Rheumatoid ArthritisPhase 3NCT00468546
A Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of MabThera (Rituximab) in Combination With Methotrexate (MTX) in Participants With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Failed on Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Therapy
A Phase 3 study testing MabThera/Rituxan and Methotrexate in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by Hoffmann-La Roche at 115 sites in 11 countries.
Trial summary
This study will assess the safety and efficacy of rituximab combined with MTX in participants with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to anti-Tumor Necrosis (TNF) alpha therapy. The anticipated time in the study is up to 2 years and the target sample size is 500 participants. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Rheumatoid Arthritis
- What is being tested?
- MabThera/Rituxan and Methotrexate
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 520 participants
- Where
- 115 sitesin 11 countries
- Study dates
- May 2003to Jul 2012
- Phase
- Phase 3
- 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 to 80 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adult participants 18-80 years of age with active RA for at least 6 months;
- Received treatment for RA on an outpatient basis and experienced an inadequate response or intolerance to treatment with at least 1 anti-TNF alpha therapy (etanercept, infliximab or adalimumab);
- Must have received MTX for a minimum of 12 weeks, with the last 4 weeks, prior to screening at a stable dose;
- Participants with swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) of at least 8 joints at screening and at randomization;
- Radiographic evidence of at least 1 joint with a definite erosion due to RA;
- Participants of reproductive potential must be using reliable contraceptive methods.
Who cannot join
- Bone or joint surgery within 8 weeks prior to screening or joint surgery planned within 24 weeks of randomization;
- Class IV functional status of RA;
- Previous treatment within 6 months with intravenous gamma globulin, or the Prosorba column;
- Intraarticular or parenteral corticosteroids within 4 weeks prior to screening visit;
- With a live vaccine within 4 weeks prior to randomization;
- Previous treatment with rituximab or other cell-depleting therapies;
Show all 19Show fewer
- Concurrent treatment with any disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (except for MTX) or any anti-TNF alfa factor or other biologic therapy;
- History of severe allergic or anaphylactic reactions to humanized or murine monoclonal antibodies;
- Evidence of significant uncontrolled concomitant diseases such as cardiovascular disease, nervous system, pulmonary, renal, hepatic, endocrine or gastrointestinal disorders;
- Known contraindications to receiving rituximab;
- Known active bacterial, viral, fungal, mycobacterial or other infection;
- History of recurrent significant infection or history of recurrent bacterial infections;
- Primary or secondary immunodeficiency (history of, or currently active);
- History of cancer, including solid tumors and hematologic malignancies (except basal cell or squamous cell carcinoma of the skin that have been excised and cured);
- Women who are pregnant or breast-feeding;
- History of alcohol, drug or chemical abuse within 6 months prior to screening;
- Neuropathies and neurovasculopathies which might interfere with pain evaluation;
- Participants with poor peripheral venous access;
- Intolerance or contraindications to oral or intravenous corticosteroids.
Trial locations and contacts
115 sites in 11 countries.
115 sites in 11 countries
United States67 sites
Study site
Albany, New York, 12206
Study site
Amarillo, Texas, 79124
Study site
Baltimore, Maryland, 21224
Study site
Birmingham, Alabama, 35294
Study site
Boca Raton, Florida, 33486
Study site
Boise, Idaho, 83702
Study site
Boston, Massachusetts, 02215
Study site
Burlington, Vermont, 05401
Study site
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27599-7600
Study site
Chicago, Illinois, 60612
Study site
Chicago, Illinois, 60637
Study site
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45267-0563
Study site
Cleveland, Ohio, 44195
Study site
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, 83814
Study site
Dallas, Texas, 75231
Study site
Dallas, Texas, 75246
Study site
Danbury, Connecticut, 06810
Study site
Dayton, Ohio, 45402
Study site
Delray Beach, Florida, 33484
Study site
Duncansville, Pennsylvania, 16635
Study site
Durham, North Carolina, 27710
Study site
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33334
Study site
Fullerton, California, 92835
Study site
Greenville, North Carolina, 27834
Study site
Houston, Texas, 77074
Study site
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46202-5149
Study site
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46260
Study site
Jupiter, Florida, 33458
Study site
Kalamazoo, Michigan, 49048
Study site
La Jolla, California, 92037
Study site
Lansing, Michigan, 48910
Study site
Largo, Florida, 33773
Study site
Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205
Study site
Los Angeles, California, 90045
Study site
Los Angeles, California, 90048
Study site
Madison, Wisconsin, 53717
Study site
Madison, Wisconsin, 53792
Study site
Manhasset, New York, 11030
Study site
Mayfield, Ohio, 44143
Study site
Meridian, Idaho, 83642
Study site
Mesa, Arizona, 85208
Study site
New York, New York, 10003
Study site
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73103
Study site
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73109
Study site
Orlando, Florida, 32806
Study site
Palo Alto, California, 94304
Study site
Paradise Valley, Arizona, 85253
Study site
Pasadena, California, 91105
Study site
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19140
Study site
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19141
Study site
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19152
Study site
Rancho Mirage, California, 92270
Study site
Rochester, Minnesota, 55905
Study site
Rochester, New York, 14618
Study site
Salt Lake City, Utah, 84132
Study site
Santa Maria, California, 93454
Study site
Seattle, Washington, 98101
Study site
Seattle, Washington, 98104
Study site
Shreverport, Louisiana, 71103
Study site
Smithtown, New York, 11787
Study site
Spokane, Washington, 99204
Study site
St Louis, Missouri, 63110
Study site
St Louis, Missouri, 63141
Study site
Tucson, Arizona, 85724
Study site
Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74135
Study site
Upland, California, 91786
Study site
Waco, Texas, 76708
Canada7 sites
Study site
Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6
Study site
Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2S2
Study site
Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 2B6
Study site
London, Ontario, N6A 4V2
Study site
Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5
Study site
Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X5
Study site
Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 1L7
France7 sites
Study site
Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, 94275
Study site
Montpellier, 34295
Study site
Paris, 75679
Study site
Rouen, 76031
Study site
Strasbourg, 67098
Study site
Toulouse, 31059
Study site
Tours, 37044
Israel6 sites
Study site
Haifa, 3109601
Study site
Haifa, 3339419
Study site
Jerusalem, 9112001
Study site
Petah Tikva, 4941492
Study site
Ramat Gan, 5262000
Study site
Tel Aviv, 6423906
Italy6 sites
Study site
Arenzano, Liguria, 16011
Study site
Brescia, Lombardy, 25123
Study site
Genoa, Liguria, 16132
Study site
Milan, Lombardy, 20157
Study site
Pisa, Tuscany, 56100
Study site
Udine, Friuli Venezia Giulia, 33100
United Kingdom6 sites
Study site
Cannock, WS11 5XY
Study site
Leeds, LS7 4SA
Study site
London, E11 1NR
Study site
Manchester, M41 5SL
Study site
Metropolitan Borough of Wirral, CH49 5PE
Study site
Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7DN
Germany5 sites
Study site
Berlin, 10117
Study site
Dresden, 01067
Study site
Leipzig, 04103
Study site
Ratingen, 40882
Study site
Würzburg, 97080
Belgium4 sites
Study site
Brussels, 1070
Study site
Brussels, 1200
Study site
Ghent, 9000
Study site
Liège, 4000
Norway4 sites
Study site
Drammen, 3004
Study site
Lillehammer, 2609
Study site
Oslo, 0370
Study site
Tromsø, 9038
About this study
Official title: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Double-blind, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Rituximab in Combination With Methotrexate in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Had an Inadequate Response to Anti-TNF Alpha Therapies
This study will assess the safety and efficacy of rituximab combined with MTX in participants with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to anti-Tumor Necrosis (TNF) alpha therapy. The anticipated time in the study is up to 2 years and the target sample size is 500 participants. Eligible participants may receive re-treatment with rituximab under a separate protocol WA17531.
- Conditions
- Rheumatoid Arthritis
- Being tested
- MabThera/Rituxan, Methotrexate, Placebo
- Medical subject headings
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
MabThera/RituxanDrug
1
MethotrexateDrug
2
PlaceboOther
3
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo Plus Methotrexate | Placebo comparator | Participants will be administered placebo by intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg per os (p.o.) or parenterally once a week up to 24 weeks and will be followed up to Week 104. Receives: Drug: Methotrexate; Other: Placebo |
| Rituximab plus Methotrexate | Experimental | Participants will be administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and will be followed up to Week 104. Receives: Drug: MabThera/Rituxan; Drug: Methotrexate |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20 Response at Week 24
American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response is defined as >= 20% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both tender joint count (TJC)-68 joints and swollen joint count (SJC)-66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from score 0 (no pain) to 100 (unbearable pain); Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging score 0 (no disease activity) to 100 (maximum disease activity); Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do) for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either C-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR).
Measured: Week 24
Secondary outcomes (11)
Number of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 24
ACR 50 response is defined as a >= 50% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both TJC -68 joints and SJC -66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no pain to score '100'=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no disease activity to score '100'=maximum disease activity; HAQ : Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either CRP or ESR.
Measured: Week 24
Number of Participants With ACR 70 Response at Week 24
ACR 70 response is defined as a >= 70% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both TJC -68 joints and SJC -66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no pain to score '100'=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no disease activity to score '100'=maximum disease activity; HAQ : Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either CRP or ESR.
Measured: Week 24
Mean Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score of 28 Joints at Week 24
The disease activity score (DAS28) is an evaluation index of rheumatoid arthritis. The DAS28 applies a mathematical formula based on the following parameters: 1. TJC-28 joints, 2. SJC -28 joints, 3. ESR or CRP measurement, 4. Participant's judgement on his own overall health (global health [GH]) status expressed by a VAS (0 [no disease activity] to 100 [maximum disease activity]). The mathematical formula is 0.56 × √28TJC + 0.28 × √28SJC + 0.7 x loge ESR + 0.014 × GH. The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10, where lower scores indicate best disease control and higher scores indicate worsening of disease. Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline.
Measured: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Percentage of Participants With DAS28 Low Disease Activity and DAS28 Remission at Week 24
The DAS28 is an evaluation index of RA. The DAS28 applies a mathematical formula based on the following parameters: 1. TJC- 28 joints, 2. SJC- 28 joints, 3. ESR or CRP measurement, 4. Participant's judgement on his own overall health status (GH) expressed by a visual analogue scale VAS (0 [no disease activity] to 100 [maximum disease activity]). The mathematical formula is 0.56 × √28TJC + 0.28 × √28SJC + 0.7 x loge ESR + 0.014 × GH. The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10. A participant was categorized as having low disease activity, if participant's DAS28 score was <= 3.2, and was categorized as having clinical remission if participant's DAS28 score was < 2.6.
Measured: Week 24
Number of Participants With Good, Moderate, or no European League Against Rheumatism Responses at Week 24
European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response is defined based on the DAS28 score and the EULAR response criteria (Van Gestel et al, 1996 and 1999). The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10, where lower scores indicate best disease control and higher scores indicate worsening of disease. At a given visit, participants with a DAS28 score of < 3.2 are considered good responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is >1.2. Participants with a DAS28 score >= 3.2 to 5.1 are considered moderate responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is <=1.2 to >=0.6. Participants with DAS28 score >5.1 are considered non-responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is <=1.2 to >=0.6.
Measured: Week 24
Percentage Change From Baseline in the ACR Core Set (SJC, TJC, Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments, Health Assessment Questionnaire, Pain, C-Reactive Protein, and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) Score
Percentage change in the scores of the following parameters of ACR core set relative to respective baseline scores in both study arms was analyzed : SJC (28 and 66 joints) and TJC (28 and 66 joints), patient's global assessment and physician's global assessment based on disease activity (both are expressed by VAS [0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity]), HAQ (based on HAQ disability index [HAQDI]) which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst), pain assessment using a VAS ranging from score 0 (no pain) to 100 (unbearable pain), CRP concentration, and ESR.
Measured: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Mean Change From Baseline of Short Form 36 Total Scores at Week 24
The Short Form (SF)-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Transforming and standardizing these domains leads to the calculation of the physical component summary and mental component summary measures. Scores on each item were summed and averaged (range 0 [worst] to 100 [best]); increase in score from baseline indicated improvement. Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline.
Measured: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Number of Participants With Categorical Change From Baseline in the Physical Component Scores of SF-36
The SF-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing :1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Scores on physical component were summed and averaged (range 0 [worst] to 100 [best]); If participants' had shown change from baseline in physical health component score >5.42, it was considered as improved; score between -5.42 to 5.42 was considered as unchanged, and score < -5.42 was considered as worsened. Change from Baseline = difference between the score of physical component at Week 24 and the score at Baseline.
Measured: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in the Mental Component Scores of SF-36
The SF-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing :1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Scores on mental component were summed and averaged (range = 0 [worst]-100 [best]); increase from baseline indicated improvement. If participants' had shown change from baseline in mental health score >6.33, it was considered as improved; scores between -6.33 to 6.33 was considered unchanged, and score <-6.33 was considered as worsened. Change from Baseline = difference between the mental component score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline.
Measured: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Mean Change From Baseline in the Genant-modified Sharp Joint Space Narrowing Score, Genant-modified Sharp Total Score, and Erosion Score
The Genant-modified Sharp scoring system assesses structural damage due to rheumatoid arthritis in radiographs. A score for erosions of 0-3.5 (8 gradations) is assigned for 14 joints in each hand and wrist, and 6 joints in each foot. Joint space narrowing scores of 0-4 (9 gradations) are assigned to 13 joints in each hand and 6 joints in each foot. The maximum erosion score is 40 x 3.5 = 140. The maximum joint space narrowing score is 38 x 4.0 = 152. Both the erosion and joint space narrowing scores are normalized to 145 and are added together for a maximum total Genant-modified Sharp score of 290. For all the three radiograph assessment, the minimum score is 0. A higher score indicates more damage and a negative change score indicates improvement. The change in score is to be calculated as: Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Weeks 24, 56, or 104 and the score at Baseline.
Measured: From Baseline (Day 1) to Weeks (W) 24, 56, and 104
Percentage of Participants Without Erosive Progression
The Genant-modified Sharp scoring system assesses structural damage due to rheumatoid arthritis in radiographs. A score for erosions of 0-3.5 (8 gradations) is assigned for 14 joints in each hand and wrist, and 6 joints in each foot. The maximum erosion score is 40 x 3.5 = 140 which is normalized to 145. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 145. A higher score indicates more damage and negative change score indicates improvement.
Measured: Up to Week 104
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 May 2007 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2003
- Primary completionJan 2005
- Study completionJul 2012
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 (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Rheumatoid ArthritisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Hoffmann-La RocheThe 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 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Enrolment
- 520 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hoffmann-La Roche
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Biogen
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Clinical Trials, Study chair, Hoffmann-La Roche
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00468546
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- WA17042
- Other IDs
- 102-20
- Status last verified
- Aug 2016
- First submitted
- 30 Apr 2007
- Last updated
- 25 Oct 2016
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
Publications
Lal P, Su Z, Holweg CT, Silverman GJ, Schwartzman S, Kelman A, Read S, Spaniolo G, Monroe JG, Behrens TW, Townsend MJ. Inflammation and autoantibody markers identify rheumatoid arthritis patients with enhanced clinical benefit following rituximab treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Dec;63(12):3681-91. doi: 10.1002/art.30596.
PubMed 22127691Keystone E, Burmester GR, Furie R, Loveless JE, Emery P, Kremer J, Tak PP, Broder MS, Yu E, Cravets M, Magrini F, Jost F. Improvement in patient-reported outcomes in a rituximab trial in patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis refractory to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Jun 15;59(6):785-93. doi: 10.1002/art.23715.
PubMed 18512710
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Oct 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Double-blind, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Rituximab in Combination With Methotrexate in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Had an Inadequate Response to Anti-TNF Alpha Therapies
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00468546
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- WA17042
- Conditions
- Rheumatoid Arthritis
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 520 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hoffmann-La RocheIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Biogen
- Study start
- May 2003
- Primary completion
- Jan 2005 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 May 2007 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 25 Oct 2016
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will assess the safety and efficacy of rituximab combined with MTX in participants with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to anti-Tumor Necrosis (TNF) alpha therapy. The anticipated time in the study is up to 2 years and the target sample size is 500 participants. Eligible participants may receive re-treatment with rituximab under a separate protocol WA17531.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo Plus Methotrexate | Placebo comparator | Drug: Methotrexate, Other: PlaceboParticipants will be administered placebo by intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg per os (p.o.) or parenterally once a week up to 24 weeks and will be followed up to Week 104. |
| Rituximab plus Methotrexate | Experimental | Drug: MabThera/Rituxan, Drug: MethotrexateParticipants will be administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and will be followed up to Week 104. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Adult participants 18-80 years of age with active RA for at least 6 months;
- Received treatment for RA on an outpatient basis and experienced an inadequate response or intolerance to treatment with at least 1 anti-TNF alpha therapy (etanercept, infliximab or adalimumab);
- Must have received MTX for a minimum of 12 weeks, with the last 4 weeks, prior to screening at a stable dose;
- Participants with swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) of at least 8 joints at screening and at randomization;
- Radiographic evidence of at least 1 joint with a definite erosion due to RA;
Key exclusion criteria (19 listed)
- Bone or joint surgery within 8 weeks prior to screening or joint surgery planned within 24 weeks of randomization;
- Class IV functional status of RA;
- Previous treatment within 6 months with intravenous gamma globulin, or the Prosorba column;
- Intraarticular or parenteral corticosteroids within 4 weeks prior to screening visit;
- With a live vaccine within 4 weeks prior to randomization;
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 |
|---|---|---|
| MabThera/Rituxan1 | Drug | Rituximab plus Methotrexate |
| Methotrexate2 | Drug | Placebo Plus Methotrexate, Rituximab plus Methotrexate |
| Placebo3 | Other | Placebo Plus Methotrexate |
Primary outcome
Number of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20 Response at Week 24
Time frame: Week 24
American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response is defined as >= 20% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both tender joint count (TJC)-68 joints and swollen joint count (SJC)-66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from score 0 (no pain) to 100 (unbearable pain); Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging score 0 (no disease activity) to 100 (maximum disease activity); Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do) for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either C-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR).
11 secondary outcomes
Number of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 24
Time frame: Week 24
Number of Participants With ACR 70 Response at Week 24
Time frame: Week 24
Mean Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score of 28 Joints at Week 24
Time frame: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Percentage of Participants With DAS28 Low Disease Activity and DAS28 Remission at Week 24
Time frame: Week 24
Number of Participants With Good, Moderate, or no European League Against Rheumatism Responses at Week 24
Time frame: Week 24
Percentage Change From Baseline in the ACR Core Set (SJC, TJC, Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments, Health Assessment Questionnaire, Pain, C-Reactive Protein, and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) Score
Time frame: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Mean Change From Baseline of Short Form 36 Total Scores at Week 24
Time frame: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Number of Participants With Categorical Change From Baseline in the Physical Component Scores of SF-36
Time frame: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in the Mental Component Scores of SF-36
Time frame: From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24
Mean Change From Baseline in the Genant-modified Sharp Joint Space Narrowing Score, Genant-modified Sharp Total Score, and Erosion Score
Time frame: From Baseline (Day 1) to Weeks (W) 24, 56, and 104
Percentage of Participants Without Erosive Progression
Time frame: Up to Week 104
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Oct 2016.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 22127691Lal P, Su Z, Holweg CT, Silverman GJ, Schwartzman S, Kelman A, Read S, Spaniolo G, Monroe JG, Behrens TW, Townsend MJ. Inflammation and autoantibody markers identify rheumatoid arthritis patients with enhanced clinical benefit following rituximab treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Dec;63(12):3681-91. doi: 10.1002/art.30596.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 18512710Keystone E, Burmester GR, Furie R, Loveless JE, Emery P, Kremer J, Tak PP, Broder MS, Yu E, Cravets M, Magrini F, Jost F. Improvement in patient-reported outcomes in a rituximab trial in patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis refractory to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Jun 15;59(6):785-93. doi: 10.1002/art.23715.
Related trials for Rheumatoid Arthritis
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.
Clinical Trials study chair
Hoffmann-La Roche
115 sites in 11 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing MabThera/Rituxan and Methotrexate in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by Hoffmann-La Roche at 115 sites in 11 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 6 inclusion and 19 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 25 Oct 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 115 sites in United States, Canada, France, Israel, Italy and 6 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 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
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 25 Oct 2016). 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?
Number of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20 Response at Week 24 (time frame: Week 24). 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 NCT00468546, which also lists 2 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 25 Oct 2016.