Chronic PainPhase 3NCT01571362
A Research Study of an Investigational Drug ALO-02 (Oxycodone Hydrochloride and Naltrexone Hydrochloride) in Patients With Moderate to Severe Chronic Low Back Pain
A Phase 3 study testing ALO-02 in people with Chronic Pain and Low Back Pain, run by Pfizer at 52 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The primary objective of the study is to determine the analgesic efficacy and safety of ALO-02 extended-release capsules, when compared to placebo, in subjects with moderate to severe chronic low back pain. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Chronic Pain, Low Back Pain, Analgesia
- What is being tested?
- ALO-02
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 410 participants
- Where
- 52 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Jun 2012to Jun 2013
- 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
- Moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain present for at least 3 months.
- Require a continuous around-the-clock opioid analgesic for an extended period of time.
- Refrain from taking other opioid and non-opioid medications during the study.
Who cannot join
- Active or within a past 2 years a history of lumbosacral radiculopathy or chronic low back pain due to other underlying disorders such as spinal stenosis with neurologic impairment, cancer, infection, or post-surgical intervention.
- Documented diagnosis of ongoing pain due to other chronic pain conditions which may interfere with assessment of chronic low back pain.
- Active or ongoing or history of alcohol or drug abuse.
Trial locations and contacts
52 sites in 1 country.
52 sites in 1 country
United States52 sites
Albuquerque Clinical Trials, Inc.
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102
Allegheny Pain Management, PC
Altoona, Pennsylvania, 16602
Anaheim Clinical Trials, LLC
Anaheim, California, 92801
FutureSearch Trials of Neurology
Austin, Texas, 78731
Med Center
Carmichael, California, 95608
Pain Research of Charleston
Charleston, South Carolina, 29406
Community Research
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45227
Clinicos, LLC
Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80904
Lynn Institute of the Rockies Medical Centre
Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80907
TLM Medical Services
Columbia, South Carolina, 29204
Columbus Clinical Research
Columbus, Ohio, 43213
KRK Medical Research
Dallas, Texas, 75230
FutureSearch Trials of Dallas, LP
Dallas, Texas, 75231
Avail Clinical Research, LLC
DeLand, Florida, 32720
Altoona Center for Clinical Research
Duncansville, Pennsylvania, 16635
MediSphere Medical Research Center, LLC
Evansville, Indiana, 47714
Med Investigations, Inc.
Fair Oaks, California, 95628
Neuro-Pain Medical Center
Fresno, California, 93710
Dedicated Clinical Research
Goodyear, Arizona, 85395
Drug Trials America
Hartsdale, New York, 10530
Mid-Atlantic Medical Research - Research Department
Hollywood, Maryland, 20636
Pacific Coast Pain Management Center
Laguna Hills, California, 92637
Office of Stephen H. Miller, M.D.
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89144
Long Beach Center for Clinical Research - previous addresse
Long Beach, California, 90806
Long Beach Center for Clinical Research
Long Beach, California, 90807
Drug Studies America
Marietta, Georgia, 30060
Georgia Institute for Clinical Research, LLC
Marietta, Georgia, 30060
Coastal Clinical Research, Inc.
Mobile, Alabama, 36608
Mid Hudson Medical Research, PLLC
New Windsor, New York, 12553
Research Across America
New York, New York, 10022
Providence Clinical Research
North Hollywood, California, 91606
Lynn Health Science Institute
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73112
Associated Orthopedics
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73119
Hillcrest Clinical Research
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73119
Heartland Clinical Research, Inc.
Omaha, Nebraska, 68134
Ormond Medical Arts pharmaceutical Research Center
Ormond Beach, Florida, 32174
Arizona Research Center
Phoenix, Arizona, 85023
Premier Research Group Limited
Phoenix, Arizona, 85027
Gold Coast Research, LLC
Plantation, Florida, 33317
The Office of Martin E. Hale, MD, PA
Plantation, Florida, 33317
Accord Clinical Research, LLC- Duplicate 2
Port Orange, Florida, 32129
Accord Clinical Research, LLC- Duplicate
Port Orange, Florida, 32129
Quality Research Inc.
San Antonio, Texas, 78209
Lee Medical Associates
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Progressive Clinical Research, P.A.
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Mercy Health Research
St Louis, Missouri, 63141
Clinical Research of West Florida
Tampa, Florida, 33603
Omega Medical Research
Warwick, Rhode Island, 02886
Palm Beach Research Center
West Palm Beach, Florida, 33409
Upstate Clinical Research Associates, LLC
Williamsville, New York, 14221
The Center for Clinical Research
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27103
Clinical Pharmacology Study Group
Worcester, Massachusetts, 01605
About this study
Official title: A Multicenter, 12 Week, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomized Withdrawal Study To Determine The Efficacy And Safety Of Alo-02 (Oxycodone Hydrochloride And Naltrexone Hydrochloride) Extended-release Capsules In Subjects With Moderate To Severe Chronic Low Back Pain
The primary objective of the study is to determine the analgesic efficacy and safety of ALO-02 extended-release capsules, when compared to placebo, in subjects with moderate to severe chronic low back pain.
- Conditions
- Chronic Pain, Low Back Pain, Analgesia
- Being tested
- ALO-02, Placebo
- Keywords
- oxycodone, naltrexone, chronic pain, low back pain
- Medical subject headings
- Chronic Pain, Low Back Pain, Agnosia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ALO-02Drug
Also called oxycodone HCl and naltrexone HCl
20 to 160mg total daily dose of oxycodone, divided into symmetric doses and administered twice daily
PlaceboDrug
oral placebo, divided into symmetric doses and administered twice daily
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| ALO-02 | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: ALO-02 |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Not described Receives: Drug: Placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Weekly Average Electronic Diary (eDiary) Numeric Rating Scale -Pain (NRS-Pain) Score From Randomization Baseline to Final 2 Weeks (Average of Weeks 11 and 12)
Weekly average diary NRS-Pain scores were derived from the daily NRS-pain scale and calculated as the mean of the last 7 days. NRS-Pain scores based on an 11-point numerical rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 11 and 12
Secondary outcomes (100)
Change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score From Randomization Baseline to the End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit).
The RMDQ is a 24-item questionnaire designed to measure self-rated disability due to back pain. An individual participant's score can vary from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severe disability), with a lower score indicating better function; higher score indicating greater disability.
Measured: Week 12
Percentage (%) of Participants With Shift in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) by Category With Baseline PGA Score of Very Good (1), Good (2), Fair (3), Poor (4), Very Poor (5) From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit).
Measure represents the score at Randomization Baseline / score at Week 12 (or Early Termination) in PGA, a global evaluation that utilizes a 5-point Likert scale with a score of 1 being the best (Very Good) and a score of 5 being the worst (Very Poor).
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Week 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction of Greater or Equal to (≥) 20%
Weekly average Diary NRS-pain scores are derived from the daily pain NRS and calculated as the mean of the last 7 days. Scores range from 0 equals (=) no pain to 10 = worst possible pain. Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 11 and 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction ≥30%
Weekly average Diary NRS-pain scores are derived from the daily pain NRS and calculated as the mean of the last 7 days. Scores range from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain. Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 11 and 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction ≥40%
Weekly average Diary NRS-pain scores are derived from the daily pain NRS and calculated as the mean of the last 7 days. Scores range from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain. Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 11 and 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction ≥50%
Weekly average Diary NRS-pain scores are derived from the daily pain NRS and calculated as the mean of the last 7 days. Scores range from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain. Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 11 and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Treatment in Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form (BPI-sf): Worst Pain, Least Pain, Average Pain, Pain Right Now, Pain Severity Index, Pain Interference Index
BPI-sf is an 11-item self-report questionnaire that is designed to assess the severity and impact of pain on daily functions. BPI-sf includes 4 questions that assess pain intensity (worst, least, average, right now) and 7 questions that assess impact of pain on daily functions (general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, enjoyment of life). BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain. Pain Severity Index is the mean of the 4 pain scores (worst, least, average, and right now) on the BPI-sf; range is 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; A higher score indicates greater pain severity. Pain Interference Index is the mean of the scores for the 7 items of the BPI-sf; range is 0=Does not interfere to 10=Completely interferes.
Measured: Screening, Week 4, 5, or 6
Change From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in BPI-sf: Worst Pain, Least Pain, Average Pain, Pain Right Now, Pain Severity Index, Pain Interference Index
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain. Pain Severity Index is the mean of the 4 pain scores (worst, least, average, and right now) on the BPI-sf; range is 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; A higher score indicates greater pain severity. Pain Interference Index is the mean of the scores for the 7 items of the BPI-sf; range is 0=Does not interfere to 10=Completely interferes.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Worst Pain
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Least Pain
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Average Pain
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Right Now
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Severity Index
Pain Severity Index is the mean of the 4 pain scores (worst, least, average, and right now) on the BPI-sf; range is 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; a higher score indicates greater pain severity.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Interference Index
Pain Interference Index is the mean of the scores for the 7 items of the BPI-sf; range is 0=Does not interfere to 10=Completely interferes.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Worst Pain
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Least Pain
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Average Pain
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Right Now
BPI-sf scores range from 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Severity Index
Pain Severity Index is the mean of the 4 pain scores (worst, least, average, and right now) on the BPI-sf; range is 0=No pain to 10=Pain as bad as you can imagine; a higher score indicates greater pain severity.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Interference Index
Pain Interference Index is the mean of the scores for the 7 items of the BPI-sf; range is 0=Does not interfere to 10=Completely interferes.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Area Under the Curve (AUC) of eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Randomization Baseline to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Weeks 11 and 12)
NRS-Pain scores based on an 11-point numerical rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). AUC was calculated using daily change from Baseline scores from Baseline until the last dose date in the Double-Blind Treatment Period. AUC was calculated for each participant using the linear trapezoidal method. Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 11 and 12
Average Daily Use of Rescue Acetaminophen (Milligrams Per Day [mg/Day]) During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
The amount of acetaminophen administered for each treatment during the Double-Blind Treatment Period. Average daily use calculated as: total dose of rescue medication during Double-Blind Period divided by the number of days in Double-Blind Period.
Measured: Daily from Day 1 of the Double-Blind Period through Week 12
Percentage of Participants With a 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Treatment
The percentage of analgesic response is defined as: (rolling 7-day mean pain score during Titration Period - Screening Period pain intensity score) divided by Screening Period pain intensity score times100.
Measured: Screening, Week 4, 5 or 6
Median Time to 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Treatment
The percentage of analgesic response is defined as: (rolling 7-day mean pain score during Titration Period minus (-) Screening Period pain intensity score) divided by Screening Period pain intensity score times 100. An event was defined as a participant with 20, 30, 40, or 50% analgesic response from Screening. If there was no event for a participant, time to the event was considered censored at Day 42 of the Titration Period or before Day 42 of the Titration Period at the time of the last diary pain score. The survival duration begins on the date of first dose of study drug in the Titration Period and is calculated as the [date of event or last diary pain score - date of first dose in Titration Period +1].
Measured: Screening, Week 4, 5, or 6
Percentage of Participants With a 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline
The percentage of analgesic response is defined as: (rolling 7-day mean pain score during Titration Period - Screening Period pain intensity score) divided by Screening Period pain intensity score times 100.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline (up to 6 weeks)
Median Time to 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline
The percentage of analgesic response is defined as: (rolling 7-day mean pain score during Titration Period - Screening Period pain intensity score) divided by Screening Period pain intensity score times 100. If there was no event for a participant, time to the event was considered censored at Day 42 of the Titration Period or before Day 42 of the Titration Period at the time of the last diary pain score. The survival duration begins on the date of first dose of study drug in the Titration Period and is calculated as the [date of event or last diary pain score - date of first dose in Titration Period +1].
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline (up to 6 weeks)
Percentage of Participants With a 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Loss of Analgesic Response From Randomization Baseline During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
The percentage of lost analgesic response is defined as: (rolling 7-day mean pain score during Double-Blind Period - Randomization Baseline pain intensity score) divided by Randomization Baseline pain intensity score times 100. If there was no event for a participant, time to the event was considered censored at Day 84 or before Day 84 at the time of the last diary pain score. The survival duration began on the date of first dose of study drug in the Double-Blind Period and was calculated as the [date of event or last diary pain score - date of first dose in Double-Blind Treatment +1].
Measured: Randomization Baseline, up to Week 12
Median Time to 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Loss of Analgesic Response From Baseline During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
The percentage of lost analgesic response was defined as: (rolling seven day mean pain score during Double-Blind Period - Randomization Baseline pain intensity score) divided by Randomization Baseline pain intensity score times 100. If there was no event for a participant, time to the event was considered censored at Day 84 or before Day 84 at the time of the last diary pain score. The survival duration began on the date of first dose of study drug in the Double-Blind Period and was calculated as the [date of event or last diary pain score - date of first dose in Double-Blind Treatment +1].
Measured: Randomization Baseline, up to Week 12
Percentage of Participants Discontinuing Treatment for Investigator-Reported Lack of Efficacy
If there was no event for a participant, time to the event was considered censored at Day 84 or before Day 84 at time of treatment discontinuation for another reason.
Measured: Week 1 up to Week 12
Median Time to Treatment Discontinuation for Investigator-Reported Lack of Efficacy During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
If there was no event for a participant, time to the event was considered censored at Day 84 or before Day 84 at time of treatment discontinuation for another reason. The survival duration begins on the date of first dose in the Double-Blind period and is calculated as the [date of event or discontinuation - date of first dose in Double-Blind Period +1].
Measured: Week 1 up to Week 12
Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) Total Score During the Open-Label Titration Period
The COWS contains 11 common opiate withdrawal signs or symptoms rated by the investigator or designee who, for each item, checked the number that best described the participant's signs or symptoms. The minimum total COWS score is 0, the maximum is 48. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome. The summed score of the 11 items was used to assess a participant's level of opiate withdrawal.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
COWS Total Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
The COWS contains 11 common opiate withdrawal signs or symptoms rated by the investigator or designee who, for each item, checked the number that best described the participant's signs or symptoms. The minimum total COWS score is 0, the maximum is 48. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome. The summed score of the 11 items was used to assess a participant's level of opiate withdrawal.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12
COWS Total Score During the Post-Treatment Period
The COWS contains 11 common opiate withdrawal signs or symptoms rated by the investigator or designee who, for each item, checked the number that best described the participant's signs or symptoms. The minimum total COWS score is 0, the maximum is 48. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome. The summed score of the 11 items was used to assess a participant's level of opiate withdrawal.
Measured: Follow-Up (FU) Weeks 1 and 2
Percentage of Participants With Opiate Withdrawal During the Open-Label Titration Period by COWS Category
The COWS contains 11 common opiate withdrawal signs or symptoms rated by the investigator or designee who, for each item, checked the number that best described the participant's signs or symptoms. The minimum total COWS score is 0, the maximum is 48. The summed score of the 11 items was used to assess a participant's level of opiate withdrawal. The scores are assessed as follows: 5-12 = mild; 13-24 = moderate; 25-36 = moderately severe; more than 36 = severe withdrawal.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (or Early Termination)
Percentage of Participants With Opiate Withdrawal During the Double-Blind Treatment Period by COWS Category
The COWS contains 11 common opiate withdrawal signs or symptoms rated by the investigator or designee who, for each item, checked the number that best described the participant's signs or symptoms. The minimum total COWS score is 0, the maximum is 48. The summed score of the 11 items was used to assess a participant's level of opiate withdrawal. The scores are assessed as follows: 5-12 = mild; 13-24 = moderate; 25-36 = moderately severe; more than 36 = severe withdrawal.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 (or Early Termination)
Percentage of Participants With Opiate Withdrawal During Post-Treatment by COWS Category
The COWS contains 11 common opiate withdrawal signs or symptoms rated by the investigator or designee who, for each item, checked the number that best described the participant's signs or symptoms. The minimum total COWS score is 0, the maximum is 48. The summed score of the 11 items was used to assess a participant's level of opiate withdrawal. The scores are assessed as follows: 5-12 = mild; 13-24 = moderate; 25-36 = moderately severe; more than 36 = severe withdrawal.
Measured: Follow-Up Weeks 1 and 2
Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) During the Open-Label Titration Period
The SOWS was completed daily by the participant during any of the 2-week tapers from study drug, as well as at each study visit, using an eDiary device, and contains 16 symptoms of opiate withdrawal rated by the participant (Scale of 0 to 4: 0 = not at all, 1 = a little, 2= moderately, 3= quite a bit, 4 = extremely). The sum of the scores on each item was the total SOWS score; the minimum possible SOWS score was 0, the maximum 64. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
SOWS Total Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
The SOWS was completed daily by the participant during any of the 2-week tapers from study drug, as well as at each study visit, using an eDiary device, and contains 16 symptoms of opiate withdrawal rated by the participant (Scale of 0 to 4: 0 = not at all, 1 = a little, 2= moderately, 3= quite a bit, 4 = extremely). The sum of the scores on each item was the total SOWS score; the minimum possible SOWS score was 0, the maximum 64. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12
SOWS Total Score During the Post-Treatment Period
The SOWS was completed daily by the participant during any of the 2-week tapers from study drug, as well as at each study visit, using an eDiary device, and contains 16 symptoms of opiate withdrawal rated by the participant (Scale of 0 to 4: 0 = not at all, 1 = a little, 2= moderately, 3= quite a bit, 4 = extremely). The sum of the scores on each item was the total SOWS score; the minimum possible SOWS score was 0, the maximum 64. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
Measured: Follow-Up Weeks 1 and 2
Change From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Titration Period in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score for All Participants
RMDQ is a 24-item questionnaire designed to measure self-rated disability due to back pain the same day the questionnaire is completed. An individual participant's score could have ranged from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severe disability), with a lower score indicating better function; higher scores indicating greater disability.
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Change From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in RMDQ Total Score
RMDQ is a 24-item questionnaire designed to measure self-rated disability due to back pain the same day the questionnaire is completed. An individual participant's score could have ranged from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severe disability), with a lower score indicating better function.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in RMDQ Total Score
RMDQ is a 24-item questionnaire designed to measure self-rated disability due to back pain the same day the questionnaire is completed. An individual participant's score could have ranged from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severe disability), with a lower score indicating better function.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to the End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, and 8 in RMDQ Total Score
RMDQ is a 24-item questionnaire designed to measure self-rated disability due to back pain the same day the questionnaire is completed. An individual participant's score could have ranged from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severe disability), with a lower score indicating better function.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Screening to Randomization Baseline in PGA of Low Back Pain by Category in Participants With Screening PGA Score of Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor, Very Poor
Represents the score at Screening / score at Randomization Baseline in PGA of low back pain, a global evaluation that utilizes a 5-point Likert scale with a score of: 1 = very good, asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities; 2 = good, mild symptoms, and no limitation of normal activities; 3 = fair, moderate symptoms and limitation to some normal activities; 4 = poor, severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities; and a score of 5 = very poor; very severe symptoms, which were intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Screening to the End of the Open-Label Titration Period in PGA of Low Back Pain by Category in Participants With Screening PGA Score of Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor, Very Poor
Represents the score at Screening / score at to end of the titration period in PGA of low back pain, a global evaluation that utilizes a 5-point Likert scale with a score of: 1 = very good, asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities; 2 = good, mild symptoms, and no limitation of normal activities; 3 = fair, moderate symptoms and limitation to some normal activities; 4 = poor, severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities; and a score of 5 = very poor; very severe symptoms, which were intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline, or Early Termination
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Week 4 in PGA of Low Back Pain by Category in Participants With Randomization Baseline PGA Score of Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor, Very Poor
Represents the score at Randomization Baseline / score at Week 4 in PGA of low back pain, a global evaluation that utilizes a 5-point Likert scale with a score of: 1 = very good, asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities; 2 = good, mild symptoms, and no limitation of normal activities; 3 = fair, moderate symptoms and limitation to some normal activities; 4 = poor, severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities; and a score of 5 = very poor; very severe symptoms, which were intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Week 4
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Week 8 in PGA of Low Back Pain by Category in Participants With Randomization Baseline PGA Score of Very Good , Good, Fair, Poor, Very Poor
Represents the score at Randomization Baseline / score at Week 8 in PGA of low back pain, a global evaluation that utilizes a 5-point Likert scale with a score of: 1 = very good, asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities; 2 = good, mild symptoms, and no limitation of normal activities; 3 = fair, moderate symptoms and limitation to some normal activities; 4 = poor, severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities; and a score of 5 = very poor; very severe symptoms, which were intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Week 8
Satisfaction With Treatment at the End of Open-Label Titration Period for All Participants
Satisfaction with treatment is a single-item self-rated instrument that measures the participant's overall satisfaction with the study drug during study participation on a 5-point likert scale ranging from 1 = Very dissatisfied to 5 = Very satisfied.
Measured: End of Open-Label Titration Period (Week 4, 5, or 6 or Early Termination)
Satisfaction With Treatment at Randomization Baseline
Satisfaction with treatment is a single-item self-rated instrument that measures the participant's overall satisfaction with the study drug during study participation on a 5-point likert scale ranging from 1 = Very dissatisfied to 5 = Very satisfied.
Measured: Randomization Baseline
Percentage of Participants Who Reported Being Satisfied/Very Satisfied With Treatment on the Satisfaction With Treatment Questionnaire During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Participants used an electronic tablet at the center to rate their overall treatment satisfaction with study drug during study participation using a 5-point categorical scale (1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4 = satisfied, 5 = very satisfied).
Measured: Week 12 or Early Termination
Change From Screening Period to the End of Open-Label Titration Period in Short Form-36v2 (SF-36v2) Health Survey Score
SF-36v2 Health Survey is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 36 questions, measuring 8 health aspects; 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. These domains also combine to form two component summary scores evaluating mental health and physical health. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 100. A higher scores indicates a better health state.
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Change From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in SF-36v2 Health Survey Score
SF-36v2 Health Survey is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 36 questions, measuring 8 health aspects; 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. These domains also combine to form two component summary scores evaluating mental health and physical health. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 100. A higher score indicate a better health state.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Randomization Baseline to the End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit) in SF-36v2 Health Survey
SF-36v2 Health Survey is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 36 questions, measuring 8 health aspects; 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. These domains also combine to form two component summary scores evaluating mental health and physical health. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 100. A higher score indicate a better health state.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Week 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit) in SF-36v2 Health Survey
SF-36v2 Health Survey is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 36 questions, measuring 8 health aspects; 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. These domains also combine to form two component summary scores evaluating mental health and physical health. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 100. A higher score indicate a better health state.
Measured: Screening, Week 12
Change From Screening Period to the End of Open-Label Titration Period in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using the EuroQol 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) Summary Index
The EQ 5D Health Questionnaire is a self completion standardized instrument for use as a measure of health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value or utility score that consisted of 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) each of which was rated on a 3-point response scale (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems), and the scores are combined to form a single index utility value between 0 and 1 with higher scores indicating better health.
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Change From Screening Period to the End of Open-Label Titration Period in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using the EQ-5D VAS
The EQ-5D consists of a standard vertical 20cm visual analogue scale (EQ VAS), for recording a participant's rating for their current health related quality of life state; the scale went from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Participants were asked to draw a line on the scale to indicate how good or bad your own health is today, in your opinion.
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Change From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using the EQ-5D Summary Index
Self-completion standardized instrument for use as a measure of health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value or utility score that consisted of 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) each of which was rated on a 3-point response scale (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems), and the scores are combined to form a single index utility value between 0 and 1 with higher scores indicating better health
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using the EQ-5D VAS
The EQ-5D consists of a standard vertical 20cm visual analogue scale (EQ VAS), for recording a participant's rating for their current health related quality of life state; the scale went from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Participants were asked to draw a line on the scale to indicate how good or bad your own health is today, in your opinion.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit) in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using EQ-5D Summary Index
Self-completion standardized instrument for use as a measure of health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value or utility score that consisted of 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) each of which was rated on a 3-point response scale (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems), and the scores are combined to form a single index utility value between 0 and 1 with higher scores indicating better health
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Week 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit) in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using the EQ-5D VAS
The EQ-5D consists of a standard vertical 20cm visual analogue scale (EQ VAS), for recording a participant's rating for their current health related quality of life state; the scale went from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Participants were asked to draw a line on the scale to indicate how good or bad your own health is today, in your opinion.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Week 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit) in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using EQ-5D Summary Index
Self-completion standardized instrument for use as a measure of health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value or utility score that consisted of 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) each of which was rated on a 3-point response scale (no problems/some or moderate problems/extreme problems), and the scores are combined to form a single index utility value between 0 and 1 with higher scores indicating better health.
Measured: Screening, Week 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit) in Participant Assessment of Overall Health State Using EQ-5D VAS
The EQ-5D consists of a standard vertical 20cm visual analogue scale (EQ VAS), for recording a participant's rating for their current health related quality of life state; the scale went from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state). Participants were asked to draw a line on the scale to indicate how good or bad your own health is today, in your opinion.
Measured: Screening, Week 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Open-Label in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI:SHP): % Work Time Missed, % Impairment, % Overall Work Impairment, % Activity Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment /absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
- work time missed - a measure of absenteeism, calculated as work time missed due to health problem (question 2) as a proportion of hours actually worked (question 4).
- impairment while working - a measure of presenteeism, the degree to which health problem impacted work (question 5).
- overall work impairment - a measure of overall work productivity loss due to health problem (absenteeism+presenteeism).
- activity impairment - a measure of the degree to which health problem has affected ability to do regular activities other than work at a job (question 6). Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Change From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in WPAI:SHP: Percent Work Time Missed, Percent Impairment, Percent Overall Work Impairment, Percent Activity Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
- work time missed - a measure of absenteeism, calculated as work time missed due to health problem (question 2) as a proportion of hours actually worked (question 4).
- impairment while working - a measure of presenteeism, the degree to which health problem impacted work (question 5).
- overall work impairment - a measure of overall work productivity loss due to health problem (absenteeism+presenteeism).
- activity impairment - a measure of the degree to which health problem has affected ability to do regular activities other than work at a job (question 6).
Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Work Time Missed Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% work time missed - a measure of absenteeism, calculated as work time missed due to health problem (question 2) as a proportion of hours actually worked (question 4).
Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% impairment while working - a measure of presenteeism, the degree to which health problem impacted work (question 5).
Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% overall work impairment - a measure of overall work productivity loss due to health problem (absenteeism+presenteeism).
Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Activity Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% activity impairment - a measure of the degree to which health problem has affected ability to do regular activities other than work at a job (question 6). Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Work Time Missed Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% work time missed - a measure of absenteeism, calculated as work time missed due to health problem (question 2) as a proportion of hours actually worked (question 4). Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% impairment while working - a measure of presenteeism, the degree to which health problem impacted work (question 5). Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% overall work impairment - a measure of overall work productivity loss due to health problem (absenteeism+presenteeism). Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in WPAI:SHP Percent Activity Impairment Due to Low Back Pain
A self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment that yields 4 scores: Absenteeism (work time missed); Presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism+presenteeism); and activity impairment.
% activity impairment - a measure of the degree to which health problem has affected ability to do regular activities other than work at a job (question 6). Each score is expressed as a percentage (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity.
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Titration Period in Hospitalization Because of Low Back Pain as Assessed Using the Healthcare Resource Use (HRU) Questionnaire
Question 3a = In the past 4 weeks, have you been hospitalized due to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain?
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in Hospitalization Because of Low Back Pain as Assessed Using the HRU Questionnaire
Question 3a = In the past 4 weeks, have you been hospitalized due to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain?
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Screening to Randomization Baseline in HRU Questionnaire: Number of Office Visits Directly Related or Any Medication Used for Chronic Low Back Pain
Question 1: number of office visits directly related to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Screening to Randomization Baseline in HRU Questionnaire: Money Spent on Physical Treatments in Past 4 Weeks
Question 2: Money (dollars) spent out-of-pocket on physical treatments in the past 4 weeks to manage chronic low back pain
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Screening to Randomization Baseline in HRU Questionnaire: Nights Stayed in Hospital
Question 3b: nights stayed in the hospital, if answer to Q3a was yes.
Measured: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Screening to End of Open-Label Titration Period in HRU Questionnaire: Number of Office Visits Directly Related or Any Medication Used for Chronic Low Back Pain
Question 1: number of office visits directly related to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain.
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Change From Screening to End of Open-Label Titration Period in HRU Questionnaire: Money Spent on Physical Treatments in Past 4 Weeks
Question 2: Money (dollars) spent out-of-pocket on physical treatments in the past 4 weeks to manage chronic low back pain
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Change From Screening to End of Open-Label Titration Period in HRU Questionnaire: Nights Stayed in Hospital
Question 3b: nights stayed in the hospital, if answer to Q3a was yes.
Measured: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in Hospitalization Because of Low Back Pain as Assessed Using the HRU Questionnaire
Question 3a = In the past 4 weeks, have you been hospitalized due to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain?
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or Early Termination)
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8 and 12 (or Final Visit) in HRU Questionnaire: Number of Office Visits Related to or Medications Used for Chronic Low Back Pain
Question 1: number of office visits directly related to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8 and 12 (or Final Visit) in HRU Questionnaire: Money Spent on Treatments
Question 2: money (dollars) spent out-of-pocket on physical treatments in the past 4 weeks to manage chronic low back pain.
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8 and 12 (or Final Visit) in HRU Questionnaire: Nights Spent in Hospital
Question 3b: nights stayed in the hospital
Measured: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Percentage of Participants With Shift From Screening Period to the End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8 and 12 (or Final Visit) in Hospitalization Because of Low Back Pain as Assessed Using the HRU Questionnaire
Question 3a = In the past 4 weeks, have you been hospitalized due to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain?
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8 and 12 (or Final Visit) in HRU Questionnaire: Number of Office Visits Related or Medication Used for Chronic Low Back Pain
Question 1: number of office visits directly related to chronic low back pain or any medication used for chronic low back pain
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8 and 12 (or Final Visit) in HRU Questionnaire: Money Spent on Treatment for Chronic Low Back Pain
Question 2: money (dollars) spent out-of-pocket on physical treatments in the past 4 weeks to manage chronic low back pain
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Double-Blind Weeks 4, 8 and 12 (or Final Visit) in HRU Questionnaire: Nights in Hospital for Chronic Low Back Pain
Question 3b: nights stayed in the hospital
Measured: Screening, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Mean Oxycodone Average Daily Dose During the Open-Label Titration Period
Measured: Open-Label Period
Mean Oxycodone Duration of Titration During the Open-Label Titration Period
Measured: Open-Label Period
Median Oxycodone Average Daily Dose During the Open-Label Titration Period
Measured: Open-Label Period
Median Oxycodone Duration of Titration During the Open-Label Titration Period
Measured: Open-Label Period
Mean Oxycodone Average Daily Dose During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Measured: Double-Blind Period
Mean Oxycodone Duration of Treatment During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Measured: Double-Blind Period
Median Oxycodone Average Daily Dose During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Measured: Double-Blind Period
Median Oxycodone Duration of Treatment During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Measured: Double-Blind Period
Oxycodone and Noroxycodone Observed Steady-State Plasma Concentration During the Titration Period
Observed steady-state plasma concentration (Cobs) of oxycodone and noroxycodone.
Measured: Blood samples were taken within +/-4 hours of the morning dose of ALO-02 at Week 6/Early Termination, Randomization Baseline
Naltrexone and 6-β-naltrexol Observed Steady-State Plasma Concentration During the Titration Period
Cobs of naltrexone and 6-β-naltrexol
Measured: Blood samples were taken within +/-4 hours of the morning dose of ALO-02 at Week 6/Early Termination, Randomization Baseline
Oxycodone and Noroxycodone Observed Steady-State Plasma Concentration During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Observed steady-state plasma concentration (Cobs) of oxycodone and noroxycodone
Measured: Blood samples were taken within +/-4 hours of the morning dose of study drug at Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Naltrexone and 6-β-naltrexol Observed Steady-State Plasma Concentration During the Double Blind Treatment Period
Observed steady-state plasma concentration (Cobs) of naltrexone and 6-β-naltrexol
Measured: Blood samples were taken within +/-4 hours of the morning dose of study drug at Randomization Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Apr 2012 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2012
- Primary completionJun 2013
- Study completionJun 2013
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 (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Chronic PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by PfizerThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 410 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Pfizer
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Pfizer CT.gov Call Center, Study director, Pfizer
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01571362
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- B4531002
- Other IDs
- B4531002, ALO-02-10-3002
- Status last verified
- Feb 2017
- First submitted
- 3 Apr 2012
- Last updated
- 4 Apr 2017
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- Yes
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Gimbel JS, Rauck RL, Bass A, Wilson J, Pixton G, Malhotra B, Wilson G, Wolfram G. Effects of naltrexone exposure observed in two phase three studies with ALO-02, an extended-release oxycodone surrounding sequestered naltrexone. J Opioid Manag. 2019 Sep/Oct;15(5):417-427. doi: 10.5055/jom.2019.0530.
PubMed 31849032Wilson JG, Bass A, Pixton GC, Wolfram G, Rauck RL. Safety and tolerability of ALO-02 (oxycodone hydrochloride and sequestered naltrexone hydrochloride) extended-release capsules in older patients: a pooled analysis of two clinical trials. Curr Med Res Opin. 2020 Jan;36(1):91-99. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2019.1661679. Epub 2019 Sep 17.
PubMed 31456431Weil AJ, Masters ET, Barsdorf AI, Bass A, Pixton G, Wilson JG, Wolfram G. Patient-reported health-related quality of life, work productivity, and activity impairment during treatment with ALO-02 (extended-release oxycodone and sequestered naltrexone) for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 Oct 17;15(1):202. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0749-y.
PubMed 29041942Rauck RL, Hale ME, Bass A, Bramson C, Pixton G, Wilson JG, Setnik B, Meisner P, Sommerville KW, Malhotra BK, Wolfram G. A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy and safety study of ALO-02 (extended-release oxycodone surrounding sequestered naltrexone) for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain treatment. Pain. 2015 Sep;156(9):1660-1669. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000230.
PubMed 25993547
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Apr 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Multicenter, 12 Week, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomized Withdrawal Study To Determine The Efficacy And Safety Of Alo-02 (Oxycodone Hydrochloride And Naltrexone Hydrochloride) Extended-release Capsules In Subjects With Moderate To Severe Chronic Low Back Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01571362
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- B4531002
- Conditions
- Chronic Pain, Low Back Pain, Analgesia
- Keywords
- oxycodone, naltrexone, chronic pain, low back pain
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 410 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- PfizerIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- Jun 2012
- Primary completion
- Jun 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jun 2013 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 Apr 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 4 Apr 2017
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The primary objective of the study is to determine the analgesic efficacy and safety of ALO-02 extended-release capsules, when compared to placebo, in subjects with moderate to severe chronic low back pain.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| ALO-02 | Experimental | Drug: ALO-02 |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Drug: Placebo |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain present for at least 3 months.
- Require a continuous around-the-clock opioid analgesic for an extended period of time.
- Refrain from taking other opioid and non-opioid medications during the study.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Active or within a past 2 years a history of lumbosacral radiculopathy or chronic low back pain due to other underlying disorders such as spinal stenosis with neurologic impairment, cancer, infection, or post-surgical intervention.
- Documented diagnosis of ongoing pain due to other chronic pain conditions which may interfere with assessment of chronic low back pain.
- Active or ongoing or history of alcohol or drug abuse.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| ALO-02Also: oxycodone HCl and naltrexone HCl20 to 160mg total daily dose of oxycodone, divided into symmetric doses and administered twice daily | Drug | ALO-02 |
| Placebooral placebo, divided into symmetric doses and administered twice daily | Drug | Placebo |
Primary outcome
Change in Weekly Average Electronic Diary (eDiary) Numeric Rating Scale -Pain (NRS-Pain) Score From Randomization Baseline to Final 2 Weeks (Average of Weeks 11 and 12)
Time frame: Weeks 11 and 12
Weekly average diary NRS-Pain scores were derived from the daily NRS-pain scale and calculated as the mean of the last 7 days. NRS-Pain scores based on an 11-point numerical rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Higher scores indicate greater pain.
100 secondary outcomes
Change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score From Randomization Baseline to the End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit).
Time frame: Week 12
Percentage (%) of Participants With Shift in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) by Category With Baseline PGA Score of Very Good (1), Good (2), Fair (3), Poor (4), Very Poor (5) From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Week 12 (or Final Visit).
Time frame: Randomization Baseline, Week 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction of Greater or Equal to (≥) 20%
Time frame: Weeks 11 and 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction ≥30%
Time frame: Weeks 11 and 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction ≥40%
Time frame: Weeks 11 and 12
Percentage of Participants With Improvement in Weekly Average eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Screening to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) by Cumulative Percent Reduction ≥50%
Time frame: Weeks 11 and 12
Change From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Treatment in Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form (BPI-sf): Worst Pain, Least Pain, Average Pain, Pain Right Now, Pain Severity Index, Pain Interference Index
Time frame: Screening, Week 4, 5, or 6
Change From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline in BPI-sf: Worst Pain, Least Pain, Average Pain, Pain Right Now, Pain Severity Index, Pain Interference Index
Time frame: Screening, Randomization Baseline
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Worst Pain
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Least Pain
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Average Pain
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Right Now
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Severity Index
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Randomization Baseline to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Interference Index
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Worst Pain
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Least Pain
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Average Pain
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Right Now
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Severity Index
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Change From Screening to End of Double-Blind Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 (or Final Visit) in BPI-sf Scores of Pain Interference Index
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12
Area Under the Curve (AUC) of eDiary NRS-Pain Scores From Randomization Baseline to Final 2 Weeks of the Double-Blind Treatment Period (Weeks 11 and 12)
Time frame: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 11 and 12
Average Daily Use of Rescue Acetaminophen (Milligrams Per Day [mg/Day]) During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Time frame: Daily from Day 1 of the Double-Blind Period through Week 12
Percentage of Participants With a 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Treatment
Time frame: Screening, Week 4, 5 or 6
Median Time to 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Treatment
Time frame: Screening, Week 4, 5, or 6
Percentage of Participants With a 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline
Time frame: Screening, Randomization Baseline (up to 6 weeks)
Median Time to 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Analgesic Response From Screening Period to Randomization Baseline
Time frame: Screening, Randomization Baseline (up to 6 weeks)
Percentage of Participants With a 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Loss of Analgesic Response From Randomization Baseline During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Time frame: Randomization Baseline, up to Week 12
Median Time to 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% Loss of Analgesic Response From Baseline During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Time frame: Randomization Baseline, up to Week 12
Percentage of Participants Discontinuing Treatment for Investigator-Reported Lack of Efficacy
Time frame: Week 1 up to Week 12
Median Time to Treatment Discontinuation for Investigator-Reported Lack of Efficacy During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Time frame: Week 1 up to Week 12
Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) Total Score During the Open-Label Titration Period
Time frame: Screening, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
COWS Total Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Time frame: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12
COWS Total Score During the Post-Treatment Period
Time frame: Follow-Up (FU) Weeks 1 and 2
Percentage of Participants With Opiate Withdrawal During the Open-Label Titration Period by COWS Category
Time frame: Screening, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (or Early Termination)
Percentage of Participants With Opiate Withdrawal During the Double-Blind Treatment Period by COWS Category
Time frame: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 (or Early Termination)
Percentage of Participants With Opiate Withdrawal During Post-Treatment by COWS Category
Time frame: Follow-Up Weeks 1 and 2
Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) During the Open-Label Titration Period
Time frame: Screening, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
SOWS Total Score During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Time frame: Randomization Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12
SOWS Total Score During the Post-Treatment Period
Time frame: Follow-Up Weeks 1 and 2
Change From Screening Period to End of Open-Label Titration Period in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score for All Participants
Time frame: Screening, Week 6 (or Early Termination)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Apr 2017.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31849032Gimbel JS, Rauck RL, Bass A, Wilson J, Pixton G, Malhotra B, Wilson G, Wolfram G. Effects of naltrexone exposure observed in two phase three studies with ALO-02, an extended-release oxycodone surrounding sequestered naltrexone. J Opioid Manag. 2019 Sep/Oct;15(5):417-427. doi: 10.5055/jom.2019.0530.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31456431Wilson JG, Bass A, Pixton GC, Wolfram G, Rauck RL. Safety and tolerability of ALO-02 (oxycodone hydrochloride and sequestered naltrexone hydrochloride) extended-release capsules in older patients: a pooled analysis of two clinical trials. Curr Med Res Opin. 2020 Jan;36(1):91-99. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2019.1661679. Epub 2019 Sep 17.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29041942Weil AJ, Masters ET, Barsdorf AI, Bass A, Pixton G, Wilson JG, Wolfram G. Patient-reported health-related quality of life, work productivity, and activity impairment during treatment with ALO-02 (extended-release oxycodone and sequestered naltrexone) for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 Oct 17;15(1):202. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0749-y.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25993547Rauck RL, Hale ME, Bass A, Bramson C, Pixton G, Wilson JG, Setnik B, Meisner P, Sommerville KW, Malhotra BK, Wolfram G. A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy and safety study of ALO-02 (extended-release oxycodone surrounding sequestered naltrexone) for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain treatment. Pain. 2015 Sep;156(9):1660-1669. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000230.
- To obtain contact information for a study center near you, click here.Link provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Chronic Pain
Recruiting
Empowered Relief® for Cancer Survivors With Chronic Pain
Chronic Pain Due to Cancer, Pain Catastrophizing
RecruitingObservational study
Pain Phenotypes in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis
Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Lumbar Stabilization Exercises With and Without YTWL (Scapular Stabilization Exercises) on Reducing Chronic Low Back Pain and Related Disability. A Randomized Clinical Trial,
Chronic Non Specific Mechanical Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Comparing Non-Medicine Strategies for Improving Low Back Pain
Chronic Low-back Pain (cLBP), High-Impact Chronic Pain (HICP)
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Pectoral Nerve Block (PECS) Using Magnesium Sulfate Added to Dexamethasone on Quality of Recovery and Chronic Post-Mastectomy Pain
Breast Cancer, Postoperative Pain
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
52 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 ALO-02 in people with Chronic Pain and Low Back Pain, run by Pfizer at 52 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 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 Apr 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 52 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 4 Apr 2017). 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 in Weekly Average Electronic Diary (eDiary) Numeric Rating Scale -Pain (NRS-Pain) Score From Randomization Baseline to Final 2 Weeks (Average of Weeks 11 and 12) (time frame: Weeks 11 and 12). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01571362, which also lists 4 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 Apr 2017.