(7):901-910. doi: 10.1136/ard-2022-223715. Epub 2023 Mar 17.

    PubMed 36931693
  • Hansen KE, Mortezavi M, Nagy E, Wang C, Connell CA, Radi Z, Litman HJ, Adami G, Rossini M. Fracture in clinical studies of tofacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2022 Dec 27;14:1759720X221142346. doi: 10.1177/1759720X221142346. eCollection 2022.

    PubMed 36601090
  • Curtis JR, Yamaoka K, Chen YH, Bhatt DL, Gunay LM, Sugiyama N, Connell CA, Wang C, Wu J, Menon S, Vranic I, Gomez-Reino JJ. Malignancy risk with tofacitinib versus TNF inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the open-label, randomised controlled ORAL Surveillance trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2023 Mar;82(3):331-343. doi: 10.1136/ard-2022-222543. Epub 2022 Dec 5.

    PubMed 36600185
  • Winthrop KL, Yndestad A, Henrohn D, Danese S, Marsal S, Galindo M, Woolcott JC, Jo H, Kwok K, Shapiro AB, Jones TV, Diehl A, Su C, Panes J, Cohen SB. Influenza Adverse Events in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis, Ulcerative Colitis, or Psoriatic Arthritis in the Tofacitinib Clinical Development Programs. Rheumatol Ther. 2023 Apr;10(2):357-373. doi: 10.1007/s40744-022-00507-z. Epub 2022 Dec 17.

    PubMed 36526796
  • Winthrop KL, Curtis JR, Yamaoka K, Lee EB, Hirose T, Rivas JL, Kwok K, Burmester GR. Clinical Management of Herpes Zoster in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis or Psoriatic Arthritis Receiving Tofacitinib Treatment. Rheumatol Ther. 2022 Feb;9(1):243-263. doi: 10.1007/s40744-021-00390-0. Epub 2021 Dec 6.

    PubMed 34870800
  • Cohen SB, Tanaka Y, Mariette X, Curtis JR, Lee EB, Nash P, Winthrop KL, Charles-Schoeman C, Wang L, Chen C, Kwok K, Biswas P, Shapiro A, Madsen A, Wollenhaupt J. Long-term safety of tofacitinib up to 9.5 years: a comprehensive integrated analysis of the rheumatoid arthritis clinical development programme. RMD Open. 2020 Oct;6(3):e001395. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2020-001395.

    PubMed 33127856
  • Panaccione R, Isaacs JD, Chen LA, Wang W, Marren A, Kwok K, Wang L, Chan G, Su C. Characterization of Creatine Kinase Levels in Tofacitinib-Treated Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: Results from Clinical Trials. Dig Dis Sci. 2021 Aug;66(8):2732-2743. doi: 10.1007/s10620-020-06560-4. Epub 2020 Aug 20.

    PubMed 32816215
  • Mariette X, Chen C, Biswas P, Kwok K, Boy MG. Lymphoma in the Tofacitinib Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Development Program. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2018 May;70(5):685-694. doi: 10.1002/acr.23421. Epub 2018 Apr 2.

    PubMed 28941219
  • Cohen SB, Tanaka Y, Mariette X, Curtis JR, Lee EB, Nash P, Winthrop KL, Charles-Schoeman C, Thirunavukkarasu K, DeMasi R, Geier J, Kwok K, Wang L, Riese R, Wollenhaupt J. Long-term safety of tofacitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis up to 8.5 years: integrated analysis of data from the global clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Jul;76(7):1253-1262. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-210457. Epub 2017 Jan 31.

    PubMed 28143815
  • Wallenstein GV, Kanik KS, Wilkinson B, Cohen S, Cutolo M, Fleischmann RM, Genovese MC, Gomez Reino J, Gruben D, Kremer J, Krishnaswami S, Lee EB, Pascual-Ramos V, Strand V, Zwillich SH. Effects of the oral Janus kinase inhibitor tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: results of two Phase 2 randomised controlled trials. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2016 May-Jun;34(3):430-42. Epub 2016 Apr 28.

    PubMed 27156561
  • Charles-Schoeman C, Burmester G, Nash P, Zerbini CA, Soma K, Kwok K, Hendrikx T, Bananis E, Fleischmann R. Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib following inadequate response to conventional synthetic or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Jul;75(7):1293-301. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-207178. Epub 2015 Aug 14.

    PubMed 26275429
  • Cohen S, Radominski SC, Gomez-Reino JJ, Wang L, Krishnaswami S, Wood SP, Soma K, Nduaka CI, Kwok K, Valdez H, Benda B, Riese R. Analysis of infections and all-cause mortality in phase II, phase III, and long-term extension studies of tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014 Nov;66(11):2924-37. doi: 10.1002/art.38779.

    PubMed 25047021

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing CP-690,550 in people with Arthritis, Rheumatoid, run by Pfizer at 82 sites in 13 countries.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Jan 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 82 sites in United States, Poland, Brazil, Czechia, Argentina and 8 more countries. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 8 Jan 2013). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 12 (time frame: Week 12). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00413660, which also lists 16 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Jan 2013.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in