FibromyalgiaPhase 3NCT01387607
A Study For Pregabalin In Patients With Fibromyalgia
A Phase 3 study testing pregabalin in people with Fibromyalgia, run by Pfizer's Upjohn has merged with Mylan to form Viatris Inc. at 22 sites in China.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin compared with placebo for management of fibromyalgia in adults. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Fibromyalgia
- What is being tested?
- pregabalin
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 343 participants
- Where
- 22 sitesChina
- Study dates
- 6 Feb 2012to 31 Oct 2016
- 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
- Male or female patients, at least 18 years of age
- Meeting the ACR (America College of Rheumatology) criteria for fibromyalgia (ie, widespread pain present for at least 3 months, and pain in at least 11 of 18 specific tender point sites)
- At screening (V1) and randomization (V2), patients must have a score of no less than 40 mm on the Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
- At randomization (V2), at least 4 pain diaries must be completed satisfactorily within the last 7 days and the average pain score must be no less than 4
Who cannot join
- Patients with no less than 30% decrease on the Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at randomization (V2) as compared to screening (V1)
- Patients with other severe pain due to other conditions (eg, DPN or PHN) that may confound assessment or self-evaluation of the pain associated with fibromyalgia
- Patients with any widespread inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders, widespread rheumatic diseases other than fibromyalgia, active infections, or untreated endocrine disorders
- CLcr less than 60 mL/min (estimated from serum creatinine)
Trial locations and contacts
22 sites in 1 country.
22 sites in 1 country
China22 sites
Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University
Beijing, Beijing Municipality, 100020
China-Japan Friendship Hospital/Rheumatology Department
Beijing, 100029
Peking Union Medical College Hospital/Rheumatology Department
Beijing, 100032
PLA. The Military General Hospital of Beijing
Beijing, 100700
Department of Rheumatism And Immunity, The First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College
Bengbu, Anhui, 233000
Xiangya Hospital of Centre-south University
Changsha, Kaifu District, Hunan, 410008
Si Chuan Huaxi Hospital/Rheumatology Department
Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041
Southwest Hospital of the Third Military Medical University,PLA
Chongqing, Chongqing Municipality, 400038
Department of Neurology,General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command of PLA
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510010
Guangdong General Hospital
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510080
Department of Neurology,The First Affiliated Hospital Of Guangzhou Medical University
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510120
The Third Affiliated Hospital Of Sun Yat-sen University
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510630
Rheumatology Department, The first Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University
Harbin, Heilongjiang, 150001
Rheumatology Department, The second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University
Harbin, Heilongjiang, 150086
Anhui Province Hospital
Hefei, Anhui, 230001
The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/ Rheumatology and Immunology Department
Kunming, Yunnan, 650032
The Second Affiliated Hospital to Nanchang University
Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006
Zhongshan Hospital Fudan University, Rheumatology Department
Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, 200032
Rheumatology and Immunology Dept., Renji Hospital Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine
Shanghai, 200001
Rheumatology and Immunology Department, Shanghai Changzheng Hospital
Shanghai, 200003
The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University/Neurology Department
Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000
Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University
Xi’an, Shanxi, 710032
About this study
Official title: A 14-week, Randomized, Double-blind Placebo-controlled Study For Pregabalin In Subjects With Fibromyalgia
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin compared with placebo for management of fibromyalgia in adults.
- Conditions
- Fibromyalgia
- Being tested
- pregabalin, placebo
- Keywords
- Pregabalin, fibromyalgia
- Medical subject headings
- Fibromyalgia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
pregabalinDrug
Pregabalin capsule, 300-450mg/day, twice daily
placeboDrug
Placebo, twice daily
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Pregabalin | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: pregabalin |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Matched placebo Receives: Drug: placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change From Baseline in Endpoint Mean Pain Score During the Double-blind Treatment Period at Week 14
Assessment of mean pain score was based on participant's daily pain diary. The daily pain diary consisted of an 11-point numeric rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). The participants rated their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. Self-assessment was performed daily at awakening. The endpoint mean pain score was defined as the mean of the Week 14 pain diary entries in the double-blind treatment phase. Baseline was defined as the mean of last 7 pain diary entries up to and including Day 1.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Secondary outcomes (23)
Percentage of Participants Categorized by Each Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score at Week 14
The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) was a participant-rated instrument that measured change in participant's overall status on a scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse), which was based on a validated scale, the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC). Categories were defined based on the PGIC scores as followed: 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse and 7 = very much worse.
Measured: Week 14
Change From Baseline in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total Score at Week 14
The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) was a 20-item participant-reported outcome instrument designed to assess health status, progress, and outcomes in participants with fibromyalgia. It contained 10 subscales. There were 11 questions that are related specifically to physical functioning. The remaining items assessed pain, fatigue, stiffness, difficulty working, and symptoms of anxiousness and depression. Score range for each subscale was 0 to 10. The 10 subscales were combined to yield a total score with range from 0 to 100. The total score provided an estimation of fibromyalgia impact with higher scores indicating greater impairment.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Percentage of Participants With at Least 30% Reduction in Weekly Mean Pain Score From Baseline to Week 14
Assessment of mean pain score was based on participant's daily pain diary. The daily pain diary consisted of an 11-point numeric rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). The participants rated their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. Self-assessment was performed daily at awakening. Weekly mean pain score was calculated as mean value of the observations within the window for each week during the double-blind treatment phase. A participant with at least 30% reduction in weekly mean pain score from baseline to Week 14 was defined as a 30% responder.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Reduction in Weekly Mean Pain Score From Baseline to Week 14
Assessment of mean pain score was based on participant's daily pain diary. The daily pain diary consisted of an 11-point numeric rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). The participants rated their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. Self-assessment was performed daily at awakening. Weekly mean pain score was calculated as mean value of the observations within the window for each week during the double-blind treatment phase. A participant with at least 50% reduction in weekly mean pain score from baseline to Week 14 was defined as a 50% responder.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Sleep Disturbance Subscale Score
The Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. Range of scores represented for sleep disturbance was 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more of the attribute.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Snoring, Awaken Short of Breath and Sleep Adequacy Subscale Scores
The Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. Range of scores represented for snoring, awaken short of breath and sleep adequacy was 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more of the attribute.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Quantity of Sleep and Somnolence Subscale Scores
The Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. Range of quantity of sleep parameter was 0 to 24 and somnolence was 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more of the attribute.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Sleep Problems Index Overall Score
The Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index. Range of sleep problem index overall score was 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more of the attribute.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Percentage of Participants With Optimal Sleep at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale
The Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale was a participant-rated questionnaire consisting of 12 items that assess key constructs of sleep. Instrument scoring yields 7 subscales (sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken short of breath or with a headache, quantity of sleep, optimal sleep, sleep adequacy, and somnolence) as well as a 9-item overall sleep problems index.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline in Mean Sleep Interference Score at Week 14
The Daily Sleep Interference Scale was an 11-point numerical scale ranging from 0 (does not interfere with sleep) to 10 (completely interferes [unable to sleep due to pain]). Participants were asked to describe how their pain had interfered with their sleep during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. Self-assessment was performed daily upon awakening. Baseline Mean Sleep Interference score was defined as the mean of all available last 7 sleep interference score diary entries up to and including Day 1.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Wake After Sleep Onset (sWASO)
The Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) was included in the participant's diary and designed to capture subjective evaluation of sleep behavior in participants with disrupted sleep. It was administered to each participant approximately 30 - 60 minutes after arising each day in the morning. The Subjective Wake after Sleep Onset (sWASO) parameter subjectively estimated the total amount of time the participant was awake after initial sleep onset until final awakening. Baseline was defined as the mean of last 7 SSQ diary entries up to and including Day 1.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Latency to Sleep Onset (sLSO)
The Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) was included in the participant's diary and designed to capture subjective evaluation of sleep behavior in participants with disrupted sleep. It was administered to each participant approximately 30 - 60 minutes after arising each day in the morning. The Subjective Latency to Sleep Onset (sLSO) parameter subjectively estimated the amount of time to fall asleep after lights out. Baseline was defined as the mean of last 7 SSQ diary entries up to and including Day 1.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Number of Awakenings After Sleep Onset (sNAASO)
The Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) was included in the participant's diary and designed to capture subjective evaluation of sleep behavior in participants with disrupted sleep. It was administered to each participant approximately 30 - 60 minutes after arising each day in the morning. The Subjective Number of Awakenings after Sleep Onset (sNAASO) parameter subjectively estimated the total number of times the participant awakened during the night until final awakening. Baseline was defined as the mean of last 7 SSQ diary entries up to and including Day 1.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Total Sleep Time (sTST)
The Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) was included in the participant's diary and designed to capture subjective evaluation of sleep behavior in participants with disrupted sleep. It was administered to each participant approximately 30 - 60 minutes after arising each day in the morning. The Subjective Total Sleep Time (sTST) parameter subjectively estimated the total amount of time the participant was asleep after lights out until final awakening. Baseline was defined as the mean of last 7 SSQ diary entries up to and including Day 1.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Sleep Quality
The Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) was included in the participant's diary and designed to capture subjective evaluation of sleep behavior in participants with disrupted sleep. It was administered to each participant approximately 30 - 60 minutes after arising each day in the morning. The Sleep Quality parameter subjectively rated the quality of sleep during the past night by selecting a number between 0 (very poor) and 10 (excellent). Baseline was defined as the mean of last 7 SSQ diary entries up to and including Day 1.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline in Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) Score at Week 14
The Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) scale was a self-administered survey that yielded a Global Fatigue Index by assessing the participant's level of fatigue and the degree to which fatigue interferes with activities of daily living. It contained 16 items and measured 4 dimensions of fatigue: severity (2 items), distress (1 item), degree of interference in activities of daily living (11 items), and timing (2 items). Index range was 1 to 50 and higher scores reflected greater impairment.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey - Mental Component Summary Score
The Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) was a self-administered questionnaire that measured each of the following 8 health concepts: Physical functioning, role limitations due to physical problems, social functioning, bodily pain, mental health, role limitations due to emotional problems, vitality, and general health perception. Mental component included mental health, role limitations due to emotional problems, vitality and general health perception. Score range for mental component summary score was 0 to 100 and higher scores reflected better participant status.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey - Physical Component Summary Score
The Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) was a self-administered questionnaire that measured each of the following 8 health concepts: Physical functioning, role limitations due to physical problems, social functioning, bodily pain, mental health, role limitations due to emotional problems, vitality, and general health perception. Physical component included physical functioning, role limitations due to physical problems, social functioning and bodily pain. Score range for physical component summary score was 0 to 100 and higher scores reflected better participant status.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline in Pain Visual Analog Scale (Pain VAS) Score at Week 14
The Pain Visual Analog Scale (Pain VAS) was a horizontal line; 100 mm in length, self administered by the participants in order to rate pain from 0 "no pain" to 100 "worst possible pain".
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) - Anxiety Subscale Score
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was a self-reported 14-item instrument that consisted of two 7-item subscales that measure the presence and severity of anxiety and depression. For each subscale, score range was 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater impairment.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) - Depression Subscale Score
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was a self-reported 14-item instrument that consisted of two 7-item subscales that measure the presence and severity of anxiety and depression. For each subscale, range was 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater impairment.
Measured: Baseline, Week 14
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Discontinuation Due to AEs
An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a product or medical device. A Serious adverse event (SAE) was any untoward medical occurrence at any dose that resulted in death; was life-threatening (immediate risk of death); required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability (substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal life functions); congenital anomaly/birth defect. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were events between first dose of study drug and up to follow-up visit (Study Day 105) that were absent before treatment or that worsened after treatment. AEs included both SAEs and non-SAEs.
Measured: Baseline to Follow up (Day 105)
Number of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Categorized by Severity
A mild Adverse Event (AE) was an AE that did not interfere with participant's usual function. A moderate AE was an AE that interfered participant's usual function to some extent. A severe AE was an AE that interfered significantly with participant's usual function.
Measured: Baseline to Follow up (Day 105)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Jul 2011 (estimated)
- Study start6 Feb 2012
- Primary completion31 Oct 2016
- Study completion31 Oct 2016
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 (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for FibromyalgiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- 343 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Pfizer's Upjohn has merged with Mylan to form Viatris Inc.
- 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
- NCT01387607
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A0081241
- Status last verified
- Sep 2017
- First submitted
- 30 Jun 2011
- Last updated
- 28 Jan 2021
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Zhang X, Xu H, Zhang Z, Li Y, Pauer L, Liao S, Zhang F. Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin for Fibromyalgia in a Population of Chinese Subjects. J Pain Res. 2021 Feb 25;14:537-548. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S281483. eCollection 2021.
PubMed 33658841
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Jan 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A 14-week, Randomized, Double-blind Placebo-controlled Study For Pregabalin In Subjects With Fibromyalgia
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01387607
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- A0081241
- Conditions
- Fibromyalgia
- Keywords
- Pregabalin, fibromyalgia
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 343 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Pfizer's Upjohn has merged with Mylan to form Viatris Inc.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- 6 Feb 2012 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Oct 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Oct 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Jul 2011 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 30 Jul 2018
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin compared with placebo for management of fibromyalgia in adults.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Pregabalin | Experimental | Drug: pregabalin |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Drug: placeboMatched placebo |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Male or female patients, at least 18 years of age
- Meeting the ACR (America College of Rheumatology) criteria for fibromyalgia (ie, widespread pain present for at least 3 months, and pain in at least 11 of 18 specific tender point sites)
- At screening (V1) and randomization (V2), patients must have a score of no less than 40 mm on the Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
- At randomization (V2), at least 4 pain diaries must be completed satisfactorily within the last 7 days and the average pain score must be no less than 4
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Patients with no less than 30% decrease on the Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at randomization (V2) as compared to screening (V1)
- Patients with other severe pain due to other conditions (eg, DPN or PHN) that may confound assessment or self-evaluation of the pain associated with fibromyalgia
- Patients with any widespread inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders, widespread rheumatic diseases other than fibromyalgia, active infections, or untreated endocrine disorders
- CLcr less than 60 mL/min (estimated from serum creatinine)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| pregabalinPregabalin capsule, 300-450mg/day, twice daily | Drug | Pregabalin |
| placeboPlacebo, twice daily | Drug | Placebo |
Primary outcome
Change From Baseline in Endpoint Mean Pain Score During the Double-blind Treatment Period at Week 14
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Assessment of mean pain score was based on participant's daily pain diary. The daily pain diary consisted of an 11-point numeric rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). The participants rated their pain during the past 24 hours by choosing the appropriate number between 0 and 10. Self-assessment was performed daily at awakening. The endpoint mean pain score was defined as the mean of the Week 14 pain diary entries in the double-blind treatment phase. Baseline was defined as the mean of last 7 pain diary entries up to and including Day 1.
23 secondary outcomes
Percentage of Participants Categorized by Each Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score at Week 14
Time frame: Week 14
Change From Baseline in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total Score at Week 14
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Percentage of Participants With at Least 30% Reduction in Weekly Mean Pain Score From Baseline to Week 14
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Percentage of Participants With at Least 50% Reduction in Weekly Mean Pain Score From Baseline to Week 14
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Sleep Disturbance Subscale Score
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Snoring, Awaken Short of Breath and Sleep Adequacy Subscale Scores
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Quantity of Sleep and Somnolence Subscale Scores
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale - Sleep Problems Index Overall Score
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Percentage of Participants With Optimal Sleep at Week 14 in Medical Outcome Study (MOS)-Sleep Scale
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline in Mean Sleep Interference Score at Week 14
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Wake After Sleep Onset (sWASO)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Latency to Sleep Onset (sLSO)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Number of Awakenings After Sleep Onset (sNAASO)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Subjective Total Sleep Time (sTST)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Subjective Sleep Questionnaire (SSQ) - Sleep Quality
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline in Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) Score at Week 14
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey - Mental Component Summary Score
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey - Physical Component Summary Score
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline in Pain Visual Analog Scale (Pain VAS) Score at Week 14
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) - Anxiety Subscale Score
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Change From Baseline at Week 14 in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) - Depression Subscale Score
Time frame: Baseline, Week 14
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Discontinuation Due to AEs
Time frame: Baseline to Follow up (Day 105)
Number of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Categorized by Severity
Time frame: Baseline to Follow up (Day 105)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Jan 2021.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33658841Zhang X, Xu H, Zhang Z, Li Y, Pauer L, Liao S, Zhang F. Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin for Fibromyalgia in a Population of Chinese Subjects. J Pain Res. 2021 Feb 25;14:537-548. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S281483. eCollection 2021.
- To obtain contact information for a study center near you, click here.Link provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Fibromyalgia
Recruiting
Auricular Acupuncture for Autonomic Balance and Pain in Fibromyalgia
Fibromyalgia Syndrome
RecruitingObservational study
Respiratory Function in Fibromiyalgia Syndrome
Fibromyalgia
Not yet recruiting
Art and Mindfulness in Fibromyalgia Rehabilitation at the University Museum
Fibromyalgia
Recruiting
Exercise Interventions and Dietary Advice in Fibromyalgia and IBS
Fibromyalgia, Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Not yet recruiting
Toward Biomarker-Guided Fibromyalgia Treatment With Non-Invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation
Fibromyalgia
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
22 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 pregabalin in people with Fibromyalgia, run by Pfizer's Upjohn has merged with Mylan to form Viatris Inc. at 22 sites in China.
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 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Jan 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 22 sites in China. 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 30 Jul 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?
Change From Baseline in Endpoint Mean Pain Score During the Double-blind Treatment Period at Week 14 (time frame: Baseline, Week 14). 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 NCT01387607, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 28 Jan 2021.