AzTrials
AzTrials

Neoplasm MetastasisPhase 2NCT00545129

A Study Of Tanezumab as Add-On Therapy to Opioid Medication In Patients With Pain Due To Cancer That Has Spread To Bone

A Phase 2 study testing Tanezumab 10 mg IV in people with Neoplasm Metastasis and Palliative Care, run by Pfizer at 39 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 investigate the safety and efficacy of tanezumab in combination with opioids in treating pain due to cancer that has spread to bone. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Neoplasm Metastasis, Palliative Care
What is being tested?
Tanezumab 10 mg IV
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
59 participants
Where
39 sitesin 13 countries
Study dates
29 Apr 2009to 7 Feb 2012
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

  • Prostate cancer, breast cancer, renal cell carcinoma or multiple myeloma that has spread to bone, causing moderate to severe bone pain.
  • Requires daily opioid medication

Who cannot join

  • Patients who do not have bone pain caused by cancer are not eligible for the study.
  • Patients who started chemotherapy less than 4 weeks ago, or who completed radiotherapy less than 4 weeks ago, are not eligible.
  • Known history or evidence of osteoarthritis. History of significant trauma to a major joint within 1 year prior to Screening.
  • Known history of rheumatoid arthritis.

Trial locations and contacts

39 sites in 13 countries.

39 sites in 13 countries

United States12 sites
  • Hollings Cancer Center

    Charleston, South Carolina, 29425

  • Medical University of South Carolina, Department of Urology

    Charleston, South Carolina, 29425

  • MUSC Department of Radiology

    Charleston, South Carolina, 29425

  • MUSC Investigational Pharmacy

    Charleston, South Carolina, 29425

  • MUSC Urology Ambulatory Care

    Charleston, South Carolina, 29425

  • UCSD Center for Pain Medicine

    La Jolla, California, 92037-7651

  • UCSD Medical Center - Thornton Hospital

    La Jolla, California, 92037-7651

  • UCSD Moores Cancer Center

    La Jolla, California, 92093

  • Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah

    Salt Lake City, Utah, 84112

  • WK River Cities Clinical Research Center

    Shreveport, Louisiana, 71105

  • Willis Knighton Pierremont Health Center

    Shreveport, Louisiana, 71115

  • Indiana Pain and Spine Clinic

    South Bend, Indiana, 46617

Other trials in United States

India5 sites
  • Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University

    Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, 226003

  • Shri Siddhivinayak Ganpati Cancer Hospital

    Miraj, Maharashtra, 416 410

  • Central India Cancer Research Institute

    Nagpur, Maharashtra, 440 010

  • Shatabdi Superspeciality Hospital

    Nashik, Maharashtra, 422 005

  • Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre,

    New Delhi, 110085

Other trials in India

Poland4 sites
  • Niepubliczny Zaklad Opieki Zdrowotnej

    Bydgoszcz, 85-796

  • Hospicjum im. Ks. Eugeniusza Dutkiewicza SAC w Gdansku

    Gdansk, 80-208

  • Poradnia Medycyny Paliatywnej, Hospicjum Palium

    Poznan, 61-245

  • NZOZ Zespol Opieki Domowej

    Włocławek, 87-800

Other trials in Poland

Austria3 sites
  • Landeskrankenhaus Graz - Universitaetsklinik fuer Orthopaedie und Orthopaedische Chirurgie

    Graz, A-8036

  • Krankenhaus der Elisabethinen Linz, Institut fuer Anaesthesiologie und Intensivmedizin

    Linz, A-4010

  • Nuhr Zentrum

    Senftenberg, A-3541

Other trials in Austria

Hungary3 sites
  • Fovarosi Onkormanyzat Peterfy Sandor Utcai Korhaz - Fajdalom Ambulancia

    Budapest, 1076

  • Fovarosi Onkormanyzat Jahn Ferenc Del-pesti Korhaz - Fajdalom Ambulancia

    Budapest, 1204

  • Fejer Megyei Szt. Gyorgy Korhaz - Rendelointezet/Aneszteziologiai es Intenziv Betegellato Osztaly

    Székesfehérvár, 8003

Other trials in Hungary

Bosnia and Herzegovina2 sites
  • Clinic of Oncology

    Banja Luka, 78000

  • Institute of Oncology, University Clinical Center Sarajevo

    Sarajevo, 71000

Other trials in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Peru2 sites
  • Hospital Nacional Guillermo Almenara Irigoyen

    Lima, LIMA L13

  • Oncocare

    Lima, 05127

Other trials in Peru

Slovakia2 sites
  • Fakultna Nemocnica s Poliklinikou F.D.Roosevelta

    Banská Bystrica, 97517

  • Narodny onkologicky ustav

    Bratislava, 83310

Other trials in Slovakia

South Korea2 sites
  • Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yonsei Cancer Center

    Seoul, 120-752

  • Samsung Medical Center, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine

    Seoul, 135-710

Other trials in South Korea

Croatia1 site
  • General Hospital Varazdin

    Varaždin, 42000

Other trials in Croatia

France1 site
  • Institut Gustave Roussy

    Villejuif, 94805

Other trials in France

Latvia1 site
  • 10th Department, Latvian Oncological Centre / Riga Eastern Clinical University Hospital

    Riga, LV 1079

Other trials in Latvia

Mexico1 site
  • Centro de Cancer del Centro Medico ABC

    Mexico City, Mexico City, 01120

Other trials in Mexico

About this study

Official title: PHASE II RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED MULTICENTER EFFICACY AND SAFETY STUDY OF TANEZUMAB AS ADD-ON THERAPY TO OPIOID MEDICATION IN PATIENTS WITH PAIN DUE TO BONE METASTASES

The purpose of this study is to investigate the safety and efficacy of tanezumab in combination with opioids in treating pain due to cancer that has spread to bone.

Being tested
Tanezumab 10 mg IV, IV Placebo for tanezumab
Medical subject headings
Neoplasm Metastasis

What participants receive

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

  • Tanezumab 10 mg IVDrug

    Single IV infusion of 10 mg tanezumab on Day 1. Maintained on baseline opioid regimen.

  • IV Placebo for tanezumabDrug

    Single IV infusion of placebo for tanezumab on Day 1. Maintained on baseline opioid regimen.

Study groups in NCT00545129
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Tanezumab 10 mg IV + opioidsExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: Tanezumab 10 mg IV
Placebo + opioidsPlacebo comparatorSingle IV infusion of placebo for tanezumab on Day 1. Maintained on baseline opioid regimen.
Receives: Drug: IV Placebo for tanezumab

What is being measured

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

  1. Change From Baseline in Daily Average Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 6

    Daily average pain was assessed on an 11-point NRS over the past 24 hours (before each specified visit), where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine". Lower the score, lesser the pain intensity.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 6

Secondary outcomes (31)
  1. Change From Baseline in Daily Average Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16

    Daily average pain was assessed on an 11-point NRS over the past 24 hours (before each specified visit), where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine". Lower the score, lesser pain intensity.

    Measured: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16

  2. Change From Baseline in Daily Worst Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

    The worst pain was assessed an 11-point NRS over the past 24 hours where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine". Lower the score, lesser pain intensity.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  3. Change From Baseline in Daily Worst Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

    The worst pain was assessed on 11-point NRS over the past 24 hours where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine". The lower the value the lesser pain intensity.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  4. Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Average Pain Scores at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16: BOCF

    BPI-sf: self-administered questionnaire developed to assess severity, impact of pain on daily functions, consisted of 5 questions. Questions 1-4 measured magnitude of pain at its worst, least, average, right now. BPI-sf average pain measured the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24-hours and ranged from 0 (No Pain) to10 (Pain as bad as you can imagine), lower scores indicates lesser pain intensity. Question 5: 7 item subsets that measured level of interference of pain on daily functions on 11-point NRS at 0 (Does not interfere) to 10 (Completely interferes).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  5. Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Average Pain Scores at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16: LOCF

    BPI-sf: self-administered questionnaire developed to assess severity, impact of pain on daily functions, consisted of 5 questions. Questions 1-4 measured magnitude of pain at its worst, least, average, right now. BPI-sf average pain measured the severity of pain based on the average pain experienced over the past 24-hours and ranged from 0 (No Pain) to 10 (Pain as bad as you can imagine), lower score indicates lesser pain intensity. Question 5: 7 item subsets that measured level of interference of pain on daily functions on 11-point numeric rating scale at 0 (Does not interfere) to 10 (Completely interferes).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  6. Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Worst Pain Scores at Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16: BOCF

    BPI-sf: self-administered questionnaire developed to assess severity, impact of pain on daily functions, consisted of 5 questions. Questions 1-4 measured magnitude of pain at its worst, least, average, right now. BPI-sf worst pain measured the severity of pain based on the worst pain experienced over the past 24-hours and ranged from 0 (No Pain) to 10 (Pain as bad as you can imagine), lower scores =lesser pain intensity. Question 5: 7 item subsets that measured level of interference of pain on daily functions on 11-point numeric rating scale at 0 (Does not interfere) to 10 (Completely interferes).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  7. Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Worst Pain Scores Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16: LOCF

    BPI-sf: self-administered questionnaire developed to assess severity, impact of pain on daily functions, consisted of 5 questions. Questions 1-4 measured magnitude of pain at its worst, least, average, right now. BPI-sf worst pain measured the severity of pain based on the worst pain experienced over the past 24-hours and ranged from 0 (No Pain) to 10 (Pain as bad as you can imagine), lower scores=lesser pain intensity. Question 5: 7 item subsets that measured level of interference of pain on daily functions on11-point numeric rating scale at 0 (Does not interfere) to 10 (Completely interferes).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  8. Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 30 Percent (%), >=50%, >=70% and >=90% Reduction in Daily Average Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score: BOCF

    Percentage of participant with response as defined by a >=30%, >=50%, >=70%, and >=90%, reduction in the daily average pain intensity NRS score from baseline, that was maintained for a minimum of 3 consecutive days following this original study day (reduction in pain was maintained for a minimum duration of 4 consecutive days). Daily average pain was assessed on 11-point NRS over the past 24 hours where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine". Lower scores indicate less pain intensity.

    Measured: Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  9. Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 30 Percent (%), >=50%, >=70% and >=90% Reduction in Daily Average Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score: LOCF

    Percentage of participant with response as defined by a >=30%, >=50%, >=70%, and >=90%, reduction in the daily average pain intensity NRS score from baseline, that was maintained for a minimum of 3 consecutive days following this original study day (reduction in pain was maintained for a minimum duration of 4 consecutive days). Daily average pain was assessed on 11-point NRS over the past 24 hours where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine". Lower scores indicate less pain intensity

    Measured: Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  10. Average Daily Opioid Consumption

    The average daily opioid consumption was calculated as the daily sum of total opioid dosage in milligrams. Opioid consumption on each day was converted to the morphine equivalent dosage (MED). Results were summarized for opioid dose adjust period, baseline assessment period and post-baseline period.

    Measured: Opioid Dose Adjust Period (Day-30 to Day-4), Baseline Assessment period (Day-3 to Day-1), Post Baseline Period (Day 1 to Week 16)

  11. Number of Doses of Rescue Medication Required Per Week

    Participants received immediate release (IR) opioid as rescue medication as needed for breakthrough pain from Day 1-113 at the dose determined during the pre-treatment phase, provided the average total daily dose of opioids between study visits does not exceed the baseline total daily opioid dose by more than 10%.

    Measured: Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

  12. Change From Baseline in Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Scale (OR-SDS) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 12, and 16

    OR-SDS: participant-rated levels of frequency (F), severity (S), degree of bother (DoB) for 10 symptoms: fatigue, drowsiness, concentration, confusion, nausea, dizziness, constipation, itching, difficulty with urination, retching/vomiting. For each symptom levels of F, S and DoB scored as: frequency (0 to 4:'did not have' to 'almost constantly'), severity (0 to 4:'did not have' to 'very severe'), degree of bother (0 to 5:'did not have' to 'very much'). Mean of F, S and DoB was calculated for each symptom to derive composite scores/multi-domain average (MDA) scores which ranges from 0 to 4.33. Higher MDA=worse symptom. Composite scores for frequency (FCS), severity (SCS), degree of bother, and MDA were calculated as mean of these scores across 10 symptoms and had same ranges as individual scores frequency (0 to 4:'did not have' to 'almost constantly'), severity (0 to 4:'did not have' to 'very severe'), degree of bother (0 to 5:'did not have' to 'very much'); higher scores=more distress

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 12, 16

  13. Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Pain Interference With Function Composite Score and Individual Pain Interference Item Scores of General Activity, Walking Ability and Normal Work at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 16: BOCF

    Participant-rated 11 point Likert rating scale ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes) assessed interference of pain in functional activities (general activity, walking ability, and normal work) in past 24 hours. Measures were scored by individual item as well as function composite score (calculated by taking mean of individual interference scores), both (individual scores and composite scores) ranging from 0 to 10 with lower scores being indicative of less pain interference.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  14. Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Pain Interference With Function Composite Score and Individual Pain Interference Item Scores at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 16: LOCF

    Participant-rated 11 point Likert rating scale ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes) assessed interference of pain in functional activities (general activity, walking ability, and normal work) in past 24 hours. Measures were scored by individual item as well as function composite score (calculated by taking mean of individual interference scores), both (individual items and composite scores) ranging from 0 to 10 with lower scores being indicative of less pain interference.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  15. Patient's Global Evaluation of Study Medication

    The Patient's Global Evaluation of Study Medication (PGESM) was a single item that assessed the participant's perception of his/her response to the study medication. It was a self-administered question that utilizes a 4-point Likert scale from 1="Poor" to 4="Excellent", where higher score represented better outcome.

    Measured: Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  16. Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease (Cancer Pain) Activity at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 16: BOCF

    The Patient's Global Assessment of Cancer Pain was a global evaluation that utilized a 5-point Likert scale with a score of 1 being the best (Very Good) and a score of 5 being the worst (Very Poor), where higher score represented more pain.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  17. Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease (Cancer Pain) Activity at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 16: LOCF

    The Patient's Global Assessment of Cancer Pain was a global evaluation that utilized a 5-point Likert scale with a score of 1 being the best (Very Good) and a score of 5 being the worst (Very Poor), where higher score represented more pain.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  18. Percentage of Participants Achieving Improvement of >=2 Points in Patient's Global Assessment Of Disease (Cancer Pain) Activity: BOCF

    The Patient's Global Assessment of Cancer Pain was a global evaluation that utilized a 5-point Likert scale with a score of 1 being the best (Very Good) and a score of 5 being the worst (Very Poor), where higher score represented more pain.

    Measured: Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  19. Percentage of Participants Achieving Improvement Of >=2 Points in Patient's Global Assessment Of Disease (Cancer Pain) Activity: LOCF

    The Patient's Global Assessment of Cancer Pain was a global evaluation that utilized a 5-point Likert scale with a score of 1 being the best (Very Good) and a score of 5 being the worst (Very Poor), where higher score represented more pain.

    Measured: Week 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16

  20. Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

    An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 113 days that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.

    Measured: Baseline up to 113 days

  21. Number of Participants With Physical Examination Abnormalities

    Physical examinations included general appearance (skin, neck, eyes, ears, nose, throat), cardiovascular system (including rhythm and presence of other cardiac abnormalities, such as gallops, murmurs, and cardiomegaly), respiratory system, gastrointestinal system, genitourinary system, musculoskeletal system, and any additional assessments necessary to establish baseline status or evaluate symptoms or adverse experiences. Abnormalities in physical examination was based on investigator's discretion.

    Measured: Baseline up to Week 16 or Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  22. Number of Participants With Abnormal Neurological Examination

    Neurological examinations assessed strength of groups of muscles of the head and neck, upper limbs and lower limbs, deep tendon reflexes and sensation (tactile, vibration, joint position sense and pin prick) of index finger and great toes in order to complete the neuropathy impairment score (NIS). NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate participant for signs of peripheral neuropathy. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side, where 24 items scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis) for muscle strength, higher score indicated higher abnormality/impairment, and 13 items scored from 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent) for sensation, higher score indicated higher impairment. NIS possible overall score ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased impairment.

    Measured: Week 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  23. Vital Sign Examination: Body Temperature

    Measured: Baseline (Day 1 0H), Week 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  24. Vital Sign Examination: Blood Pressure (BP)

    Systolic BP: the measurement of the pressure when the heart is contracted (systole). The systolic pressure indicates the maximum amount of work/force the heart has to perform with each stroke in order to move blood through the arteries. Diastolic BP: the pressure in the large arteries during the relaxation of the left ventricle. The diastolic pressure indicates the amount of pressure the heart must overcome in order to generate the next beat.

    Measured: Baseline (Day 1 0H), Week 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  25. Vital Sign Examination: Respiratory Rate

    Respiration rate measured as number of breaths taken per minute.

    Measured: Baseline (Day 1, 0H), Week 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  26. Vital Sign Examination: Heart Rate

    Heart rate is the number of heart beats per minute.

    Measured: Baseline (Day 1, 0H), Week 2, 4, 6, 12, 16, and Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  27. Body Weight of Participants

    Measured: Baseline, Week 6, 16 and Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  28. Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Examination

    Criteria for laboratory tests abnormalities included: hemoglobin, hematocrit (<0.8*lower limit of normal [LLN]); red blood cell count (<0.8*LLN); platelets (<0.5*LLN or >1.75* upper limit of normal [ULN]); leucocytes (<0.6*LLN or >1.5*ULN); lymphocytes, total neutrophils (<0.8*LLN or >1.2*ULN); basophils, eosinophils, monocytes (>1.2*ULN); total bilirubin (>1.5* ULN); aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase (>3*ULN); creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (>1.3*ULN); glucose (<0.6*LLN or >1.5*ULN); uric acid (>1.2*ULN); sodium (<0.95*LLN or 1.05*ULN); potassium, calcium, chloride, bicarbonate (<0.9*LLN or 1.1*ULN); albumin, total protein (<0.8*LLN or 1.2*ULN); urine analysis. Total number of participants without regards to baseline abnormality was summarized.

    Measured: Baseline up to Week 16, Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  29. Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibodies

    Human serum samples were analyzed using electrochemiluminescent (ECL) immunoassay for the presence of anti-tanezumab antibodies. Same participant may have positive (titer value >=4.32) anti-tanezumab antibodies result at more than 1 time point.

    Measured: Baseline (Day 1), Week 4, 6, 12, 16

  30. Electrocardiogram Examination

    ECG intervals included: RR (the time interval between consecutive heart beats), PR (time between the onset of atrial depolarization and the onset of ventricular depolarization), QRS (represented ventricular depolarization) and QT (time corresponding to the beginning of depolarization to repolarization of the ventricles), QTcF (QT interval corrected using Fridericia's formula [FF]), QTcB interval (QT interval corrected using Bazett's formula [BF]).

    Measured: Baseline (Pre-dose and 1 hour Post-dose), Week 4, 16, Early Termination (up to 113 days)

  31. Electrocardiogram Examination: Heart Rate

    Standard 12-lead ECG performed after participant had rested quietly for at least 10 minutes in a supine position was measured. The time interval between consecutive heart beats [RR interval] (in beats per minute [bpm]) was used to calculate heart rate.

    Measured: Baseline (Pre-dose and 1 hour Post-dose), Week 4, 16, Early Termination (up to 113 days)

Timeline

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

  1. First posted17 Oct 2007 (estimated)
  2. Study start29 Apr 2009
  3. Primary completion24 Dec 2011
  4. Study completion7 Feb 2012

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
59 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00545129
Sponsor's protocol ID
A4091003
Other IDs
2008-005181-31, CANCER PAIN POC, 2008
Status last verified
May 2021
First submitted
15 Oct 2007
Last updated
18 Jun 2021
Data monitoring committee
Yes
Individual data sharing
Yes: Pfizer will provide access to individual de-identified participant data and related study documents (e.g. protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), Clinical Study Report (CSR)) upon request from qualified researchers, and subject to certain criteria, conditions, and exceptions. Further details on Pfizer's data sharing criteria and process for requesting access can be found at: https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical\_trials/trial\_data\_and\_results/data\_requests.

Publications

  • Sopata M, Katz N, Carey W, Smith MD, Keller D, Verburg KM, West CR, Wolfram G, Brown MT. Efficacy and safety of tanezumab in the treatment of pain from bone metastases. Pain. 2015 Sep;156(9):1703-1713. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000211.

    PubMed 25919474
  • Bapat AA, Hostetter G, Von Hoff DD, Han H. Perineural invasion and associated pain in pancreatic cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011 Sep 23;11(10):695-707. doi: 10.1038/nrc3131.

    PubMed 21941281

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing Tanezumab 10 mg IV in people with Neoplasm Metastasis and Palliative Care, run by Pfizer at 39 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 4 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 Jun 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 39 sites in United States, India, Poland, Austria, Hungary 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 18 Jun 2021). 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?

Change From Baseline in Daily Average Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 6 (time frame: Baseline, Week 6). 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 NCT00545129, 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 18 Jun 2021.

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