AzTrials
AzTrials

Arthritis, RheumatoidPhase 2NCT00603512

Comparison Of 4 CP-690,550 Doses Vs. Placebo, Each Combined With Methotrexate, For The Treatment Of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Japan

A Phase 2 study testing CP-690,550 in people with Arthritis, Rheumatoid, run by Pfizer at 18 sites in Japan.

Completed

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

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness and safety, over 3 months, of 4 dose regimens of CP-690,550, combined with methotrexate, for the treatment with active rheumatoid arthritis. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 20 to 70 years
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
140 participants
Where
18 sitesJapan
Study dates
Jan 2008to Sep 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 20 to 70 years
  • 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

18 sites in 1 country.

18 sites in 1 country

Japan18 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Bunkyo-k, Tokyo

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Chiba, Chiba

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Fukuoka, Fukuoka

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Hitachi-shi, Ibaraki

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Kawachi-Nagano, Osaka

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Kawagoe-shi, Saitama

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Kitamoto, Saitama

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Koto-ku, Tokyo

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Koushi, Kumamoto

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Meguro-ku, Tokyo

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Musashimurayama-shi, Tokyo

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Niigata, Niigata

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Sagamihara, Kanagawa

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Sendai, Miyagi

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyusyu

Other trials in Japan

About this study

Official title: A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Study to Confirm Dose Responsiveness Following 12 Weeks of the Administration of CP-690,550 (4 Doses) or Placebo in Subjects With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Inadequately Controlled With Methotrexate Alone

The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness and safety, over 3 months, of 4 dose regimens of CP-690,550, combined with methotrexate, for the treatment with active rheumatoid arthritis.

Being tested
Placebo, CP-690,550
Keywords
Phase II MTX add-on study in Japan
Medical subject headings
Arthritis, Rheumatoid

What participants receive

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

  • PlaceboDrug

    0 mg BID, 3 blinded tablets administered BID for 12 weeks

  • CP-690,550Drug

    10 mg BID, 3 blinded tablets administered BID for 12 weeks

  • CP-690,550Drug

    1 mg BID, 3 blinded tablets administered BID for 12 weeks

  • CP-690,550Drug

    3 mg BID, 3 blinded tablets administered BID for 12 weeks

  • CP-690,550Drug

    5 mg BID, 3 blinded tablets administered BID for 12 weeks

Study groups in NCT00603512
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
CP-690,550, 0mgPlacebo comparatorNot described
Receives: Drug: Placebo
CP-690,550, 10mgExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP-690,550, 1mgExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP-690,550, 3mgExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
CP-690,550, 5mgExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550

What is being measured

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

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

    ACR20 response: greater than or equal to (>=) 20 percent (%) improvement in tender joint count (TJC); >= 20% improvement in swollen joint 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 (26)
  1. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response

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

    Measured: Week 1, 2, 4, 8

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

    ACR50 response: >= 50% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts 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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/End of Treatment (EOT)

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

    ACR70 response: >= 70% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts 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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  4. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 90% (ACR90) Response

    ACR90 response: >= 90% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts and 90% 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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  5. Tender Joint 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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  6. Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count (TJC) at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12/EOT

    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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  7. Swollen Joint 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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  8. Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count (SJC) at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12/EOT

    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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  9. Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain

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

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  10. Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12/EOT

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

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  11. Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis

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

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  12. Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis (PtGA) at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12/EOT

    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 = very well and 100 = very poorly.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  13. Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Arthritis

    Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 = very good and 100 = very bad.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  14. Change From Baseline in Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis (PGA) at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12/EOT

    Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 = very good and 100 = very bad.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

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

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

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  16. Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12/EOT

    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 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  17. C-Reactive Protein (CRP)

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

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  18. Change From Baseline in C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12/EOT

    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 liter (mg/L) to 10 mg/L. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  19. Numeric Index of American College of Rheumatology Response (ACR-n)

    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.

    Measured: Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

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

    ACR-n = calculated for each participant by taking lowest percentage improvement in (1) swollen joint count or (2) tender joint count or (3) the median of remaining 5 components of 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 AUC for ACR-n is measure of the area under the curve of the mean change from baseline in ACR-n. The trapezoidal rule was used to compute AUC.

    Measured: Baseline up to Week 12

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

    DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joint 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, >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity and <2.6 implied remission.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

  22. Disease Activity Score Using 28-Joint Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [ESR])

    DAS28-4 (ESR) calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and patient's global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity (transformed score ranging 0 to 10; higher score indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). Total score range:0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-4 (ESR) less than or equal to (=<) 3.2 implied low disease activity, greater than (>) 3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity and less than (<) 2.6=remission.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12/EOT

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

    SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. 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/EOT

  24. Euro Quality of Life (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, selfcare, 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/EOT

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

    Participant-rated 12 item questionnaire assess constructs of sleep over past week.7 subscales:sleep disturbance(SD),snoring(Sno),awakened short of breath(ASOB),sleep adequacy(Ade),somnolence(Som)(range:0-100);sleep quantity(Qua)(range:0-24),optimal(Opt) sleep(yes:1,no:0),9 item index measures of sleep disturbance provide composite scores:sleep problem summary(SPS),overall SP(OSP).Except Ade,Opt,Qua,higher scores=more impairment.Scores transformed(actual raw score(RS) minus lowest possible score divided by possible RS range*100);total score range:0-100;higher score=more intensity of attribute.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, 12/EOT

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

    FACIT-F 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-Fatigue 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/EOT

Timeline

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

  1. First posted29 Jan 2008 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2008
  3. Primary completionSep 2008
  4. Study completionSep 2008

Resources

More details

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

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Quadruple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
140 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00603512
Sponsor's protocol ID
A3921039
Status last verified
Dec 2012
First submitted
17 Jan 2008
Last updated
25 Jan 2013
Data monitoring committee
Yes

Publications

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    PubMed 28143815
  • Charles-Schoeman C, Burmester G, Nash P, Zerbini CA, Soma K, Kwok K, Hendrikx T, Bananis E, Fleischmann R. Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib following inadequate response to conventional synthetic or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Jul;75(7):1293-301. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-207178. Epub 2015 Aug 14.

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

    PubMed 25047021

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing CP-690,550 in people with Arthritis, Rheumatoid, run by Pfizer at 18 sites in Japan.

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 25 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 18 sites in Japan. 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 25 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 NCT00603512, which also lists 14 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 Jan 2013.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

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

Create a free accountLog in