AzTrials
AzTrials

Rheumatoid ArthritisPhase 2NCT00902486

INCB028050 Compared to Background Therapy in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) With Inadequate Response to Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs

A Phase 2 study testing INCB028050 in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by Incyte Corporation at 49 sites in 2 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

This was a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled, dose ranging, parallel group study. Participants who had active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had inadequate response to any disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy including biologics were enrolled. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Rheumatoid Arthritis
What is being tested?
INCB028050
Type of treatment
Pill or oral medicine
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
127 participants
Where
49 sitesin 2 countries
Study dates
May 2009to Jul 2010
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

  • Must have rheumatoid arthritis which has been inadequately controlled with at least one DMARD
  • For subjects receiving antimalarials, they must be treated with antimalarials for at least 6 months and receiving a stable daily dose
  • For subjects receiving sulfasalazine, they must be treated with Sulfasalazine (SSZ) for at least 6 months and receiving a stable daily dose of no more than 3 grams per day
  • For subjects on methotrexate, they must be treated with methotrexate for at least 6 months, and receiving a stable weekly dose of methotrexate between 7.5 and 25 mg
  • For subjects on leflunomide, they must be treated with leflunomide for at least 6 months, and receiving a stable dose of leflunomide between 10 to 20 mg
  • For subjects receiving corticosteroids, they must be on a dose not to exceed 10 mg of prednisone daily
  • Active rheumatoid arthritis at the time of screening defined by the following: 6 or more joints tender or painful on motion and 4 or more swollen joints and at least one of the following two: Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) greater than or equal to 28 mm/hr or C-reactive protein (CRP) greater than or equal to 7 mg/liter
  • Have evidence of lack of risk for tuberculosis

Who cannot join

  • Current or recent viral, bacterial, fungal, parasitic or mycobacterial infection requiring systemic therapy
  • History of infected joint prosthesis
  • Subjects who have a current or recent history of severe, progressive, uncontrolled renal, hepatic, hematological, gastrointestinal, pulmonary, cardiac, neurological or cerebral disease
  • Subjects who have received treatment with the following drugs or drug classes within the specified timeframe: prior treatment with rituximab within 12 months, prior treatment with an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, DMARDs or other anti-rheumatic therapies not specified and allowed according to protocol, treatment with any investigational medication within 12 weeks or 5 half-lives (whichever is longer), and treatment with a biologic agent within 12 weeks prior to the first dose of study medication
  • Subjects with a past history of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia or anemia requiring transfusion other than at the time of trauma or surgery, and subjects that meet protocol specified laboratory measures

Trial locations and contacts

49 sites in 2 countries.

49 sites in 2 countries

United States41 sites
  • Study site

    Arlington, Virginia

  • Study site

    Aventura, Florida

  • Study site

    Birmingham, Alabama

  • Study site

    Charlotte, North Carolina

  • Study site

    Daytona Beach, Florida

  • Study site

    Denver, Colorado

  • Study site

    Duncansville, Pennsylvania

  • Study site

    Frederick, Maryland

  • Study site

    Freehold, New Jersey

  • Study site

    Gainesville, Florida

  • Study site

    Hickory, North Carolina

  • Study site

    Houston, Texas

  • Study site

    Lake Mary, Florida

  • Study site

    Lake Success, New York

  • Study site

    Lexington, Kentucky

  • Study site

    Lincoln, Nebraska

  • Study site

    Middleburg Heights, Ohio

  • Study site

    Naples, Florida

  • Study site

    Palm Desert, California

  • Study site

    Palm Harbor, Florida

  • Study site

    Paradise Valley, Arizona

  • Study site

    Peoria, Arizona

  • Study site

    Phoenix, Arizona

  • Study site

    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

  • Study site

    Reno, Nevada

  • Study site

    San Antonio, Texas

  • Study site

    Santa Maria, California

  • Study site

    Santa Monica, California

  • Study site

    Sarasota, Florida

  • Study site

    Sellersville, Pennsylvania

  • Study site

    South Bend, Indiana

  • Study site

    Spokane, Washington

  • Study site

    Springfield, Illinois

  • Study site

    St Louis, Missouri

  • Study site

    Syracuse, New York

  • Study site

    Toledo, Ohio

  • Study site

    Tulsa, Oklahoma

  • Study site

    Westlake Village, California

  • Study site

    Wheaton, Maryland

  • Study site

    Whittier, California

  • Study site

    Wichita, Kansas

Other trials in United States

Czechia8 sites
  • Study site

    Brno

  • Study site

    Česká Lípa

  • Study site

    Chomutov

  • Study site

    Hlučín

  • Study site

    Hustopeče

  • Study site

    Kroměříž

  • Study site

    Prague

  • Study site

    Zlín

Other trials in Czechia

About this study

Official title: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled, Dose Ranging, Parallel Group, Phase 2 Study of INCB028050 Compared to Background Therapy in Patients With Active RA With Inadequate Response to Any Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARD) Therapy Including Biologics

This was a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled, dose ranging, parallel group study. Participants who had active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had inadequate response to any disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy including biologics were enrolled. Screening evaluations were performed within approximately 28 days of randomization. The duration of the study was 6 months with the primary endpoint assessed at 3 months. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to one of three doses (4, 7 or 10 mg QD) of INCB028050 (Baricitinib) or placebo.

Being tested
INCB028050, Placebo
Keywords
Rheumatoid arthritis
Medical subject headings
Arthritis, Rheumatoid

What participants receive

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

  • INCB028050Drug

    Also called Baricitinib

    4 mg capsules QD

  • INCB028050Drug

    Also called Baricitinib

    7 mg capsules QD

  • INCB028050Drug

    Also called Baricitinib

    10 mg capsule QD

  • PlaceboDrug

    Placebo matching INCB028050 QD

Study groups in NCT00902486
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
INCB028050 4 mg QDExperimentalINCB028050 4mg Once daily (QD)
Receives: Drug: INCB028050
INCB028050 7 mg QDExperimentalINCB028050 7mg QD
Receives: Drug: INCB028050
INCB028050 10 mg QDExperimentalINCB028050 10mg QD
Receives: Drug: INCB028050
PlaceboPlacebo comparatorPlacebo group may 'cross-over' following 3 months of treatment to receive either active arm #2 (7mg QD) or active arm #3 (10mg QD) of INCB028050 capsules.
Receives: Drug: Placebo

What is being measured

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

  1. The Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Improvement

    The ACR 20 is defined as ≥ 20% improvement in tender joint count plus ≥ 20% improvement in swollen joint count plus ≥ 20% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: participants' assessment of pain, participants' global assessment of disease activity (PGA), Physician's global assessment of disease activity (PHGA), participants' self-assessed disability Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) or C-reactive protein (CRP), whichever shows the greatest change.

    Measured: Week 12

  2. Participants With at Least 1 Adverse Event From Baseline Through Week 12

    Measured: From Baseline through week 12

Secondary outcomes (28)
  1. Participants With at Least 1 Adverse Event From Week 12 to Week 24

    Measured: Week 12 to Week 24

  2. The Percentage of Participants Who Were Assigned to Active Treatment at Baseline Achieving ACR 20 Improvement at Week 24

    The ACR 20 is defined as ≥ 20% improvement in tender joint count plus ≥ 20% improvement in swollen joint count plus ≥ 20% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: participants' assessment of pain, participants' global assessment of disease activity (PGA), Physician's global assessment of disease activity (PHGA), participants' self-assessed disability Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) or C-reactive protein (CRP), whichever shows the greatest change.

    Measured: From Baseline to Week 24

  3. The Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Improvement at Week 12 and Week 24

    The ACR 50 is defined as ≥ 50% improvement in tender joint count plus ≥ 50% improvement in swollen joint count plus ≥50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: participants' assessment of pain, PGA, PHGA, participants' self-assessed disability HAQ, and ESR or CRP, whichever shows the greatest change.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  4. The Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Improvement at Week 12 and Week 24

    The ACR 70 is defined as ≥ 70% improvement in tender joint count plus ≥ 70% improvement in swollen joint count plus ≥ 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: participants' assessment of pain, PGA, PHGA, participants' self-assessed disability HAQ, and ESR or CRP, whichever shows the greatest change.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  5. The Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 90 Improvement at Week 12 and Week 24

    The ACR 90 is defined greater than or equal to (>=) 90 percent (%) improvement in painful and tender joint count; >= 90% improvement in swollen joint count; 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 Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP) at each visit.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  6. Change in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) CRP Score From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    Calculation of the disease activity score 28 (DAS 28) score was based on the tender joint count, plus swollen joint count, plus PGA, plus C-reactive protein (CRP). A higher score indicated more disease activity. The mean change from baseline (which represent decreases in the DAS 28 CRP scores) are shown as positive numbers in these analyses. The DAS28 provides a score on a scale from 0 to 10 indicating the current activity of the rheumatoid arthritis (>5.1=high disease activity; <3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=remission).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  7. Change in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) ESR Score From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    Calculation of the disease activity score 28 (DAS 28) score was based on the tender joint count, plus swollen joint count, plus PGA, plus Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). The DAS28-ESR is expressed as units on a scale with the minimum score=0 (best) to maximum score=10 (worst). Remission was defined as DAS28-ESR <2.6. The mean change from baseline (which represent decreases in the DAS 28 ESR scores) are shown as positive numbers in these analyses.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  8. Percentage of Participants Achieving Low Disease Activity by DAS28 (ESR)≤3.2

    Participants who achieved low disease activity based on the DAS 28 ESR (score ≤3.2). Participants who achieved low disease activity were classified as responders in this analysis.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  9. Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission by DAS28 (ESR) ≤2.6

    Participants who achieved inactive disease based on the DAS 28 ESR (score ≤2.6). Participants who achieved low disease activity were classified as responders in this analysis.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  10. Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission by DAS28 (CRP) ≤2.6

    Participants who achieved inactive disease based on DAS 28 CRP (score ≤2.6). Participants who achieved low disease activity were classified as responders in this analysis.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  11. Change in ACR Assessment Tender Joint Count (TJC) From Baseline to Week 12 and Week 24

    The 28 joints to be assessed for tenderness and swelling were shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints 1-5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of tender joints ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  12. Change in ACR Assessment Swollen Joint Count (SJC) From Baseline to Week 12 and Week 24

    The 28 joints to be assessed for tenderness and swelling were shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints 1-5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of tender joints ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  13. Change in Participants' Assessment of Pain From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    Participants were to assess their current level of pain on a 100 mm horizontal Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as "no pain" and the right-hand (100 mm) as "most imaginable pain".

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  14. Change in Participants' Global Assessment of Disease Activity From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    Participants were to assess the disease (RA) activity on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as "no arthritis activity" (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as "extremely active arthritis" (maximum arthritis disease activity). A decreasing mean score, therefore, indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  15. Change in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PGA) From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    Physicians were to assess the disease (RA) activity on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as "no arthritis activity" (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as "extremely active arthritis" (maximum arthritis disease activity). A decreasing mean score, therefore, indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  16. Change in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    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 12 and Week 24

  17. Change in Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    ESR is a laboratory test that provides a non-specific measure of inflammation. The test assesses the rate at which red blood cells fall in a test tube. Normal range is 0-30 millimeter/hour (mm/hr). A higher rate is consistent with inflammation.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  18. Change in C-reactive Protein (CRP) From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  19. Change in Duration of Morning Stiffness From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    Duration of morning stiffness was defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and was able to resume normal activities without stiffness in minutes (If none was present = 0; If morning stiffness was continuing at the time of assessment or was unusual compared to the recent past, average of duration of stiffness over the past 3 days was reported; If stiffness persisted the entire day, 1440 minutes was recorded).

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  20. Percentage of Participants Achieving Good European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response (DAS28 ESR) at Week 12

    EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score. A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.

    Measured: Week 12

  21. Percentage of Participants Achieving Good EULAR Response (DAS28ESR) at Week 24

    EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score. A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 3.2.

    Measured: Week 24

  22. Percentage of Participants Achieving Good EULAR Response (DAS28CRP) at Week 12

    EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score. A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 2.6.

    Measured: Week 12

  23. Percentage of Participants Achieving Good EULAR Response (DAS28CRP) at Week 24

    EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS-28 score. A Good Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of more than 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score less than or equal to 2.6.

    Measured: Week 24

  24. Change in SF-36 Mental Component Summary From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    The Health Assessment Questionnaire Short Form 36 (SF-36) determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Scales 5-8 primarily contribute to the mental component summary score (PCS) of the SF-36. Scores on each scale are summed and averaged (range = 0 "worst"-100 "best").

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  25. Change in SF-36 Physical Component Summary From Baseline at Week 12 and Week 24

    The Health Assessment Questionnaire Short Form 36 (SF-36) determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Scales 1-4 primarily contribute to the physical component summary score (PCS) of the SF-36. Scores on each scale are summed and averaged (range = 0 "worst"-100 "best").

    Measured: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24

  26. Percent of Participants Achieving a Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 12 and Week 24

    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. The MCID score for HAQ-DI is -0.22.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  27. Percent of Participants Achieving a MCID in the Pain Score (Participant's Assessment of Pain) at Week 12 and Week 24

    Participants were to assess their current level of pain on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as "no pain" and the right-hand (100 mm) as "most imaginable pain". MCID for the pain score is a decrease of at least 10 mm on a 100 mm scale.

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

  28. Percent of Participants Achieving a MCID in the SF-36 Physical Components and Mental Components at Week 12 and Week 24

    The Health Assessment Questionnaire Short Form 36 (SF-36) determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Scales 5-8 primarily contribute to the mental component summary score (PCS) of the SF-36. Scores on each scale are summed and averaged (range = 0 "worst"-100 "best").

    Measured: Week 12 and Week 24

Timeline

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

  1. First posted15 May 2009 (estimated)
  2. Study startMay 2009
  3. Primary completionJun 2010
  4. Study completionJul 2010

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
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Investigator
Enrolment
127 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00902486
Sponsor's protocol ID
INCB 28050-201
Status last verified
Aug 2018
First submitted
13 May 2009
Last updated
4 Sep 2018
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Taylor PC, Takeuchi T, Burmester GR, Durez P, Smolen JS, Deberdt W, Issa M, Terres JR, Bello N, Winthrop KL. Safety of baricitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis over a median of 4.6 and up to 9.3 years of treatment: final results from long-term extension study and integrated database. Ann Rheum Dis. 2022 Mar;81(3):335-343. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-221276. Epub 2021 Oct 27.

    PubMed 34706874
  • Combe B, Balsa A, Sarzi-Puttini P, Tony HP, de la Torre I, Rogai V, Durand F, Witt S, Zhong J, Dougados M. Efficacy and safety data based on historical or pre-existing conditions at baseline for patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who were treated with baricitinib. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019 Aug;78(8):1135-1138. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214261. Epub 2019 Mar 6. No abstract available.

    PubMed 30842122
  • Taylor PC, Kremer JM, Emery P, Zuckerman SH, Ruotolo G, Zhong J, Chen L, Witt S, Saifan C, Kurzawa M, Otvos JD, Connelly MA, Macias WL, Schlichting DE, Rooney TP, de Bono S, McInnes IB. Lipid profile and effect of statin treatment in pooled phase II and phase III baricitinib studies. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Jul;77(7):988-995. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-212461. Epub 2018 Feb 20.

    PubMed 29463520

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing INCB028050 in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by Incyte Corporation at 49 sites in 2 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 8 inclusion and 5 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 4 Sep 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 49 sites in United States, Czechia. 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 4 Sep 2018). 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?

The Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Improvement (time frame: Week 12). 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 NCT00902486, 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 Sep 2018.

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