AzTrials
AzTrials

Arthritis, RheumatoidPhase 3NCT00960440

Study of CP-690,550 Versus Placebo In Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients On Background Methotrexate With Inadequate Response To Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) Inhibitors

A Phase 3 study testing CP-690,550 in people with Arthritis, Rheumatoid, run by Pfizer at 92 sites in 14 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 study will test if CP-690,550 is safe and effective in rheumatoid arthritis patients taking methotrexate who have an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitor treatment. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
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
399 participants
Where
92 sitesin 14 countries
Study dates
Oct 2009to Mar 2011
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 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Adults with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis on a stable dose of methotrexate who have inadequate response to Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) inhibitors.

Who cannot join

  • Pregnancy, severe acute or chronic medical conditions, including serious infections or clinically significant laboratory abnormalities.

Trial locations and contacts

92 sites in 14 countries.

92 sites in 14 countries

United States36 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Atlanta, Georgia, 30342

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Aventura, Florida, 33180

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, 18015-1153

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Birmingham, Alabama, 35294

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Boise, Idaho, 83702

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Cumberland, Maryland, 21502

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Dallas, Texas, 75231

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Dallas, Texas, 75246

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Farmington, Connecticut, 06030-5353

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Flowood, Mississippi, 39232

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Fort Worth, Texas, 76107

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Hixson, Tennessee, 37343

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Houston, Texas, 77034

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Idaho Falls, Idaho, 83404

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Indianapolis, Indiana, 46227

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Knoxville, Tennessee, 37909

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Lebanon, New Hampshire, 03756

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Los Angeles, California, 90033

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Los Angeles, California, 90095

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Lubbock, Texas, 79424

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Nashville, Tennessee, 37203

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    New Orleans, Louisiana, 70115

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Portland, Maine, 04102

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Rocky Mount, North Carolina, 27804

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    San Diego, California, 92108

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Springfield, Illinois, 62704

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Tampa, Florida, 33614

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Trumbull, Connecticut, 06611

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Tupelo, Mississippi, 38801

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Vancouver, Washington, 98664

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Vancouver, Washington, 98684

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Vancouver, Washington, 98686

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Voorhees Township, New Jersey, 08043

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Willow Grove, Pennsylvania, 19090

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Worcester, Massachusetts, 01610

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Wyomissing, Pennsylvania, 19610

Other trials in United States

Germany10 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Berlin, 10117

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Berlin, 14163

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Cologne, 50937

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Erlangen, 91054

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Frankfurt am Main, 60590

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Halle, 06108

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Hamburg, 22081

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Leipzig, 04103

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Rheine, 48431

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Würzburg, 97080

Other trials in Germany

Spain7 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Barakaldo, Vizcaya, 48903

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Bilbao, Bizkaia, 48013

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Madrid, 28007

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Mérida, Badajoz, 06800

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Santander, Cantabria, 39008

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, 15705

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Valencia, 46017

Other trials in Spain

Canada6 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 1Y2

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 2B6

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Montreal, Quebec, H2L 1S6

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 1A2

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Pointe-Claire, Quebec, H9R 3J1

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3A 1M3

Other trials in Canada

France6 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Amiens, 80054

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Lyon

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Orléans, 45000

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Orléans, 45032

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Paris, 75014

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Paris

Other trials in France

Austria4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Vienna, 1090

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Vienna, 1100

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Vienna, A-1100

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Vienna

Other trials in Austria

Belgium4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Genk, 3600

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Hasselt, 3500

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Kortrijk

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Liège, 4020

Other trials in Belgium

Brazil4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Curitiba, Paraná, 80060-240

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Goiânia, Goiás, 74110-120

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, 90610-000

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    São Paulo, São Paulo, 04266-010

Other trials in Brazil

Taiwan4 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Changhua, 500

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Kaohsiung City, 813

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Kweishan, Taoyuan County, 333

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Niao Sung Hsiang, Kaohsiung County, 833

Other trials in Taiwan

Australia3 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Daw Park, South Australia, 5041

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Heidelberg, Victoria, 3081

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Kogarah, New South Wales, 2217

Other trials in Australia

South Korea3 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Busan, 602-715

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Daegu, 705-718

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Seoul, 135-720

Other trials in South Korea

Ireland2 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Croom, Co. Limerick

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Dublin, 4

Other trials in Ireland

Italy2 sites
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Florence, 50139

  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    Iesi

Other trials in Italy

Puerto Rico1 site
  • Pfizer Investigational Site

    San Juan, 00910

Other trials in Puerto Rico

About this study

Official title: Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study Of The Safety And Efficacy Of 2 Doses Of CP-690,550 In Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis On Background Methotrexate With Inadequate Response To TNF Inhibitors

This study will test if CP-690,550 is safe and effective in rheumatoid arthritis patients taking methotrexate who have an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitor treatment.

Being tested
CP-690,550, Placebo
Keywords
randomized double-blind placebo-controlled investigational drug oral therapy safety and efficacy
Medical subject headings
Arthritis, Rheumatoid

What participants receive

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

  • CP-690,550Drug

    Oral tablets administered at 5 mg BID daily for 6 months during the double-blind, placebo-controlled period.

  • CP-690,550Drug

    Oral tablets administered at 10 mg BID daily for 6 months during the double-blind, placebo-controlled period.

  • PlaceboDrug

    Also called double-blind, placebo-controlled phase

    Oral placebo tablets administered BID daily during the first 3 months of the double-blind, study period.

  • CP-690,550Drug

    Also called double-blind, extension phase

    Oral tablets administered at 5 mg BID daily during the second 3 months of the double-blind, study period.

  • PlaceboDrug

    Also called double-blind, placebo-controlled phase

    Oral placebo tablets administered BID daily during the first 3 months of the double-blind, placebo-controlled period.

  • CP-690,550Drug

    Also called double-blind, extension phase

    Oral tablets administered at 10 mg BID daily during the second 3 months of the double-blind, study period.

Study groups in NCT00960440
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Sequence 1ExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
Sequence 2ExperimentalNot described
Receives: Drug: CP-690,550
Sequence 3Placebo comparatorNot described
Receives: Drug: Placebo; Drug: CP-690,550
Sequence 4Placebo comparatorNot described
Receives: Drug: Placebo; 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 Month 3

    ACR20 response: greater than or equal to (>=) 20 percent (%) improvement in tender joints count (TJC); >= 20% improvement in swollen joints 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). For comparison of CP-690,550 with placebo, placebo sequences were combined into single reporting group for Month 3 analysis.

    Measured: Month 3

  2. Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Month 3

    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;common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3:0=no difficulty;1=some difficulty;2=much difficulty;3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3:0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. For comparison of CP-690,550 with placebo, placebo sequences were combined into single reporting group for Month 3 analysis.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  3. Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [ESR]) Less Than 2.6 at Month 3

    DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)(millimeter/hour [mm/hour]) and patient's global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range:0-9.4, higher score=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, less than (<)2.6=remission. For comparison of CP-690,550 with placebo, placebo sequences were combined into single reporting group for Month 3 analysis.

    Measured: Month 3

Secondary outcomes (40)
  1. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Week 2 and Month 1

    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 2, Month 1

  2. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Month 4.5 and 6

    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: Month 4.5, 6

  3. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response at Week 2, Month 1 and 3

    ACR50 response: >= 50% improvement in TJC or SJC 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 2, Month 1, 3

  4. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response at Month 4.5 and 6

    ACR50 response: >= 50% improvement in TJC or SJC 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: Month 4.5 and 6

  5. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response at Week 2, Month 1 and 3

    ACR70 response: >=70% improvement in TJC or SJC 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 2, Month 1, 3

  6. Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response at Month 4.5 and 6

    ACR70 response: >=70% improvement in TJC or SJC 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: Month 4.5, 6

  7. Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and C-Reactive Protein (3 Variables) (DAS28-3 [CRP]) at Baseline, Week 2, Month 1 and 3

    DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3 (CRP) <=3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-3 (CRP) <2.6 = remission.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, Month 1, 3

  8. Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and C-Reactive Protein (3 Variables) (DAS28-3 [CRP]) at Month 4.5 and 6

    DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using the 28 joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to 9.4, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3 (CRP) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-3 (CRP) <2.6 = remission.

    Measured: Month 4.5, 6

  9. Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [ESR]) at Baseline and Month 3

    DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and PtGA of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0-9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4 (ESR) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-4 (ESR) <2.6 = remission.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  10. Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joints Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [ESR]) at Month 6

    DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and PtGA of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0-9.4, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4 (ESR) <= 3.2 implied low disease activity and >3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate to high disease activity, and DAS28-4 (ESR) <2.6 = remission.

    Measured: Month 6

  11. Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 2, Month 1 and 3

    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; common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3:0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3:0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty.

    Measured: Week 2, Month 1, 3

  12. Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Month 4.5 and 6

    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; common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3:0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3:0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty.

    Measured: Month 4.5, 6

  13. Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Baseline, Week 2, Month 1 and 3

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

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, Month 1, 3

  14. Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Month 4.5 and 6

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

    Measured: Month 4.5, 6

  15. Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis Pain at Baseline, Week 2, Month 1 and 3

    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 mm = very well and 100 mm = very poorly.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, Month 1, 3

  16. Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis Pain at Month 4.5 and 6

    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 mm = very well and 100 mm = very poorly.

    Measured: Month 4.5, 6

  17. Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Baseline, Week 2, Month 1 and 3

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

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, Month 1, 3

  18. Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Month 4.5 and 6

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

    Measured: Month 4.5, 6

  19. 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 2, Month 1 and 3

    SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 domains (of 2 components; physical and mental) of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role (role-physical, role-emotional) 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 2, Month 1, 3

  20. 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Month 6

    SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 domains (of 2 components; physical and mental) of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role (role-physical, role-emotional) 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: Month 6

  21. Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Baseline, Week 2, Month 1 and 3

    Participant-rated 12-item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week; 7 subscales:sleep disturbance,snoring,awakened short of breath,sleep adequacy,somnolence (range:0-100);sleep quantity (range:0-24),optimal sleep(yes/no), and 9 item index measures of sleep disturbance provide composite scores:sleep problem summary,overall sleep problem.Except adequacy,optimal sleep and quantity,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, Month 1, 3

  22. Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Month 6

    Participant-rated 12-item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week; 7 subscales:sleep disturbance,snoring,awakened short of breath,sleep adequacy,somnolence (range:0-100);sleep quantity (range:0-24),optimal sleep(yes/no), and 9 item index measures of sleep disturbance provide composite scores:sleep problem summary,overall sleep problem.Except adequacy,optimal sleep and quantity,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: Month 6

  23. Number of Participants With Optimal Sleep Assessed Using Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Baseline, Week 2, Month 1, and 3

    MOS-SS: participant-rated 12 item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week. It included 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath, sleep adequacy, somnolence, sleep quantity and optimal sleep. Participants responded whether their sleep was optimal or not optimal by choosing yes or no. Number of participants with optimal sleep is reported.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 2, Month 1, 3

  24. Number of Participants With Optimal Sleep Assessed Using Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Month 6

    MOS-SS: participant-rated 12 item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week. It included 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath, sleep adequacy, somnolence, sleep quantity and optimal sleep. Participants responded whether their sleep was optimal or not optimal by choosing yes or no. Number of participants with optimal sleep is reported.

    Measured: Month 6

  25. Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale at Baseline and Month 3

    FACIT-Fatigue Scale (FS):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-FS 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, Month 3

  26. Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale at Month 6

    FACIT-FS: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-FS 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: Month 6

  27. Euro Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)- Health State Profile Utility Score at Baseline, Month 1 and 3

    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, self-care, 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, Month 1, 3

  28. Euro Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score at Month 6

    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, self-care, 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: Month 6

  29. Work Productivity and Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) at Baseline, Month 3

    Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during last 3 months for direct, indirect medical cost domains. Direct cost:visit to doctor,non-medical practitioner,nursing home,hospital,surgery,emergency room(ER) treatment,diagnostic tests, over-night stay,home healthcare services, aids/devices used. Indirect costs associated with functional disability:employment status,willingness to work,work disability due to RA,sick leave,part time work,ability to perform chores,chores done by family/friends/housekeeper. Assessment was based on 0 to 2-point scale;higher score=higher medical cost.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  30. Work Productivity and Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) at Month 6

    RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during last 3 months for direct, indirect medical cost domains. Direct cost: visit to doctor, non-medical practitioner, nursing home, hospital, surgery, emergency room(ER) treatment, diagnostic tests, over-night stay, home healthcare services, aids/devices used. Indirect costs associated with functional disability: employment status, willingness to work, work disability due to RA, sick leave, part time work, ability to perform chores, chores done by family/friends/housekeeper. Assessment was based on 0 to 2-point scale; higher score=higher medical cost.

    Measured: Month 6

  31. Number of Events Including Visits, Surgeries, Tests or Devices as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Baseline and Month 3

    RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA/non-RA related number of events including visits to doctor, non-medical practitioner, hospital ER treatment, hospitalizations, number of surgeries, diagnostic tests, and devices/aids used were reported.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  32. Number of Events Including Visits, Surgeries, Tests or Devices as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Month 6

    RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA/non-RA related number of events including visits to doctor, non-medical practitioner, hospital ER treatment, hospitalizations, number of surgeries, diagnostic tests, and devices/aids used were reported.

    Measured: Month 6

  33. Number of Days as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Baseline and Month 3

    RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of days spent in hospital, nursing home, aids/devices used, on sick leave, work per week, performed part time work, performed paid work, chores done by housekeeper and chores done by family/friends were reported.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  34. Number of Days as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Month 6

    RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of days spent in hospital, nursing home, aids/devices used, on sick leave, work per week, performed part time work, performed paid work, chores done by housekeeper and chores done by family/friends were reported.

    Measured: Month 6

  35. Number of Hours Per Day as Assessed RA-HCRU at Baseline and Month 3

    RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of hours spent per day for home healthcare services, chores done by housekeeper, chores done by family or friends, hours affected per day and average number of hours missed work per day were reported.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  36. Number of Hours Per Day as Assessed RA-HCRU at Month 6

    RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of hours spent per day for home healthcare services, chores done by housekeeper, chores done by family or friends, hours affected per day and average number of hours missed work per day were reported.

    Measured: Month 6

  37. Work Performance in Past 3 Months on Days Bothered as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Baseline and Month 3

    Work performance of participants on number of days bothered was based on 10-point scale, where higher score indicated lower work performance.

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  38. Work Performance in Past 3 Months on Days Bothered as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Month 6

    Work performance of participants on number of days bothered was based on 10-point scale, where higher score indicated lower work performance.

    Measured: Month 6

  39. Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) Score at Baseline and Month 3

    WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (TMS)(5-items); Physical Demands scale (PDS) (6-item); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (MIDS) (9-items); Output Demands Scale (ODS) (5-items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time). Work Loss Index (WLI), which represented percentage of lost work over time period relative to a normative population, was derived (total score: 0 [no loss] to 100 [complete loss of work]).

    Measured: Baseline, Month 3

  40. Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) Score at Month 6

    WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (TMS)(5-items); Physical Demands scale (PDS) (6-item); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (MIDS) (9-items); Output Demands Scale (ODS) (5-items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time). Work Loss Index (WLI), which represented percentage of lost work over time period relative to a normative population, was derived (total score: 0 [no loss] to 100 [complete loss of work]).

    Measured: Month 6

Timeline

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

  1. First posted17 Aug 2009 (estimated)
  2. Study startOct 2009
  3. Primary completionMar 2011
  4. Study completionMar 2011

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 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Quadruple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
399 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00960440
Sponsor's protocol ID
A3921032
Status last verified
Nov 2018
First submitted
14 Aug 2009
Last updated
19 Dec 2018
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
  • Citera G, Jain R, Irazoque F, Madariaga H, Gruben D, Wang L, Stockert L, Santana K, Ebrahim A, Ponce de Leon D. Tofacitinib Efficacy in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Probable Depression/Anxiety: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 3 and 3b/4 Randomized Controlled Trials. Rheumatol Ther. 2024 Feb;11(1):35-50. doi: 10.1007/s40744-023-00612-7. Epub 2023 Nov 5.

    PubMed 37925660
  • Charles-Schoeman C, Hyde C, Guan S, Parikh N, Wang J, Shahbazian A, Stockert L, Andrews J. Relationship Between Paraoxonase-1 Genotype and Activity, and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Malignancies in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Receiving Tofacitinib. J Rheumatol. 2023 Jul 15:jrheum.2023-0112. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.2023-0112. Online ahead of print.

    PubMed 37453736
  • 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
  • Dougados M, Taylor PC, Bingham CO 3rd, Fallon L, Brault Y, Roychoudhury S, Wang L, Kessouri M. The effect of tofacitinib on residual pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis. RMD Open. 2022 Sep;8(2):e002478. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2022-002478.

    PubMed 36814062
  • 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
  • Dikranian AH, Gonzalez-Gay MA, Wellborne F, Alvaro-Gracia JM, Takiya L, Stockert L, Paulissen J, Shi H, Tatulych S, Curtis JR. Efficacy of tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis stratified by baseline body mass index: an analysis of pooled data from phase 3 studies. RMD Open. 2022 May;8(1):e002103. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2021-002103.

    PubMed 35577477
  • Dikranian A, Gold D, Bessette L, Nash P, Azevedo VF, Wang L, Woolcott J, Shapiro AB, Szumski A, Fleishaker D, Wollenhaupt J. Frequency and Duration of Early Non-serious Adverse Events in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with Tofacitinib. Rheumatol Ther. 2022 Apr;9(2):411-433. doi: 10.1007/s40744-021-00405-w. Epub 2021 Dec 17.

    PubMed 34921355
  • 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
  • Strand V, Kaine J, Alten R, Wallenstein G, Diehl A, Shi H, Germino R, Murray CW. Associations between Patient Global Assessment scores and pain, physical function, and fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: a post hoc analysis of data from phase 3 trials of tofacitinib. Arthritis Res Ther. 2020 Oct 15;22(1):243. doi: 10.1186/s13075-020-02324-7.

    PubMed 33059710

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 3 study testing CP-690,550 in people with Arthritis, Rheumatoid, run by Pfizer at 92 sites in 14 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 1 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 19 Dec 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 92 sites in United States, Germany, Spain, Canada, France and 9 more countries. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 10 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 Month 3 (time frame: Month 3). The study lists 3 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 NCT00960440, which also lists 25 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 19 Dec 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