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.
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
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
Turkey (Türkiye)4 sites
Pfizer Investigational Site
Ankara, 06100
Pfizer Investigational Site
Istanbul, 34098
Pfizer Investigational Site
Izmir, 35100
Pfizer Investigational Site
Izmir, 35340
Bulgaria3 sites
Pfizer Investigational Site
Sofia, 1612
Pfizer Investigational Site
Sofia, 1709
Pfizer Investigational Site
Sofia
Slovakia3 sites
Pfizer Investigational Site
Bratislava, 81109
Pfizer Investigational Site
Piešťany, 921 01
Pfizer Investigational Site
Žilina, 012 07
Mexico2 sites
Pfizer Investigational Site
Mexico City, Mexico City, 14000
Pfizer Investigational Site
Morelia, Michoacán, 58070
Sweden2 sites
Pfizer Investigational Site
Jönköping, 551 85
Pfizer Investigational Site
Umeå, 901 85
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.
- Conditions
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid
- 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 group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| CP 690,550 1 mg BID | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 10 mg BID | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 15 mg | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 3 mg BID | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 5 mg BID | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP-690,550 20 mg QD | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: CP-690,550 |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Dummy tablets Receives: Other: placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
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)
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)
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
- First posted20 Dec 2006 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2007
- Primary completionAug 2008
- Study completionAug 2008
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (16)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Arthritis, RheumatoidStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by PfizerThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Pfizer
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Pfizer CT.gov Call Center, Study director, Pfizer
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
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- 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 42888330Hetland 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 39192350Wright 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 38958913Kristensen 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 36931693Hansen 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 36601090Curtis 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 36600185Winthrop 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 36526796Winthrop 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 34870800Cohen 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 33127856Panaccione 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 32816215Mariette 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 28941219Cohen 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 28143815Wallenstein 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 27156561Charles-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 26275429Cohen 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
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Jan 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- 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
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00413660
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- A3921025
- Conditions
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid
- Keywords
- DMARD therapy
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 509 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- PfizerIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- Jan 2007
- Primary completion
- Aug 2008 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2008 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Dec 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 8 Jan 2013
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 7
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| CP 690,550 1 mg BID | Experimental | Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 10 mg BID | Experimental | Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 15 mg | Experimental | Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 3 mg BID | Experimental | Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP 690,550 5 mg BID | Experimental | Drug: CP-690,550 |
| CP-690,550 20 mg QD | Experimental | Drug: CP-690,550 |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Other: placeboDummy tablets |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Active rheumatoid arthritis
- Inadequate response to stably dosed methotrexate
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Current therapy with any DMARD or biologic other than methotrexate
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| CP-690,5504 blinded tablets administered BID | Drug | CP 690,550 1 mg BID |
| CP-690,5504 blinded tablets administered BID | Drug | CP 690,550 10 mg BID |
| CP-690,5504 blinded tablets administered BID | Drug | CP 690,550 15 mg |
| CP-690,5504 blinded tablets administered BID | Drug | CP 690,550 3 mg BID |
| CP-690,5504 blinded tablets administered BID | Drug | CP 690,550 5 mg BID |
| CP-690,550Oral tablets | Drug | CP-690,550 20 mg QD |
| placeboPlacebo | Other | Placebo |
Primary outcome
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 12
Time frame: 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).
30 secondary outcomes
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 16, 20, 24/Early Termination (ET)
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Area Under the Numeric Index of American College of Rheumatology Response (ACR-n) Curve
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12
Tender Joints Count (TJC)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Tender Joints Count (TJC) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Swollen Joints Count (SJC)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Swollen Joints Count (SJC) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
C-Reactive Protein (CRP)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and C-Reactive Protein (3 Variables) (DAS28-3 [CRP])
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
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
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Percentage of Participants With Categorization of Disease Improvement Based on DAS28-3 (CRP)
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
Percentage of Participants With Disease Remission Based on DAS28-3 (CRP)
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24/ET
36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Week 12 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET
Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimentions (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimentions (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility at Week 12 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12, 24/ET
Medical Outcome Study- Sleep Scale (MOS-SS)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Medical Outcome Study- Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Week 2, 12 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET
Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET
Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale at Week 2, 12 and 24/ET
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 12, 24/ET
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Jan 2013.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42888330Wright 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39192350Hetland 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38958913Wright 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36931693Kristensen 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36601090Hansen 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36600185Curtis 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36526796Winthrop 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 34870800Winthrop 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33127856Cohen 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32816215Panaccione 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 28941219Mariette 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 28143815Cohen 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.
- To obtain contact information for a study center near you, click here.Link provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Arthritis, Rheumatoid
RecruitingPhase 2
Study of PTC844 in Participants With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis
Rheumatoid Arthritis
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
An Ascending Dose Study of DKB903 in Participants With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Participants With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)
Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
R-2487 in Patients With Sjogren's Syndrome (SjD)
Sjogren's Syndrome, Sjögren
RecruitingPhase 1
A Trial in Healthy Adult Participants and Adults With Autoimmune Diseases to Test How HBM7020 is Tolerated and How it Behaves in the Body
Rheumatoid Arthritis, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Inhaled AP01 in Participants With Progressive Pulmonary Fibrosis
Pulmonary Fibrosis, Progressive Pulmonary Fibrosis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Pfizer CT.gov Call Center study director
Pfizer
82 sites in 13 countries: see every site and its status.
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.