OsteoarthritisPhase 3NCT00863772
Tanezumab and Nerve Function In Arthritis Patients
A Phase 3 study testing tanezumab in people with Osteoarthritis, run by Pfizer at 97 sites in United States.
Trial summary
Tanezumab reduces pain of osteoarthritis without affecting how nerve impulses are transmitted in sensory nerves. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 99 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Osteoarthritis
- What is being tested?
- tanezumab
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 220 participants
- Where
- 97 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 18 May 2009to 16 Nov 2010
- 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 99 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- BMI less or equal to 39 kg/m2
- Osteoarthritis (arthritis) of the knee or hip with pain score that qualifies
- Willing to comply with study visit schedule and study requirements, including, for women of child-bearing potential or male patients with female partners of child-bearing potential, the use of 2 forms of birth control, one of which is a barrier method.
- Patients must consent in writing to participate in the study.
Who cannot join
- Untreated, uncontrolled diseases,
- Unwilling or unable to discontinue the use of prohibited medications, including other pain medications, during the screening period and during the study,
- Significant cardiac disease within the past 6 months
- Significant neurological disease (e.g. peripheral neuropathy, multiple sclerosis, stroke) or signs of neuropathy at screening
- Known bleeding disorder or anticoagulation therapy
- Planned surgery during the study period
Show all 13Show fewer
- History of alcoholism or drug abuse in the past 2 years
- Unable to use acetaminophen
- Use of a biologic (including live vaccines, with the exception of Flumist) within the past 3 months
- Allergic reaction to a biologic or an antibody in the past
- Disqualifying laboratory values, including Hepatitis B or C, HIV or drug test
- Cancer in the past 5 years. Basal cell or squamous cell carcinoma are okay.
- Medical condition that may interfere with study endpoints or safety of the subject as determined by the investigator.
Trial locations and contacts
97 sites in 1 country.
97 sites in 1 country
United States97 sites
Altoona Hospital Campus
Altoona, Pennsylvania, 16601
Blair Neurologic Associates
Altoona, Pennsylvania, 16601
Blair Medical Associates
Altoona, Pennsylvania, 16602
Blair Orthopedic Associates, Inc.
Altoona, Pennsylvania, 16602
Bon Secour Campus
Altoona, Pennsylvania, 16602
AAMR Research Clinic, PA
Amarillo, Texas, 79106
Amarillo Diagnostic Clinic
Amarillo, Texas, 79106
IntegraTrials, L.L.C
Arlington, Virginia, 22205
TLC Neurology, P.L.L.C
Arlington, Virginia, 22205
Virginia Hospital Center
Arlington, Virginia, 22205
Asheville Imaging
Asheville, North Carolina, 28801
Biltmore Medical Associates
Asheville, North Carolina, 28801
Clinical Study Center of Asheville, LLC
Asheville, North Carolina, 28803
Asheville Neurology
Asheville, North Carolina, 28806-2287
Atlanta Center for Medical Research
Atlanta, Georgia, 30308
Atlanta Neurology
Atlanta, Georgia, 30342
Diagnostic Imaging of Atlanta
Atlanta, Georgia, 30342
NeuroTrials Research, Incorporated
Atlanta, Georgia, 30342
JEM Research, LLC
Atlantis, Florida, 33462
Medical Specialists of the Palm Beaches
Atlantis, Florida, 33462
JDP Medical Research, LLC
Aurora, Colorado, 80014
Northwest Neurology, P.C.
Austell, Georgia, 30106
Northwestern Lake Forest Hospital Diagnostic Imaging Centers
Bannockburn, Illinois, 60015
Northwest Clinical Research Center
Bellevue, Washington, 98007
Bend Memorial Clinic
Bend, Oregon, 97701
North Star Neurology
Bend, Oregon, 97701
Bradenton Research Center, Inc
Bradenton, Florida, 34205
Manatee Internal Medicine
Bradenton, Florida, 34208
Alpine Neurology
Centennial, Colorado, 80112
Peak Anesthesia
Centennial, Colorado, 80112
Rush University Medical Center
Chicago, Illinois, 60612
Radiant Research, Inc.
Dallas, Texas, 75231
Dr. Michael Vengrow
Dallas, Texas, 75243
Atlanta Knee and Sports Medicine
Decatur, Georgia, 30033
Joseph D. Weissman, MD
Decatur, Georgia, 30033
Neurology Specialists of Decatur
Decatur, Georgia, 30033
Southeastern Center for Clinical Trials
Decatur, Georgia, 30033
Jefrey D. Lieberman, MD
Decatur, Georgia, 30333
Altoona Center for Clinical Research
Duncansville, Pennsylvania, 16635
Elkhart Clinic, LLC
Elkhart, Indiana, 46514
Evergreen Neurology and Neurodiagnostics, PLLC
Everett, Washington, 98201
Clinical Physiology Associates
Fort Myers, Florida, 33916
Harris Bonnette, MD
Fort Myers, Florida, 33919
Coastal Carolina Research Center in Goose Creek
Goose Creek, South Carolina, 29445
Tidewater Neurology
Goose Creek, South Carolina, 29445
Unifour Medical Research Associates, LLC
Hickory, North Carolina, 28601
Neurology Associates, PA
Hickory, North Carolina, 28602
Unifour Medical Research Associates, LLC
Hickory, North Carolina, 28602
Sunrise Clinical Research, Inc.
Hollywood, Florida, 33021
Sunrise Clinical Research, Inc
Hollywood, Florida, 33024
Foundation for Southwest Orthopedic Research
Houston, Texas, 77030
The Neurology Center
Houston, Texas, 77030
Indiana University School of Medicine
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46202
University Hospital
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46202
NEA Baptist Clinic
Jonesboro, Arkansas, 72401
Neurological Associates of Long Island, P.C.
Lake Success, New York, 11042
G. Timothy Kelly, MD
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89128
Clinical Neurology Specialists
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89146
Caldwell Memorial Hospital
Lenoir, North Carolina, 28645
Northstate Clinical Research
Lenoir, North Carolina, 28645
Pharmax Research Clinic, Inc
Miami, Florida, 33126
International Research Associates, LLC
Miami, Florida, 33183
Consultants in Neurology, Ltd.
Northbrook, Illinois, 60062
The Arthritis Center
Palm Harbor, Florida, 34684
Pines Neurological Associates
Pembroke Pines, Florida, 33026
Pembroke Clinical Trials
Pembroke Pines, Florida, 33028
Pines Neurological Associates
Pembroke Pines, Florida, 33028
Advent Clinical Research Centers, Inc
Pinellas Park, Florida, 33781
Advent Clinical Research Center
Pinellas Park, Florida, 33781
Berma Research Group
Plantation, Florida, 33317
Hypothe Test, LLC
Roanoke, Virginia, 24014
Mayo Clinic Rochester
Rochester, Minnesota, 55905
Andrew J. Porges, M.D. PC
Roslyn, New York, 11576
Paragon Research Center, LLC
San Antonio, Texas, 78205
Baptist M&S Imaging
San Antonio, Texas, 78215
Sun Research Institute
San Antonio, Texas, 78215
Christine L. Truitt, MD
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Diagnostics Research Group
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Neurodiagnostic Laboratories of San Antonio, Inc.
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Neurodiagnostic Laboratories of San Antonio, Inc
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Radiant Research Inc.
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Kennedy-White Orthopaedic Center
Sarasota, Florida, 34232
Ronal Aung-Din, MD
Sarasota, Florida, 34232
Ronald Aung-Din, MD
Sarasota, Florida, 34232
Sarasota Center for Clinical Research
Sarasota, Florida, 34232
Arthritis & Rheumatic Care Center
South Miami, Florida, 33143
Miami Research Associates
South Miami, Florida, 33143
Neuroscience Consultants, LLC
South Miami, Florida, 33143
Carol L. Pappas MD, PhD
St. Petersburg, Florida, 33713
Carol L. Pappas, M.D. PhD
St. Petersburg, Florida, 33713
Dale G. Bramlet, MD, P.L.
St. Petersburg, Florida, 33713
Tampa Neurology Associates
Tampa, Florida, 33609
Tampa Medical Group, P.A.
Tampa, Florida, 33614
Ohio Research Center
Toledo, Ohio, 43623
Radiology Associates of Venice & Englewood
Venice, Florida, 34285
Lovelace Scientific Resources, Inc
Venice, Florida, 34292
Venice Arthritis Center
Venice, Florida, 34292
About this study
Official title: A PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED MULTICENTER STUDY OF TANEZUMAB ON PERIPHERAL NERVE FUNCTION IN PATIENTS WITH OSTEOARTHRITIS.
Tanezumab reduces pain of osteoarthritis without affecting how nerve impulses are transmitted in sensory nerves.
Read the detailed description
This study was terminated on 16 Nov 2010 following a US FDA clinical hold for tanezumab osteoarthritis clinical studies which halted dosing and enrollment of patients on 23 June 2010 for potential safety issues.
- Conditions
- Osteoarthritis
- Being tested
- tanezumab, Placebo
- Medical subject headings
- Osteoarthritis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
tanezumabBiological
5 mg dose Intravenously every 8 weeks for duration of study
tanezumabBiological
10 mg dose Intravenously every 8 weeks for duration of study
PlaceboOther
Placebo, Intravenously, every 8 weeks for duration of study
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Tanezumab 5 mg | Experimental | Not described Receives: Biological: tanezumab |
| Tanezumab 10 mg | Experimental | Not described Receives: Biological: tanezumab |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Not described Receives: Other: Placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Tests-Normal Deviate and Heart Rate Deep Breathing-Normal Deviate (5NC [nd] + HRdb [nd]) Composite Score at Week 24: Intent to Treat (ITT) Analysis Set
5NC(nd)+HRdb(nd)composite score included 5 Nerve Conduction Studies(NCS)attributes(peroneal motor nerve distal latency [MNDL],peroneal nerve compound muscle action potential[CMAP],peroneal motor nerve conduction velocity[MNCV],tibial MNDL,sural sensory nerve action potential amplitude [SNAP])and HRdb value. Values of attributes scored as percentile(calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics),then expressed as normal deviate(nd)score based on standard normal distribution.Score >0=worse response,less than(<)0=better response compared to normal matched population.Score change>0=worsening,<0=improvement compared to baseline.2 neurological visits(NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. NCS measurements were collected once at each NV.HRdb measurements were collected twice and highest nd score was selected at each NV. Mean of selected measurements at each NV was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Tests-Normal Deviate and Heart Rate Deep Breathing-Normal Deviate (5NC [nd] + HRdb [nd]) Composite Score at Week 24: Per Protocol Analysis Set (PPAS)
5NC(nd)+HRdb(nd)composite score included 5 Nerve Conduction Studies(NCS)attributes(peroneal motor nerve distal latency [MNDL],peroneal nerve compound muscle action potential[CMAP],peroneal motor nerve conduction velocity[MNCV],tibial MNDL,sural sensory nerve action potential amplitude [SNAP])and HRdb value. Values of attributes scored as percentile(calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics),then expressed as normal deviate(nd)score based on standard normal distribution.Score >0=worse response,less than(<)0=better response compared to normal matched population.Score change>0=worsening,<0=improvement compared to baseline.2 neurological visits(NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. NCS measurements were collected once at each NV.HRdb measurements were collected twice and highest nd score was selected at each NV. Mean of selected measurements at each NV was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Secondary outcomes (38)
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score - Lower Limbs [NIS (LL)] at Week 24
NIS-LL: assess muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left and right limbs. Components of muscle weakness (hip and knee flexion, hip and knee extension, ankle dorsiflexors, ankle plantar flexors, toe extensors, toe flexors) scored on scale 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis), higher score=greater weakness. Components of reflexes (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae); sensation (touch pressure, pin-prick, vibration, joint position) scored 0 = normal, 1 = decreased, or 2 = absent. NIS-LL score: sum of scores of NIS items 17-24, 28-29 and 34-37. Total possible NIS-LL score range 0-88, high score = more impairment.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 24
NIS: 74 items, assess muscle weakness, reflexes and sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each side). Components of muscle weakness are 24 items and scored on scale 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis), higher score=greater weakness. Components of reflexes and sensation are 13 items and scored 0 = normal, 1= decreased, or 2 = absent. Total possible NIS score range 0 to 244, higher score = greater impairment.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Symptoms and Change (NSC) Score at Week 24
NSC score is the number of the 38 symptom questions where the participants indicated experiencing the symptom to any severity. Total score range: 0 to 38 where higher score indicated more symptoms. A change from Baseline > 0 indicated some symptoms of peripheral neuropathy.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Compound Muscle Action Potential Amplitude (CMAP) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Peroneal motor nerve compound muscle action potential amplitude (in millivolts) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response than the normal matched population. Score change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the two NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Compound Muscle Action Potential Amplitude (CMAP) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Peroneal motor nerve compound muscle action potential amplitude (in millivolts) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response than the normal matched population. Score change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Conduction Velocity (MNCV) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Peroneal motor nerve conduction velocity (in meters/second) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response than the normal matched population. Score change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Conduction Velocity (MNCV) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Peroneal motor nerve conduction velocity (in meters/second) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response than the normal matched population. Score change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Peroneal motor nerve distal latency (in milliseconds) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score >0 indicated worse response and <0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Score change >0 indicated worsening and <0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Peroneal motor nerve distal latency (in milliseconds) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score >0 indicated worse response and <0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Score change >0 indicated worsening and <0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Tibial Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Tibial motor nerve distal latency (in milliseconds) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score >0 indicated worse response and <0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Score change >0 indicated worsening and <0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Tibial Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Tibial motor nerve distal latency (in milliseconds) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Score >0 indicated worse response and <0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Score change >0 indicated worsening and <0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Sural Sensory Nerve Action Potential Amplitude (SNAP) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Sural sensory nerve action potential amplitude (in microvolts) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. A score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response than the normal matched population. A change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Sural Sensory Nerve Action Potential Amplitude (SNAP) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Sural sensory nerve action potential amplitude (in microvolts) was measured using electromyography of the left lower limb. Values were scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. A score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response than the normal matched population. A change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Heart Rate Deep Breathing [HRdb] at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
HRdb test was used to evaluate the effect of treatment on autonomic function. Participants took a series of 8 deep breaths and average heart rate difference was measured and compared to normative data. R-R (time between two consecutive R waves in the electrocardiogram) response to deep breathing was reported as a normal deviates. Score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Score change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Measurements of HRdb were collected twice and highest nd score was selected at each NV. Mean of the 2 selected NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Heart Rate Deep Breathing [HRdb] at Week 24: PPAS
HRdb test was used to evaluate the effect of treatment on autonomic function. Participants took a series of 8 deep breaths and average heart rate difference was measured and compared to normative data. R-R (time between two consecutive R waves in the electrocardiogram) response to deep breathing was reported as a normal deviates. Score <0 indicated worse response and >0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Score change <0 indicated worsening and >0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Measurements of HRdb were collected twice and highest nd score was selected at each NV. Mean of the 2 selected NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Test - Normal Deviate [5NC (nd)] at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
5NC (nd) score included 5 NCS attributes: peroneal MNDL, CMAP, MNCV, tibial MNDL and sural SNAP. Values of attributes scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Total score calculated as sum of each NCS attribute. Total score >0 indicated worse and <0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Total score change >0 indicated worsening and <0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline. 2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Test - Normal Deviate (5NC [nd]) at Week 24: PPAS
5NC (nd) score included 5 NCS attributes: peroneal MNDL, CMAP, MNCV, tibial MNDL and sural SNAP. Values of attributes scored as percentiles (calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics), then expressed as normal deviate (nd) score based on standard normal distribution. Total score calculated as sum of each NCS attribute. Total score >0 indicated worse and <0 indicated better response as compared to normal matched population. Total score change >0 indicated worsening and <0 indicated improvement as compared to baseline.2 neurological visits (NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. Mean of the 2 NV measurements was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Protein Gene Product (PGP) 9.5-Positive Intraepidermal Epidermal Nerve Fiber (IENF) Density at Week 24
IENF density was quantified in 3 millimeter (mm) immunostained (PGP 9.5-immunohistochemical staining) skin punch biopsies taken from the distal end of the leg, 10 centimeter (cm) above the lateral malleolus, within the territory of the sural nerve, containing epidermis and superficial dermis to evaluate amount of small diameter nerve fibers. Skin biopsies were taken from normal appearing skin and skin having local scar, signs of trauma, ulceration, or active dermatologic process were avoided.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis in the index joint (knee or hip) in the past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
WOMAC physical function subscale is a 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to osteoarthritis in the index joint (knee or hip) in the past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 17 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse function. Total score range for WOMAC physical function subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse function.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in the Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Participants answered: Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants rated their condition using a 5-point scale where 1 = very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities), 2 = good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities), 3 = fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4 = poor (Severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities) and, 5 =very poor (Very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher score indicated severe condition.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
OMERACT-OARSI response: >=50 percent (%) improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of >=2 units in WOMAC pain or physical function subscale, or at least 2 of the following 3 being true: >=20% improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of >=1 unit in 1) WOMAC pain subscale, 2) WOMAC physical function subscale, 3) PGA of osteoarthritis (score: 1-5, higher score=more affected). WOMAC pain, physical function subscales assess amount of pain/difficulty experienced (score: 0-10, higher score=higher pain/difficulty).
Measured: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30%, 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis in the index joint ( knee or hip) in the past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain.
Measured: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Participants answered: Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants rated their condition using a 5-point scale where 1 = very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities), 2 = good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities), 3 = fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4 = poor (Severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities) and, 5 =very poor (Very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher score indicated severe condition.
Measured: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Number of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis in the index joint (knee or hip) in the past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Participants with specified reduction (as percent) from baseline at Week 16 are reported.
Measured: Week 16
Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score in the Index Knee/Hip Joint at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24
Participants assessed daily average index joint pain during the past 24 hours on an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). Higher score indicated greater pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
The WOMAC stiffness subscale is a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to osteoarthritis in the index joint (knee or hip) in the past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 2 individual questions scored on NRS of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating more stiffness. Total score range for WOMAC stiffness subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate more stiffness. Stiffness was defined as a sensation of decreased ease of movement in the index joint (knee or hip).
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain (5 items), stiffness (2 items) and physical function (17 items) in participants with osteoarthritis of knee or hip. WOMAC average score is the mean of WOMAC Pain, Physical Function and Stiffness subscale scores and ranges from 0 to 10, where higher score indicates worse response. Change from baseline <0 indicates an improvement.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Participants answered: "How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?". Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain. Higher score indicated greater pain. Change from baseline <0 indicated an improvement.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Participants answered: How much pain have you had when going up or down stairs?. Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain. Higher score indicated greater pain. Change from baseline <0 indicates an improvement.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Domain Scores at Week 24
SF-36v2 is a self-administered questionnaire evaluating 8 aspects/domains of functional health and wellbeing: physical function, role physical, bodily pain, vitality, general health, social function, role emotional and mental health. The total score for each domain is scaled 0-100 (100 = highest level of functioning). Change from baseline >0 indicates an improvement.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical and Mental Component Scores at Week 24
SF-36v2 is a self-administered questionnaire evaluating 8 aspects/domains of functional health and wellbeing: physical function, role physical, bodily pain, vitality, general health, social function, role emotional and mental health. Total score for each aspect were scaled 0-100(100=highest level of functioning). For obtaining physical and mental component scores, z-score for each scale=(observed score - mean score for general 1990 United States [US] population)/corresponding standard deviation. The 2 component scores were obtained by multiplying each aspect z-score by physical or mental factor score coefficient (1990 general US population) and summing the eight products. Component scores indicated how many standard deviations higher (in case of positive z-score [better functioning])/lower (in case of negative z-score [worse functioning]) participant's value was relative to the mean of the reference population. Change from baseline >0 indicates an improvement.
Measured: Baseline, Week 24
Number of Participants With Rescue Medication Usage
In case of inadequate pain relief for osteoarthritis during the treatment period, acetaminophen up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days per week could be taken as rescue medication.
Measured: Week 8, 16, 24
Number of Days With Rescue Medication Usage
In case of inadequate pain relief for osteoarthritis during the treatment period, acetaminophen up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days per week could be taken as rescue medication. Result reported is number of days of rescue medication use in each week, and ranges from 0 to 7.
Measured: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Amount of Rescue Medication Used
In case of inadequate pain relief for osteoarthritis during the treatment period, acetaminophen up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days per week could be taken as rescue medication. Results reported is total dose of acetaminophen (in mg) for each week.
Measured: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA)
Human serum samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using the semiquantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Same participant may have positive ADA result at more than 1 time point.
Measured: pre-dose on Day 1 (Baseline), Week 8, 16, 24, 32
Plasma Trough Concentration of Tanezumab
Plasma trough concentration of tanezumab was measured using a validated, sensitive and specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
Measured: pre-dose on Day 1 (Baseline), Weeks 8, 16, 24, and 32
Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and 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. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the 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. AEs included both serious AEs and non-serious AEs.
Measured: Baseline through 112 days after last Intravenous dose of Investigational product to last participant treated with study medication on study (up to Week 32 after last IV dose of investigational product to last participant treated)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Mar 2009 (estimated)
- Study start18 May 2009
- Primary completion16 Nov 2010
- Study completion16 Nov 2010
Why it stopped: See termination reason in detailed description.
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 (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for OsteoarthritisStudies 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 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 220 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
- NCT00863772
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A4091026
- Other IDs
- NERVE SAFETY STUDY
- Status last verified
- Dec 2020
- First submitted
- 17 Mar 2009
- Last updated
- 4 Feb 2021
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- 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
Brown MT, Cornblath DR, Koltzenburg M, Gorson KC, Hickman A, Pixton GC, Gaitonde P, Viktrup L, West CR. Peripheral Nerve Safety of Nerve Growth Factor Inhibition by Tanezumab: Pooled Analyses of Phase III Clinical Studies in Over 5000 Patients with Osteoarthritis. Clin Drug Investig. 2023 Jul;43(7):551-563. doi: 10.1007/s40261-023-01286-3. Epub 2023 Jul 18.
PubMed 37460782Tive L, Bello AE, Radin D, Schnitzer TJ, Nguyen H, Brown MT, West CR. Pooled analysis of tanezumab efficacy and safety with subgroup analyses of phase III clinical trials in patients with osteoarthritis pain of the knee or hip. J Pain Res. 2019 Mar 19;12:975-995. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S191297. eCollection 2019.
PubMed 30936738Brown MT, Herrmann DN, Goldstein M, Burr AM, Smith MD, West CR, Verburg KM, Dyck PJ. Nerve safety of tanezumab, a nerve growth factor inhibitor for pain treatment. J Neurol Sci. 2014 Oct 15;345(1-2):139-47. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2014.07.028. Epub 2014 Jul 18.
PubMed 25073573
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Feb 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED MULTICENTER STUDY OF TANEZUMAB ON PERIPHERAL NERVE FUNCTION IN PATIENTS WITH OSTEOARTHRITIS.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00863772
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- A4091026
- Conditions
- Osteoarthritis
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: See termination reason in detailed description.
- Enrolment
- 220 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- PfizerIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- 18 May 2009 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 16 Nov 2010 (actual)
- Study completion
- 16 Nov 2010 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Mar 2009 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 4 Feb 2021
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Tanezumab reduces pain of osteoarthritis without affecting how nerve impulses are transmitted in sensory nerves.
Detailed description
This study was terminated on 16 Nov 2010 following a US FDA clinical hold for tanezumab osteoarthritis clinical studies which halted dosing and enrollment of patients on 23 June 2010 for potential safety issues.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Tanezumab 5 mg | Experimental | Biological: tanezumab |
| Tanezumab 10 mg | Experimental | Biological: tanezumab |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Other: Placebo |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 99 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- BMI less or equal to 39 kg/m2
- Osteoarthritis (arthritis) of the knee or hip with pain score that qualifies
- Willing to comply with study visit schedule and study requirements, including, for women of child-bearing potential or male patients with female partners of child-bearing potential, the use of 2 forms of birth control, one of which is a barrier method.
- Patients must consent in writing to participate in the study.
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Untreated, uncontrolled diseases,
- Unwilling or unable to discontinue the use of prohibited medications, including other pain medications, during the screening period and during the study,
- Significant cardiac disease within the past 6 months
- Significant neurological disease (e.g. peripheral neuropathy, multiple sclerosis, stroke) or signs of neuropathy at screening
- Known bleeding disorder or anticoagulation therapy
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 |
|---|---|---|
| tanezumab5 mg dose Intravenously every 8 weeks for duration of study | Biological | Tanezumab 5 mg |
| tanezumab10 mg dose Intravenously every 8 weeks for duration of study | Biological | Tanezumab 10 mg |
| PlaceboPlacebo, Intravenously, every 8 weeks for duration of study | Other | Placebo |
Primary outcome
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Tests-Normal Deviate and Heart Rate Deep Breathing-Normal Deviate (5NC [nd] + HRdb [nd]) Composite Score at Week 24: Intent to Treat (ITT) Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
5NC(nd)+HRdb(nd)composite score included 5 Nerve Conduction Studies(NCS)attributes(peroneal motor nerve distal latency [MNDL],peroneal nerve compound muscle action potential[CMAP],peroneal motor nerve conduction velocity[MNCV],tibial MNDL,sural sensory nerve action potential amplitude [SNAP])and HRdb value. Values of attributes scored as percentile(calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics),then expressed as normal deviate(nd)score based on standard normal distribution.Score >0=worse response,less than(<)0=better response compared to normal matched population.Score change>0=worsening,<0=improvement compared to baseline.2 neurological visits(NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. NCS measurements were collected once at each NV.HRdb measurements were collected twice and highest nd score was selected at each NV. Mean of selected measurements at each NV was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Tests-Normal Deviate and Heart Rate Deep Breathing-Normal Deviate (5NC [nd] + HRdb [nd]) Composite Score at Week 24: Per Protocol Analysis Set (PPAS)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
5NC(nd)+HRdb(nd)composite score included 5 Nerve Conduction Studies(NCS)attributes(peroneal motor nerve distal latency [MNDL],peroneal nerve compound muscle action potential[CMAP],peroneal motor nerve conduction velocity[MNCV],tibial MNDL,sural sensory nerve action potential amplitude [SNAP])and HRdb value. Values of attributes scored as percentile(calculated from distribution of normal values corresponding to participant's baseline demographic characteristics),then expressed as normal deviate(nd)score based on standard normal distribution.Score >0=worse response,less than(<)0=better response compared to normal matched population.Score change>0=worsening,<0=improvement compared to baseline.2 neurological visits(NVs) were conducted both at baseline and Week 24. NCS measurements were collected once at each NV.HRdb measurements were collected twice and highest nd score was selected at each NV. Mean of selected measurements at each NV was calculated to obtain Baseline and Week 24 values.
38 secondary outcomes
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score - Lower Limbs [NIS (LL)] at Week 24
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 24
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Symptoms and Change (NSC) Score at Week 24
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Compound Muscle Action Potential Amplitude (CMAP) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Compound Muscle Action Potential Amplitude (CMAP) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Conduction Velocity (MNCV) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Conduction Velocity (MNCV) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Peroneal Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Tibial Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Tibial Motor Nerve Distal Latency (MNDL) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Sural Sensory Nerve Action Potential Amplitude (SNAP) Score at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Sural Sensory Nerve Action Potential Amplitude (SNAP) Score at Week 24: PPAS
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Heart Rate Deep Breathing [HRdb] at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Heart Rate Deep Breathing [HRdb] at Week 24: PPAS
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Test - Normal Deviate [5NC (nd)] at Week 24: ITT Analysis Set
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in 5 Nerve Conduction Test - Normal Deviate (5NC [nd]) at Week 24: PPAS
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Protein Gene Product (PGP) 9.5-Positive Intraepidermal Epidermal Nerve Fiber (IENF) Density at Week 24
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in the Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30%, 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Number of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Time frame: Week 16
Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score in the Index Knee/Hip Joint at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Domain Scores at Week 24
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical and Mental Component Scores at Week 24
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Number of Participants With Rescue Medication Usage
Time frame: Week 8, 16, 24
Number of Days With Rescue Medication Usage
Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Amount of Rescue Medication Used
Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA)
Time frame: pre-dose on Day 1 (Baseline), Week 8, 16, 24, 32
Plasma Trough Concentration of Tanezumab
Time frame: pre-dose on Day 1 (Baseline), Weeks 8, 16, 24, and 32
Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
Time frame: Baseline through 112 days after last Intravenous dose of Investigational product to last participant treated with study medication on study (up to Week 32 after last IV dose of investigational product to last participant treated)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Feb 2021.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37460782Brown MT, Cornblath DR, Koltzenburg M, Gorson KC, Hickman A, Pixton GC, Gaitonde P, Viktrup L, West CR. Peripheral Nerve Safety of Nerve Growth Factor Inhibition by Tanezumab: Pooled Analyses of Phase III Clinical Studies in Over 5000 Patients with Osteoarthritis. Clin Drug Investig. 2023 Jul;43(7):551-563. doi: 10.1007/s40261-023-01286-3. Epub 2023 Jul 18.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30936738Tive L, Bello AE, Radin D, Schnitzer TJ, Nguyen H, Brown MT, West CR. Pooled analysis of tanezumab efficacy and safety with subgroup analyses of phase III clinical trials in patients with osteoarthritis pain of the knee or hip. J Pain Res. 2019 Mar 19;12:975-995. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S191297. eCollection 2019.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25073573Brown MT, Herrmann DN, Goldstein M, Burr AM, Smith MD, West CR, Verburg KM, Dyck PJ. Nerve safety of tanezumab, a nerve growth factor inhibitor for pain treatment. J Neurol Sci. 2014 Oct 15;345(1-2):139-47. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2014.07.028. Epub 2014 Jul 18.
- To obtain contact information for a study center near you, click here.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: 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.
Related trials for Osteoarthritis
Recruiting
Oral Nutritional Optimization in Total Joint Arthroplasty
Osteoarthritis
Not yet recruiting
Opioid Reduction and Enhanced Recovery in Orthopaedic Surgery (OREOS)-Knee
Knee Arthroplasty, Total, Partial Knee Arthroplasty
Recruiting
Trans-arterial Embolization for the Treatment of Facet Pain Due to Facet Arthropathy
Facet Joint Arthropathy, Pain
Not yet recruiting
Hybrid Closed Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy
Patello-femoral Osteoarthritis
Recruiting
Effects of Graded Motor Imagery in Individuals With Foot/Ankle Osteoarthritis
Ankle Osteoarthritis, Foot Osteoarthritis
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
97 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing tanezumab in people with Osteoarthritis, run by Pfizer at 97 sites in United States.
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 4 inclusion and 13 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: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Feb 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 97 sites in United States. 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 4 Feb 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 5 Nerve Conduction Tests-Normal Deviate and Heart Rate Deep Breathing-Normal Deviate (5NC [nd] + HRdb [nd]) Composite Score at Week 24: Intent to Treat (ITT) Analysis Set (time frame: Baseline, Week 24). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT00863772, which also lists 3 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 4 Feb 2021.