Low Back PainPhase 3TANGONCT02528253
A Phase 3 Study of Tanezumab for Chronic Low Back Pain
A Phase 3 study testing Tanezumab 5 mg SC, Tanezumab 10 mg SC and Tramadol PR oral in people with Low Back Pain, run by Pfizer at 262 sites in 9 countries.
Trial summary
This study will investigate the efficacy and safety of tanezumab 5 mg and 10 mg administered by subcutaneous injection seven times at 8 week intervals (56 weeks). The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of tanezumab 10 mg and 5 mg compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic low back… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Low Back Pain
- What is being tested?
- Tanezumab 5 mg SC, Tanezumab 10 mg SC and Tramadol PR oral
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 1,832 participants
- Where
- 262 sitesin 9 countries
- Study dates
- 18 Aug 2015to 20 Dec 2018
- 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
- -Chronic low back pain ≥3 months in duration, Quebec Task Force in Spinal Disorders class 1 or 2, with documented history of previous inadequate treatment response to at least 3 different categories of agents commonly used and generally considered effective for the treatment of chronic low back pain.
Who cannot join
- --Diagnosis of osteoarthritis of the knee or hip as defined by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria.
- Subjects who have Kellgren Lawrence Grade > or =2 radiographic evidence of hip or Grade > or=3 radiographic evidence of knee osteoarthritis will be excluded;
- History or radiographic evidence of other diseases that could confound efficacy or safety assessments (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis).
- History or radiographic evidence of orthopedic conditions that may increase the risk of, or confound assessment of joint safety conditions during the study.
- Signs and symptoms of clinically significant cardiac disease within 6 months of the study (e.g., unstable angina, myocardial infarction, resting bradycardia, poorly controlled or untreated hypertension) as defined in the protocol or subjects with any other cardiovascular illness that in the opinion of the Investigator would render a subject unsuitable to participate in the study
- History, diagnosis, or signs and symptoms of clinically significant neurological disease (e.g., transient ischemic attack, stroke, peripheral or autonomic neuropathy) as specified in the protocol
- Subjects with evidence or symptoms consistent with autonomic dysfunction (e.g., orthostatic hypotension and/or autonomic symptoms) as defined in the protocol.
Trial locations and contacts
262 sites in 9 countries.
262 sites in 9 countries
United States179 sites
Albuquerque Clinical Trials, Inc.
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87102
New Mexico Clinical Research & Osteoporosis Center, Inc.
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87106
Anaheim Clinical Trials, LLC
Anaheim, California, 92801
KRK Medical Research
Arlington, Texas, 76012
JEM Research Institute
Atlantis, Florida, 33462
Great Lakes Research Group, Inc.
Bay City, Michigan, 48706
Clinical Inquest Center Ltd
Beavercreek, Ohio, 45431
Washington Center for Pain Management
Bellevue, Washington, 98004
Northwest Clinical Research Center
Bellevue, Washington, 98007
Comprehensive Clinical Research
Berlin, New Jersey, 08009
Central Alabama Research
Birmingham, Alabama, 35209
Cahaba Research
Birmingham, Alabama, 35242
River Birch Research Alliance, LLC
Blue Ridge, Georgia, 30513
Willis-Knighton Physician Network/ Spine and Pain Specialist
Bossier City, Louisiana, 71111
Willis-Knighton Physician Network/WKB Family Medicine Associates
Bossier City, Louisiana, 71111
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts, 02115
Alpine Clinical Research Center
Boulder, Colorado, 80301
Orthopedic Research Institute
Boynton Beach, Florida, 33472
New England Research Associates, LLC
Bridgeport, Connecticut, 06606
Healthwise Medical Associates
Brooklyn, New York, 11206
Investigators Research Group, LLC
Brownsburg, Indiana, 46112
Valley Medical Research/Valley Medical Primary Care
Centerville, Ohio, 45459
Core Healthcare Group
Cerritos, California, 90703
Charlottesville Medical Research Center, LLC
Charlottesville, Virginia, 22911
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, 02467
Medex Healthcare Research Inc
Chicago, Illinois, 60602
Chicago Clinical Research Institute, Inc.
Chicago, Illinois, 60607
Northwestern Memorial Hospital - Arkes Pavilion, Diagnostic Testing Center
Chicago, Illinois, 60611
Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine
Chicago, Illinois, 60611
Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Lavin Pavilion
Chicago, Illinois, 60611
Northwestern University
Chicago, Illinois, 60611
Great Lakes Clinical Trials
Chicago, Illinois, 60640
Chicago Anesthesia Pain Specialists
Chicago, Illinois, 60657
eStudySite
Chula Vista, California, 91911
Hightop Medical Research Center
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45224
New Horizons Clinical Research
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45242
TLM Medical Services
Columbia, South Carolina, 29204
Columbus Regional Research Institute
Columbus, Georgia, 31904
Optimed Research LTD
Columbus, Ohio, 43235
Clinical Research of South Florida
Coral Gables, Florida, 33134
Mayfield Imaging Center
Crestview Hills, Kentucky, 41017
Klein & Associates, M.D., P.A.
Cumberland, Maryland, 21502
Avail Clinical Research,LLC
DeLand, Florida, 32720
Midland Florida Clinical Research Center, LLC
DeLand, Florida, 32720
Mountain View Clinical Research, Inc.
Denver, Colorado, 80209
Mountain View Clinical Research, Inc
Denver, Colorado, 80209
The Iowa Clinic - Internal Medicine
Des Moines, Iowa, 50309
The Iowa Clinic Medical Imaging
Des Moines, Iowa, 50309
The Iowa Clinic
Des Moines, Iowa, 50309
Brandywine Clinical Research
Downingtown, Pennsylvania, 19335
Physicians Research Options, LLC
Draper, Utah, 84020
Altoona Center for Clinical Research
Duncansville, Pennsylvania, 16635
Otri-Med Corporation
Edgewood, Kentucky, 41017
St Elizabeth Hospital Edgewood
Edgewood, Kentucky, 41017
Triwest Research Associates, LLC
El Cajon, California, 92020
MediSphere Medical Research Center, LLC
Evansville, Indiana, 47714
Lillestol Research, LLC
Fargo, North Dakota, 58104
Plains Clinical Research Center, LLC
Fargo, North Dakota, 58104
S&W Clinical Research
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33306
Prestige Clinical Research
Franklin, Ohio, 45005
Research Center of Fresno, Inc.
Fresno, California, 93702
Neuro-Pain Medical Center
Fresno, California, 93710
Valley Research-Trials
Fresno, California, 93720
Heartland Diagnostics
Frgi, North Dakota, 58104
Center for Advanced Research & Education
Gainesville, Georgia, 30501
Collaborative Neuroscience Network, LLC.
Garden Grove, California, 92845
DeGarmo Institute of Medical Research
Greer, South Carolina, 29650
MD Clinical
Hallandale, Florida, 33009
Drug Trials America
Hartsdale, New York, 10530
Pines Clinical Research Inc.
Hollywood, Florida, 33024
East-West Medical Research Institute
Honolulu, Hawaii, 96814
Advances In Health
Houston, Texas, 77030
Centex Studies, Inc./Clear Lake Family Physicians
Houston, Texas, 77058
Clinical Trial Network
Houston, Texas, 77074
CRC of Jackson, LLC
Jackson, Mississippi, 39202
Physician's Surgery Center
Jackson, Mississippi, 39202
Clinical Neuroscience Solutions, Inc.
Jacksonville, Florida, 32256
Health Awareness, Inc.
Jupiter, Florida, 33458
PCET Research Center, LLC
Knoxville, Tennessee, 37909
eStudySite
La Mesa, California, 91942
Lafayette Clinical Research Group
Lafayette, Indiana, 47905
Lafayette Regional Vein and Laser Center
Lafayette, Indiana, 47905
Centex Studies, Inc
Lake Charles, Louisiana, 70601
Affiliated Clinical Research, Inc.
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89106
Office of Stephen H. Miller, MD
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89117
Office of Robert Kaplan, DO
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89119
Advanced Biomedical Research of America
Las Vegas, Nevada, 89123
Northstate Clinical Research
Lenoir, North Carolina, 28645
KLR Business Group dba Arkansas Clinical Research
Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205
Lynn Institute of the Ozarks
Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205
Primary Care of Arkansas, P.A.
Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205
Collaborative Neuroscience Network, LLC.
Long Beach, California, 90806
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California, 90033
USC IDS Pharmacy
Los Angeles, California, 90033
Drug Studies America
Marietta, Georgia, 30060
Georgia Institute for Clinical Research, LLC
Marietta, Georgia, 30060
Non-Surgical Orthopaedics, P.C.
Marietta, Georgia, 30060
CRI Worldwide, LLC
Marlton, New Jersey, 08053
Great Lakes Medical Research, LLC
Mentor, Ohio, 44060
Oaktree Clinic
Mentor, Ohio, 44060
Ferguson Family Medicine
Mesa, Arizona, 85215
Columbus Clinical Services, LLC
Miami, Florida, 33125
Larkin Imaging Center
Miami, Florida, 33173
M & M Medical Center, Inc
Miami, Florida, 33185
Quality Research & Medical Center LLC
Miami, Florida, 33186
Crystal Biomedical Research, LLC
Miami Lakes, Florida, 33014
Virginia Research Center
Midlothian, Virginia, 23114
My Health 1st Urgent Care
Milford, Connecticut, 06460
Alabama Clinical Research, LLC
Mobile, Alabama, 36608
Alabama Orthopaedic Clinic, P.C.
Mobile, Alabama, 36608
Coastal Clinical Research
Mobile, Alabama, 36608
Horizon Research Partners, LLC
Mobile, Alabama, 36608
Catalina Research Institute, LLC
Montclair, California, 91763
On Site Clinical Solutions, LLC
Mooresville, North Carolina, 28117
Quality Medical Research
Nashville, Tennessee, 37211
Best Clinical Trials, LLC
New Orleans, Louisiana, 70115
George Stanley Walker, MD
New Orleans, Louisiana, 70115
The Medical Research Network, LLC
New York, New York, 10128
Better Health Clinical Research Inc
Newnan, Georgia, 30265
Better Health Clinical Research, Inc.
Newnan, Georgia, 30265
Lowcountry Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine
North Charleston, South Carolina, 29406
Providence Clinical Research
North Hollywood, California, 91606
Sensible Healthcare, LLC.
Ocoee, Florida, 34761
COR Clinical Research, L.L.C
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73103
Health Research of Oklahoma
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73103
NPC Research
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73109
Lynn Health Science Institute
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73112
Olive Branch Family Medical Center
Olive Branch, Mississippi, 38654
Heartland Clinical Research, Inc.
Omaha, Nebraska, 68134
Compass Research, LLC
Orlando, Florida, 32806
National Pain Research Institute
Orlando, Florida, 32807
Mid-America Physiatrists, P.A.
Overland Park, Kansas, 66210
The Pain Center of Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona, 85018
Arizona Research Center
Phoenix, Arizona, 85053
The Pain Relief Center
Plano, Texas, 75024
Progressive Medical Research
Port Orange, Florida, 32127
ActivMed Practices & Research, Inc.
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 03801
Beacon Clinical Research, LLC
Quincy, Massachusetts, 02169
Wake Research Associates, LLC
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27612
Health Concepts
Rapid City, South Dakota, 57702
National Clinical Research - Richmond, Inc.
Richmond, Virginia, 23294
AAIR Research Center
Rochester, New York, 14618
University of Rochester
Rochester, New York, 14618
Michigan Orthopaedic Spine Surgeons
Rochester Hills, Michigan, 48307
Northern California Research
Sacramento, California, 95821
Quality Research, Inc.
San Antonio, Texas, 78209
Lee Medical Associates, PA
San Antonio, Texas, 78213
Progressive Clinical Research, PA
San Antonio, Texas, 78213
Artemis Institute for Clinical Research
San Diego, California, 92103
The Center for Clinical Trials, Inc.
Saraland, Alabama, 36571
Gulfcoast Research Institute
Sarasota, Florida, 34232
Southeast Regional Research Group
Savannah, Georgia, 31401
Valley Pain Consultants
Scottsdale, Arizona, 85254
Clinical Investigation Specialists, Inc.
Skokie, Illinois, 60076
University Clinical Research Center
Somerset, New Jersey, 08873
Encompass Clinical Research
Spring Valley, California, 91978
Medex Healthcare Research, Inc.
St Louis, Missouri, 63117
Meridien Research
St. Petersburg, Florida, 33709
Stamford Therapeutics Consortium
Stamford, Connecticut, 06905
Meridien Research
Tampa, Florida, 33634
Bone Joint & Spine Surgeons, Inc.
Toledo, Ohio, 43623
Premier Research
Trenton, New Jersey, 08611
Oakland Medical Research
Troy, Michigan, 48085
Bayview Research Group
Valley Village, California, 91607
Buynak Clinical Research, P.C.
Valparaiso, Indiana, 46383
Diablo Clinical Research, Inc.
Walnut Creek, California, 94598
Omega Medical Research
Warwick, Rhode Island, 02886
MedVadis Research Corporation
Watertown, Massachusetts, 02472
The Iowa Clinic Medical Imaging
West Des Moines, Iowa, 50266
The Iowa Clinic
West Des Moines, Iowa, 50266
Palm Beach Research Center
West Palm Beach, Florida, 33409
The Center for Rheumatology and Bone Research
Wheaton, Maryland, 20902
Professional Research Network of Kansas, LLC
Wichita, Kansas, 67205
Elite Clinical Trials, Inc.
Wildomar, California, 92595
PMG Research of Winston-Salem, LLC
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27103
The Center for Clinical Research
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27103
North Georgia Clinical Research
Woodstock, Georgia, 30189
North Georgia Internal Medicine
Woodstock, Georgia, 30189
Michigan Pain Consultants
Wyoming, Michigan, 49519
Japan40 sites
Fukushima Medical University Aizu Medical Center
Aizu-Wakamatsu, Fukushima, 969-3492
National Hospital Organization Beppu Medical Center
Beppu, Oita Prefecture, 874-0011
Tokyo Medical and Dental University Medical Hospital
Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519
Chiba University Hospital
Chuo-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 260-8677
Chihaya Hospital
Fukuoka, 813-8501
Kuroda Orthopedic Hospital
Fukuoka, 814-0165
Fukushima Medical University Hospital
Fukushima, 960-1295
Funabashi Municipal Medical Center
Funabashi, Chiba, 273-8588
Fussa Hospital
Fussa, Tokyo, 197-8511
Hakodate Central General Hospital
Hakodate, Hokkaido, 040-8585
Hakodate Ohmura Orthopedic Hospital
Hakodate, Hokkaido, 041-0802
Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, University Hospital
Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, 431-3192
Fukuoka Mirai Hospital
Higashi-ku,Fukuoka, Fukuoka, 813-0017
Kobe Konan Yamate Clinic
Higashinada-ku, Kobe, Hyōgo, 658-0011
Sobajima Clinic
Higashiosaka, Osaka, 577-0011
Omuro Orthopedic Clinic
Himeji, Hyōgo, 670-0976
Hiroshima Red Cross Hospital & Atomic-bomb Survivors Hospital
Hiroshima, 730-8619
Chiba Rosai Hospital
Ichihara, Chiba, 290-0003
Rinku General Medical Center
Izumisano, Osaka, 598-8577
Medical corporate corporation hoshikai Onishi medical clinic
Kako-gun, Hyōgo, 675-1115
National Hospital Organization Kanazawa Medical Center
Kanazawa, Ishikawa-ken, 920-8650
Kobe Red Cross Hospital
Kobe, Hyōgo, 651-0073
Kyushu Rosai Hospital
Kokuraminami-ku,Kitakyushu, Fukuoka, 800-0296
Morita Hospital
Komatsu, Ishikawa-ken, 923-8507
Saitama Jikei Hospital
Kumagaya, Saitama, 360-0816
Marunouchi Hospital
Matsumoto, Nagano, 390-8601
Tokyo Saiseikai Central Hospital
Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-0073
Aichi Medical University Hospital
Nagakute, Aichi-ken, 480-1195
Takagi Hospital
Ōkawa, Fukuoka, 831-0016
Saitama Municipal Hospital
Saitama, 336-8522
Shimonoseki City Hospital
Shimonoseki-shi, Yamaguchi, 750-8520
Kohno Clinical Medicine Research Institute Daisan Kitashinagawa Hospital
Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 140-0001
Ohimachi Orthopaedic Clinic
Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 140-0014
Keio University Hospital
Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582
Nagoya University Hospital
Showa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi-ken, 466-8560
Minamiosaka Hospital
Suminoe-ku, Osaka, Osaka, 559-0012
Toyama University Hospital
Toyama, 930-0194
Yamaguchi University Hospital
Ube, Yamaguchi, 755-8505
Chiba Central Medical Center
Wakaba-ku, Chiba, Chiba, 264-0017
Yonezawa City Hospital
Yonezawa, Yamagata, 992-8502
Spain18 sites
Complejo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruna. Servicio de Farmacia
A Coruña, 15006
Complejo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña
A Coruña, 15006
Instituto de Ciencias Medicas
Alicante, 03004
Hospital de Mar Servicio de Radiologia
Barcelona, 08003
Hospital del Mar Servicio de Farmacia
Barcelona, 08003
Specialist, S.L.
Barcelona, 08006
Specialist. Farmacia
Barcelona, 08006
Hospital del Mar
Barcelona, 08024
Hospital Universitario Quiron-Dexeus
Barcelona, 08025
Hospital Universitario Quiron-Dexeus. Servicio de Farmacia
Barcelona, 08028
Hospital Sanitas CIMA
Barcelona, 08034
Hospital Universitario La Paz.
Madrid, 28046
Hospital Universitario La Paz
Madrid, 28046
Hospital La Moraleja. Pharmacy Service
Madrid, 28050
Hospital La Moraleja
Madrid, 28050
Hospital Regional Universitario de Malaga
Málaga, 29009
Hospital Regional Universitario del Malaga
Málaga, 29009
Hospital Nuestra Senora de la Esperanza
Santiago de Compostela, A Coruna, 15705
Hungary8 sites
Bekes Megyei Koezponti Korhaz Dr Rethy Pal Tagkorhaz
Békéscsaba, 5600
Clinexpert Egeszsegugyi Szolgaltato es Kereskedelmi Kft.
Budapest, 1033
Obudai Egeszsegugyi Centrum Ktf.
Budapest, 1036
Jutrix Kft.
Kecskemét, 6000
CRU Hungary Ltd., MISEK HOSPITAL
Miskolc, 3529
CRU Hungary Ltd., MISEK-Radiology Department
Miskolc, 3529
Clinfan Kft.
Szekszárd, 7100
Tolna Megyei Balassa Janos Korhaz, Ortopediai osztaly
Szekszárd, 7100
South Korea6 sites
CTC Pharmacy, Seoul National University Hospital
Seoul, 03080
Seoul National University Hospital
Seoul, 03080
CTC Pharmacy, Severance Hospital
Seoul, 03722
Severance Hospital
Seoul, 03722
Clinical Trial Pharmacy, Samsung Medical Center
Seoul, 06351
Samsung Medical Center
Seoul, 06351
Canada5 sites
SKDS Research Inc.
Newmarket, Ontario, L3Y 5G8
G.R.M.O. (Groupe de recherche en maladies osseuses) Inc.
Québec, Quebec, G1V 3M7
Centre de recherche Saint-Louis
Québec, Quebec, G1W 4R4
London Road Diagnostic Clinic & Medical Centre
Sarnia, Ontario, N7T 4X3
Diex Research Sherbrooke Inc.
Sherbrooke, Quebec, J1L 0H8
Sweden4 sites
CTC (Clinical Trial Center) Sahlgrenska University Hospital
Gothenburg, 413 45
Pharmasite
Helsingborg, 252 20
Pharmasite
Malmö, 21152
ProbarE i Stockholm AB
Stockholm, 111 37
About this study
Official title: A PHASE 3, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE BLIND, PLACEBO AND ACTIVE-CONTROLLED, MULTICENTER, PARALLEL-GROUP STUDY OF THE ANALGESIC EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TANEZUMAB IN ADULT SUBJECTS WITH CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN
This study will investigate the efficacy and safety of tanezumab 5 mg and 10 mg administered by subcutaneous injection seven times at 8 week intervals (56 weeks). The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of tanezumab 10 mg and 5 mg compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic low back pain. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of tanezumab 10 mg and 5 mg compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic low back pain. In addition, the study will evaluate the effectiveness and long term safety profile of tanezumab treatment for chronic low back pain compared to tramadol Prolonged Release (PR), a medication commonly utilized for the treatment of chronic low back pain.
Read the detailed description
This is a randomized, double blind, placebo and active controlled, multicenter, parallel group Phase 3 study of the efficacy and safety of tanezumab when administered by SC injection for up to 56 weeks in subjects with chronic low back pain. Approximately 1800 subjects will be randomized to 1 of 4 treatment groups in a 2:2:2:3 ratio (ie, 400 subjects per treatment group for the placebo, tanezumab 5 mg and tanezumab 10 mg treatment groups and 600 subjects in the tramadol PR treatment group). Treatment groups will include: 1.) Placebo administered SC at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR up to Week 16. At the Week 16 visit, subjects in this group who meet the efficacy responder criteria will be switched in a blinded fashion in a 1:1 ratio to either tanezumab 5 mg or tanezumab 10 mg administered SC at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR to Week 56; 2.)Tanezumab 5 mg SC administered at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR to Week 56; 3.) Tanezumab 10 mg SC administered at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR to Week 56; 4.) Oral tramadol PR plus placebo administered SC at an 8 week interval to Week 56. The study is designed with a total duration (post randomization) of up to 80 weeks and will consist of three periods: Screening (up to a maximum of 37 days; includes a Washout Period and an Initial Pain Assessment Period), a Double blind Treatment Period (comprised of a 16 week Primary Efficacy Phase and a 40 week Long Term Safety and Efficacy Phase), and a Follow up Period (24 weeks). The Screening Period (beginning up to 37 days prior to Randomization) includes a Washout Period (lasting 2 32 days), if required, and an Initial Pain Assessment Period (the 5 days prior to Randomization/Baseline). Prior to entering the study, subjects must have a documented history of previous inadequate treatment response to medications in 3 different categories of agents commonly used to treat and generally considered effective for the treatment of chronic low back pain.
- Conditions
- Low Back Pain
- Being tested
- Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5mg SC, Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SC, Tanezumab 5 mg SC, Tanezumab 10 mg SC, Tramadol PR oral
- Keywords
- Chronic low back pain, Chronic pain
- Medical subject headings
- Low Back Pain, Chronic Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5mg SCBiological
Placebo SC injection every 8 weeks for 2 injections followed by tanezumab 5 mg injection every 8 weeks for 5 injections
Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SCBiological
Placebo SC injection every 8 weeks for 2 injections, followed by tanezumab 10 mg SC injection for 5 injections
Tanezumab 5 mg SCBiological
Tanezumab 5 mg SC
Tanezumab 10 mg SCBiological
Tanezumab 10 mg SC
Tramadol PR oralBiological
Tramadol PR oral
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5 mg SC | Placebo comparator | Not described Receives: Biological: Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5mg SC |
| Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SC | Placebo comparator | Not described Receives: Biological: Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SC |
| Tanezumab 5 mg SC | Experimental | Not described Receives: Biological: Tanezumab 5 mg SC |
| Tanezumab 10 mg SC | Experimental | Not described Receives: Biological: Tanezumab 10 mg SC |
| Tramadol PR oral | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Biological: Tramadol PR oral |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score for Tanezumab Versus (Vs) Placebo at Week 16
Average low back pain was assessed on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) captured through an interactive response technology (IRT). Participants described their average low back pain during the past 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Secondary outcomes (65)
Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at Week 16 for Tanezumab Versus (Vs) Placebo
The RMDQ is a self-administered, widely used health status measure index of how well participants with low back pain (LBP) are able to function with regard to daily activities. It measures pain and function, using 24 items describing limitations to everyday life that can be caused by LBP. The total score of the RMDQ from the total number of items checked ranged from 0 (no disability) to 24 (maximum disability), where higher scores indicated greater disability.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score for Tanezumab Versus (Vs) Tramadol at Week 16
Average LBP was assessed on an 11-point NRS captured through an IRT. Participants described their average LBP during the past 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Average LBP was assessed on an 11-point NRS captured through an IRT. The LBPI score was captured once daily from baseline up to week 16, and once weekly from week 16 to week 64. Participants described their average LBP during the past 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Daily Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score at Week 64
Average LBP was assessed on an 11-point NRS captured through an IRT. The LBPI score was captured once a week for week 64. Participants described their average LBP during the past 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16 (for Tanezumab vs Tramadol) 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
The RMDQ is a self-administered, widely used health status measure index of how well participants with LBP are able to function with regard to daily activities. It measures pain and function, using 24 items describing limitations to everyday life that can be caused by LBP. The total score of the RMDQ is the total number of items checked ranging from 0 (no disability) to 24 (maximum disability), where higher scores indicated greater disability. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score at Weeks 64 and 80: Observed Data
The RMDQ is a self-administered, widely used health status measure index of how well participants with LBP are able to function with regard to daily activities. It measures pain and function, using 24 items describing limitations to everyday life that can be caused by LBP. The total score of the RMDQ is the total number of items checked ranging from 0 (no disability) to 24 (maximum disability), where higher scores indicated greater disability.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Low Back Pain at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
PGA of LBP was assessed by asking a question to participants: "Considering all the ways your low back pain affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants responded on a 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1-5, using IRT, where 1=very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities); 2=good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities); 3=fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities); 4=poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities); and 5=very poor (very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicated worsening of condition. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Low Back Pain at Week 64: Observed Data
PGA of LBP was assessed by asking a question to participants: "Considering all the ways your low back pain affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants responded on a 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1-5, using IRT, where 1=very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities); 2=good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities); 3=fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities); 4=poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities); and 5=very poor (very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicated worsening of condition.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Percent Change From Baseline in Daily Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score at Weeks 16, 24 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)
Average LBP was assessed on an 11-point NRS captured through an IRT. LBPI score was captured once a week for week 64. Participants described their average LBP during the past 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain.Percentage of participants with cumulative reduction (as percent) (greater than [>] 0%; >= 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 and equals to [=] 100 %) in LBPI from baseline to weeks 16, 24 and 56 were reported, participants (%) are reported more than once in categories specified.Missing data was imputed using mixed BOCF/LOCF.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.Also, intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 24 and 56
Percentage of Participants Achieving Average LBPI Reduction of >=30 Percent(%), >=50%, >=70% and >=90% From Baseline at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)
Average LBP was assessed on an 11-point NRS captured through an IRT. The LBPI score was captured once a week for week 64. Participants described their average LBP during the past 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Percentage of participants with reduction in LBPI of at least (>=) 30%, 50%, 70% and 90% at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56 compared to baseline were classified as responders to LBPI and are reported here, participants (%) are reported more than once in categories specified.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.Also, intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Percentage of Participants Achieving RMDQ Reduction of >=30%, >=50%, >=70% and >=90% From Baseline at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)
RMDQ: health status measure index of how well participants with LBP are able to function with regard to daily activities. Measures pain and function using 24 items describing limitations to everyday life. Total score of RMDQ is total number of items checked ranging from 0=no disability to 24=maximum disability, higher scores=greater disability. Percentage of participants with reduction in LBPI of at least (>=) 30, 50, 70 and 90% at specified weeks compared to baseline were classified as responders to LBPI and are reported here. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms. Also, intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Percent Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score at Weeks 16, 24 and 56
The RMDQ is a self-administered, widely used health status measure index of how well participants with LBP are able to function with regard to daily activities. It measures pain and function, using 24 items describing limitations to everyday life that can be caused by LBP. The total score of the RMDQ is the total number of items checked ranging from 0 (no disability) to 24 (maximum disability), where higher scores indicated greater disability. Percentage of participants with cumulative reduction (as percent) (>0 %; >= 10 %, 20 %, 30 %, 40 %, 50 %, 60 %, 70 %, 80 %, 90% and =100 %) in RMDQ from Baseline to weeks 16, 24 and 56 were reported, participants (%) are reported more than once in categories specified.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 24 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-short Form (BPI-sf) Score Worst Pain at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4 of pain at its 'worst', 'least', 'average' and 'right now'. For the Worst Pain item of the BPI-sf scale (11 point NRS scale; range: 0 [no pain] to 10 [pain as bad as you can imagine]), participants were asked to rate their pain by marking an "X" in one of the boxes that best described their pain at its worst, during 24 hours prior to evaluation, higher scores indicated greater pain severity. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Worst Pain at Week 64: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4 of pain at its 'worst', 'least', 'average' and 'right now'. For the Worst Pain item of the BPI-sf scale (11 point NRS scale; range: 0 [no pain] to 10 [pain as bad as you can imagine]), participants were asked to rate their pain by marking an "X" in one of the boxes that best described their pain at its worst, during 24 hours prior to evaluation, higher scores indicated greater pain severity. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Scores Average Pain at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4 of pain at its 'worst', 'least', 'average' and 'right now'. For the Average Pain item of the BPI-sf scale (11 point NRS scale; range: 0 [no pain] to 10 [pain as bad as you can imagine]), participants were asked to rate their pain by marking an "X" in one of the boxes that best described their pain during 24 hours prior to evaluation, higher scores indicated greater pain severity. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Average Pain at Week 64: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4 of pain at its 'worst', 'least', 'average' and 'right now'. For the Average Pain item of the BPI-sf scale (11 point NRS scale; range: 0 [no pain] to 10 [pain as bad as you can imagine]), participants were asked to rate their pain by marking an "X" in one of the boxes that best described their pain during 24 hours prior to evaluation, higher scores indicated greater pain severity. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference Index at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference Index at Week 64: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With General Activity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With General Activity at Week 64: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Walking Ability at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Walking Ability at Week 64: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Sleep at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Sleep at Week 64: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Normal Work at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Normal Work at Week 64: Observed Data
BPI-sf is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain and pain interference on daily functions during 24 hours prior to evaluation. Severity of pain was measured based on questions 1 to 4. Question 5 (7-items) assessed level of pain interference on daily activities. Pain interference index was calculated as the mean of the seven BPI-sf pain interference items (question 5a to g), being pain interference with general activity; mood; walking ability; normal work (outside home and housework); relations with other people; sleep and enjoyment of life. Responses were given on an 11-point NRS with score ranging from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes), lower scores indicated less pain or pain interference.
Measured: Baseline, Week 64
Number of Participants Who Responded for Chronic Low Back Pain Responder Index at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Chronic Low Back Pain Responder Index analysis is a composite endpoint of average low back pain intensity (aLBPI) score, PGA of Low Back Pain, and RMDQ total score. Participants were successful responders if they had: >=30 percent reduction in mean daily average LBPI from baseline to particular week; decrease of >=30 percent in PGA of low back pain from baseline to particular week or no worsening (increase) in RMDQ total score from baseline to particular week. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms. Also, intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Percentage of Participants Achieving Improvement of >=2 Points in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Low Back Pain From Baseline at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/ Last Observation CF (LOCF)
PGA of LBP assessed by asking question to participants:Considering all ways your low back pain affects you,how are you doing today? They responded on 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1-5, using IRT, where 1=very good (asymptomatic \& no limitation of normal activities);2=good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities);3=fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities);4=poor (severe symptoms \& inability to carry out most normal activities); \& 5=very poor (very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicated worsening of condition. % of participants with improvement of at least 2 points from baseline in PGA of LBP were reported. Missing data was imputed using BOCF/LOCF. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
European Quality of Life- 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Dimensions Score
EQ-5D-5L is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional visual analogue scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile is comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Individual dimension scores ranged from 1.0 (least impairment of health state) to 5.0 (most impairment of health state). Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. The health utility score for a participant with no problems in all 5 items is 1 for all countries (except for Zimbabwe where it is 0.9), and is reduced where a participant reports greater levels of problems across the five dimensions.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40 and 56
European Quality of Life- 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Overall Health Utility Score/ Index Value
EQ-5D-5L: standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score.EQ-5D-5L consists of 2 components: a health state profile and an optional VAS.EQ-5D health state profile comprises of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression.Individual dimension scores ranged from 1.0(least impairment of health state) to 5.0(most impairment of health state). Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems.Responses from five domains were used to calculate a single utility index (Overall health utility score) where values are less than equal to (<=) 1.Overall health utility score for a participant with no problems in all 5 items is 1 for all countries (except for Zimbabwe where it is 0.9), and reduced where participant reports greater levels of problems across five dimensions.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64
Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Low Back Pain (WPAI:LBP) Scores at Baseline: Observed Data
WPAI: LBP is 6-question participant rated questionnaire that measures the effect of participant's chronic low back pain (CLBP) on general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. It yields 4 sub-scores: work time missed due to pain (absenteeism), impairment while working (presenteeism), overall work impairment (work productivity) and activity impairment (daily activity impairment). These sub-scores are expressed as an impairment percentage (range from 0 to 100), with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to Week 16 was to analyze, participants who received placebo from Day 1 and received tanezumab 5/10 mg at week 16 in placebo arm, in pooled manner. Hence data have been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline
Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Low Back Pain (WPAI:LBP) Scores at Weeks 16, 56 and 64
WPAI: LBP is 6-question participant rated questionnaire that measures the effect of participant's chronic low back pain (CLBP) on general health and symptom severity on work productivity and regular activities. It yields 4 sub-scores: work time missed due to pain (absenteeism), impairment while working (presenteeism), overall work impairment (work productivity) and activity impairment (daily activity impairment). These sub-scores are expressed as an impairment percentage (range from 0 to 100), with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 56 and 64
Number of Participants Who Withdrew Due to Lack of Efficacy
Number of participants who withdrew from treatment due to lack of efficacy have been reported here.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 56
Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of Efficacy
Time to discontinuation due to lack of efficacy was defined as the time interval from the date of first study drug administration up to the date of discontinuation of participant from treatment due to lack of efficacy.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 56
Number of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication During Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64
In case of inadequate pain relief, acetaminophen/paracetamol caplets, tablets, or capsules up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication between day 1 and week 56. Number of participants with any use of rescue medication during the particular study week were summarized. As pre specified intent of study, for analyses after week 16 where multiple imputation was used, data was reported per 3 arms. This is because participants who received placebo from Day 1 and received tanezumab 5/10 mg at week 16, received placebo for the first 16 weeks, and their data before week 16 were not be imputed into analyses after week 16.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64
Number of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication During Week 64: Observed Data
In case of inadequate pain relief, after Week 24, acetaminophen/paracetamol up to 4000 mg per day up to 5 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication and use was reported weekly via diary. Number of participants with any use of rescue medication during the 4 weeks up to and including the particular study week were summarized.
Measured: Week 64
Number of Days of Rescue Medication Used at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
In case of inadequate pain relief, acetaminophen/paracetamol caplets, tablets, or capsules up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication between day 1 and week 56. Number of days the participants used the rescue medication during the particular study weeks were summarized. As pre specified intent of study, for analyses after week 16 where multiple imputation was used, data was reported per 3 arms. This is because participants who received placebo from Day 1 and received tanezumab 5/10 mg at week 16, received placebo for the first 16 weeks, and their data before week 16 were not be imputed into analyses after week 16.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Number of Days of Rescue Medication Used at Week 64
In case of inadequate pain relief, acetaminophen/paracetamol caplets, tablets, or capsules up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication between day 1 and week 56. Number of days per week the participants used the rescue medication during the 4 weeks up to and including the particular study week were summarized.
Measured: Week 64
Amount of Rescue Medication Used at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16
In case of inadequate pain relief, acetaminophen/paracetamol caplets, tablets, or capsules up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication between day 1 and week 56. The total dosage of acetaminophen in milligrams used during the specified week were summarized. Pre-specified intent of study for efficacy data up to W16 was to analyze participants who received placebo from Day1 and then received tanezumab 5/10 mg at W16,together,in placebo arm.Data has been reported per four arms.
Measured: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Visits of Services Received Directly Related to Low Back Pain
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources usage during last 3 months (for Baseline during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT). Visits of services directly related to low back pain evaluated were: visits to primary care physician, neurologist, rheumatologist, physician assistant or nurse practitioner, pain specialist, orthopedist, physical therapist, chiropractor, alternative medicine or therapy, podiatrist, nutritionist/dietitian, radiologist, home healthcare services and other practitioner. Participants might have been counted more than once under various categories.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Who Visited the Emergency Room Due to Low Back Pain
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT. Domain evaluated was number of participants who visited the emergency room due to low back pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Visits to the Emergency Room Due to Low Back Pain
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT. Domain evaluated was number of visits to the emergency room due to low back pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Hospitalized Due to Low Back Pain
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT. Domain evaluated was number of participants who were hospitalized due to low back pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Nights Stayed in the Hospital Due to Low Back Pain
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT. Domain evaluated was number of nights stayed in the hospital due to low back pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Who Used Any Aids/Devices for Doing Things
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT. Domain evaluated was number of participants who used any aids/devices for doing things. Aids such as walking aid, wheelchair, device or utensil for dress/bathe/eat and any other aids/devices.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Who Quit Job Due to Low Back Pain
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT. Domain evaluated was number of participants who quit job due to low back pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Duration Since Quitting Job Due to Low Back Pain
Low back pain HCRU assessed utilization of healthcare resources during the last 3 months for baseline, weeks 64 and 80, via IRT. Domain evaluated was duration since quitting job due to low back pain.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Treatment Satisfaction Score Determined With Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication Version II (TSQM v II) at Weeks 16 and 56
TSQM v.II: self-administered 11-item validated scale that quantified participant's level of satisfaction with study medication (7 questions scored on 7-point Likert scale [1= extremely dissatisfied, 2=very dissatisfied, 3=dissatisfied, 4=somewhat satisfied, 5=satisfied, 6=very satisfied, 7=extremely satisfied]), effectiveness and side effects/tolerability (3 questions scored on 5 point Likert scale [1= extremely dissatisfied, 2=very dissatisfied, 3=somewhat dissatisfied, 4=slightly dissatisfied, 5=not at all dissatisfied], 1 question on 2 point scale [0 =No, 1=Yes]). 11 questions of TSQM were used to calculate 4 endpoints of effectiveness, side effects, convenience and global satisfaction, each scored on a 0-100 scale with 100=best level of satisfaction. Pre-specified intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Weeks 16 and 56
Patient Reported Treatment Impact Assessment-Modified (mPRTI) Score at Weeks 16 and 56: Participant Global Preference Assessment- What is The Current or Most Recent Treatment You Were Receiving For Low Back Pain Before Enrolling?
The mPRTI is a self-administered questionnaire containing participant reported treatment impact assessment (to assess participant satisfaction), participant global preference assessment (to assess previous treatment and preference to continue using the investigational product) and participant willingness to use drug again assessment. To assess previous treatment, participants responded for, 1=injectable prescription medicines, 2=prescription medicines taken by mouth, 3=surgery, 4=prescription medicines and surgery and 5=no treatment. Pre-specified intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Weeks 16 and 56
Patient Reported Treatment Impact Assessment-Modified (mPRTI) Score at Weeks 16 and 56: Participant Global Preference Assessment- Overall, do You Prefer The Drug That You Received in This Study to Previous Treatment?
mPRTI : self-administered questionnaire containing participant reported treatment impact assessment (to assess participant satisfaction),participant global preference assessment (to assess previous treatment \& preference to continue using investigational product) \& participant willingness to use drug again assessment. To assess preference to continue using investigational product, participants responded using IRT on 5 point likert scale from 1-5, where, 1= yes, I definitely prefer drug that I am receiving now, 2= I have a slight preference for drug that I am receiving now, 3= I have no preference either way, 4= I have a slight preference for my previous treatment, 5= No, I definitely prefer my previous treatment. Higher scores indicate lesser preference to use investigational product. Pre-specified intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Weeks 16 and 56
Patient Reported Treatment Impact Assessment-Modified (mPRTI) Score at Weeks 16 and 56: Participant Willingness to Use Drug Again Assessment- Willing to Use The Same Drug That You Have Received in This Study For Your Low Back Pain Pain?
mPRTI: self-administered questionnaire containing participant reported treatment impact assessment (to assess participant satisfaction),participant global preference assessment (to assess previous treatment and preference to continue using the investigational product) \& participant willingness to use drug again assessment. To assess participants willingness to use drug again, participants responded using IRT on 5 point likert scale from 1-5, where, 1= yes, I would definitely want to use the same drug again, 2= I might want to use the same drug again, 3= I am not sure, 4= I might not want to use the same drug again, 5= no, I definitely would not want to use the same drug again. Higher scores indicate lesser willingness to use the investigational product. Pre-specified intent of study was to compare tanezumab Vs placebo for data up to \& including W16 \& comparisons of tanezumab Vs tramadol for data up to \& including W56.
Measured: Weeks 16 and 56
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to week 80 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included both serious and non-serious AEs.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 80
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Treatment-Related Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) up to Week 56
Treatment-related AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in participant who received study drug. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to W56 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. Relatedness to study drug was assessed by the investigator. Pre-specified intent of study for summaries for the entire treatment period (up to week 56), data was summarized by 3 arms.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 56
Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Abnormalities With Regard to Normal Baseline
Primary Abnormality criteria: HGB, hematocrit, RBC count <0.8* lower limit of normal(LLN); Ery. mean corpuscular volume/hemoglobin/ HGB concentration, RBCs distribution width <0.9*LLN, >1.1*upper limit of normal(ULN); platelets <0.5*LLN,>1.75*ULN; WBC count<0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; Lymphocytes,Leukocytes,Neutrophils <0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; Basophils,Eosinophils,Monocytes>1.2*ULN; Prothrombin time/Intl. normalized ratio>1.1*ULN; total bilirubin>1.5*ULN; aspartate aminotransferase,alanine aminotransferase,gamma GT,LDH,alkaline phosphatase >3.0*ULN; total protein; albumin<0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; blood urea nitrogen,creatinine,Cholesterol,triglycerides >1.3*ULN; Urate>1.2*ULN; sodium<0.95*LLN,>1.05*ULN; potassium,chloride,calcium,magnesium,bicarbonate <0.9*LLN, >1.1*ULN; phosphate<0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; glucose<0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; HGB A1C >1.3*ULN; creatine kinase>2.0*ULN, specific gravity<1.003, >1.030; pH<4.5, >8; Urine Glucose, protein,HGB,bilirubin >=1; Ketones>=1;Urine erythrocytes,Leukocytes>=20.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 80
Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Abnormalities With Regard to Abnormal Baseline
Primary Abnormality criteria: hemoglobin; hematocrit; RBC count < 0.8*LLN; Ery. mean corpuscular volume/ hemoglobin/ HGB concentration, erythrocytes distribution width <0.9*LLN, >1.1*ULN; platelets <0.5*LLN,>1.75*upper limit of normal (ULN); white blood cell count<0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; Lymphocytes, Leukocytes, Neutrophils <0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; Basophils, Eosinophils, Monocytes >1.2*ULN; total bilirubin>1.5*ULN; aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, gamma GT,LDH, alkaline phosphatase >3.0*ULN; total protein; albumin<0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, Cholesterol, triglycerides >1.3*ULN; Urate >1.2*ULN; sodium <0.95*LLN,>1.05*ULN; potassium, chloride, calcium, magnesium, bicarbonate <0.9*LLN, >1.1*ULN; phosphate <0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; glucose <0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; Hemoglobin A1C >1.3*ULN; creatine kinase >2.0*ULN; Nitrite >=1.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 80
Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure (BP) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
Measurement of BP included sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
Heart rate was measured at sitting position. Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
Change From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters at Weeks 16, 56 and 80
A 12-lead ECG was recorded after participants had rested for at least 5 minutes in the supine position in a quiet environment. All standard intervals {RR interval, PR interval, QRS interval, QT interval, QT interval corrected using Bazett's formula (QTcB) and QT interval corrected using Fridericia's formula (QTcF)} were collected. Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 56 and 80
Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (as Assessed by ECG) at Weeks 16, 56 and 80
Heart rate was measured at sitting position. Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 16, 56 and 80
Number of Participants With Confirmed Orthostatic Hypotension
Orthostatic hypotension was defined as postural change (supine to standing) that met the following criteria: For systolic BP <=150 mmHg (mean supine): Reduction in systolic BP>=20 mmHg or reduction in diastolic BP>=10 mmHg at the 1 and/or 3 minute standing BP measurements. For systolic BP >150 mmHg (mean supine): Reduction in systolic BP>=30 mmHg or reduction in diastolic BP>=15 mmHg at the 1 and/or 3 minute standing BP measurements. If the 1 minute or 3 minute standing BP in a sequence met the orthostatic hypotension criteria, then that sequence was considered positive. If 2 of 2 or 2 of 3 sequences were positive, then orthostatic hypotension was considered confirmed. Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms. Data not collected after W16 in placebo arm for this OM, as those who met criteria to continue, switched to active treatment with tanezumab after W16.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
Change From Screening in Survey of Autonomic Symptom (SAS) Scores at Weeks 24, 56 and 80
The SAS is a 12 item (11 for females) questionnaire, from which the total number of symptoms (0-12 for males and 0-11 for females) is calculated. Each positive symptom is rated from 1 (not at all) to 5 (a lot). The total impact score was the sum of all symptom rating scores, with 0 assigned where the participant did not have the particular symptom. The range for the total impact score is 0-60 for males and 0-55 for females, higher scores indicating higher impact. Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms.
Measured: Screening (up to maximum of 37 days prior to Baseline), Weeks 24, 56 and 80
Percentage of Participants With Adjudicated Joint Safety Outcomes
Incidence of participants with any of the joint safety adjudication outcomes of primary osteonecrosis, rapidly progressive OA (type 1 and type 2), subchondral insufficiency fracture (or SPONK), or pathological fracture.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 80
Percentage of Participants With Total Joint Replacements
Percentage of participants who underwent at least one total knee, hip or shoulder joint replacement surgery.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 80
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate participant for signs of peripheral neuropathy. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side, where 24 items scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis), higher score indicated higher abnormality/impairment and 13 items scored from 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent), higher score indicated higher impairment. NIS possible overall score ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased impairment. Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
Number of Participants With Anti Tanezumab Antibodies
Human serum ADA samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using a semi quantitative enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Participants listed as having anti-tanezumab antibodies had ADA titer level >=3.32. Less than 3.32 was considered below the limit of quantitation. Pre-specified intent of study for safety summaries until W80 was to summarize data by 4 arms.
Measured: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Aug 2015 (estimated)
- Study start18 Aug 2015
- Primary completion17 Oct 2017
- Study completion20 Dec 2018
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 (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Low Back 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
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 1,832 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Pfizer
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Eli Lilly and Company
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Pfizer CT.gov Call Center, Study director, Pfizer
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02528253
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A4091059
- Other IDs
- 2012-005495-34, CLBP SC STUDY, A4091059, TANGO
- Acronym
- TANGO
- Status last verified
- Feb 2020
- First submitted
- 11 Aug 2015
- Last updated
- 21 Feb 2020
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- Yes
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Pfizer will provide access to individual de-identified participant data and related study documents (e.g. protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), Clinical Study Report (CSR)) upon request from qualified researchers, and subject to certain criteria, conditions, and exceptions. Further details on Pfizer's data sharing criteria and process for requesting access can be found at: https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical\_trials/trial\_data\_and\_results/data\_requests.
Publications
Markman JD, Schnitzer TJ, Perrot S, Beydoun SR, Ohtori S, Viktrup L, Yang R, Bramson C, West CR, Verburg KM. Clinical Meaningfulness of Response to Tanezumab in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: Analysis From a 56-Week, Randomized, Placebo- and Tramadol-Controlled, Phase 3 Trial. Pain Ther. 2022 Dec;11(4):1267-1285. doi: 10.1007/s40122-022-00424-7. Epub 2022 Aug 13.
PubMed 35962939Markman JD, Bolash RB, McAlindon TE, Kivitz AJ, Pombo-Suarez M, Ohtori S, Roemer FW, Li DJ, Viktrup L, Bramson C, West CR, Verburg KM. Tanezumab for chronic low back pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, phase 3 study of efficacy and safety. Pain. 2020 Sep 1;161(9):2068-2078. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001928.
PubMed 32453139
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Feb 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A PHASE 3, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE BLIND, PLACEBO AND ACTIVE-CONTROLLED, MULTICENTER, PARALLEL-GROUP STUDY OF THE ANALGESIC EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TANEZUMAB IN ADULT SUBJECTS WITH CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02528253
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TANGO / A4091059
- Conditions
- Low Back Pain
- Keywords
- Chronic low back pain, Chronic pain
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,832 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- PfizerIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Eli Lilly and Company
- Study start
- 18 Aug 2015 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 17 Oct 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 20 Dec 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 19 Aug 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 21 Feb 2020
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will investigate the efficacy and safety of tanezumab 5 mg and 10 mg administered by subcutaneous injection seven times at 8 week intervals (56 weeks). The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of tanezumab 10 mg and 5 mg compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic low back pain. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of tanezumab 10 mg and 5 mg compared to placebo for the treatment of chronic low back pain. In addition, the study will evaluate the effectiveness and long term safety profile of tanezumab treatment for chronic low back pain compared to tramadol Prolonged Release (PR), a medication commonly utilized for the treatment of chronic low back pain.
Detailed description
This is a randomized, double blind, placebo and active controlled, multicenter, parallel group Phase 3 study of the efficacy and safety of tanezumab when administered by SC injection for up to 56 weeks in subjects with chronic low back pain. Approximately 1800 subjects will be randomized to 1 of 4 treatment groups in a 2:2:2:3 ratio (ie, 400 subjects per treatment group for the placebo, tanezumab 5 mg and tanezumab 10 mg treatment groups and 600 subjects in the tramadol PR treatment group). Treatment groups will include: 1.) Placebo administered SC at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR up to Week 16. At the Week 16 visit, subjects in this group who meet the efficacy responder criteria will be switched in a blinded fashion in a 1:1 ratio to either tanezumab 5 mg or tanezumab 10 mg administered SC at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR to Week 56; 2.)Tanezumab 5 mg SC administered at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR to Week 56; 3.) Tanezumab 10 mg SC administered at an 8 week interval plus placebo matching tramadol PR to Week 56; 4.) Oral tramadol PR plus placebo administered SC at an 8 week interval to Week 56. The study is designed with a total duration (post randomization) of up to 80 weeks and will consist of three periods: Screening (up to a maximum of 37 days; includes a Washout Period and an Initial Pain Assessment Period), a Double blind Treatment Period (comprised of a 16 week Primary Efficacy Phase and a 40 week Long Term Safety and Efficacy Phase), and a Follow up Period (24 weeks). The Screening Period (beginning up to 37 days prior to Randomization) includes a Washout Period (lasting 2 32 days), if required, and an Initial Pain Assessment Period (the 5 days prior to Randomization/Baseline). Prior to entering the study, subjects must have a documented history of previous inadequate treatment response to medications in 3 different categories of agents commonly used to treat and generally considered effective for the treatment of chronic low back pain.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 5
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5 mg SC | Placebo comparator | Biological: Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5mg SC |
| Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SC | Placebo comparator | Biological: Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SC |
| Tanezumab 5 mg SC | Experimental | Biological: Tanezumab 5 mg SC |
| Tanezumab 10 mg SC | Experimental | Biological: Tanezumab 10 mg SC |
| Tramadol PR oral | Active comparator | Biological: Tramadol PR oral |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -Chronic low back pain ≥3 months in duration, Quebec Task Force in Spinal Disorders class 1 or 2, with documented history of previous inadequate treatment response to at least 3 different categories of agents commonly used and generally considered effective for the treatment of chronic low back pain.
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- --Diagnosis of osteoarthritis of the knee or hip as defined by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria.
- Subjects who have Kellgren Lawrence Grade > or =2 radiographic evidence of hip or Grade > or=3 radiographic evidence of knee osteoarthritis will be excluded;
- History or radiographic evidence of other diseases that could confound efficacy or safety assessments (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis).
- History or radiographic evidence of orthopedic conditions that may increase the risk of, or confound assessment of joint safety conditions during the study.
- Signs and symptoms of clinically significant cardiac disease within 6 months of the study (e.g., unstable angina, myocardial infarction, resting bradycardia, poorly controlled or untreated hypertension) as defined in the protocol or subjects with any other cardiovascular illness that in the opinion of the Investigator would render a subject unsuitable to participate in the study
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5mg SCPlacebo SC injection every 8 weeks for 2 injections followed by tanezumab 5 mg injection every 8 weeks for 5 injections | Biological | Placebo to Week 16; tanezumab 5 mg SC |
| Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SCPlacebo SC injection every 8 weeks for 2 injections, followed by tanezumab 10 mg SC injection for 5 injections | Biological | Placebo to Week 16, tanezumab 10 mg SC |
| Tanezumab 5 mg SCTanezumab 5 mg SC | Biological | Tanezumab 5 mg SC |
| Tanezumab 10 mg SCTanezumab 10 mg SC | Biological | Tanezumab 10 mg SC |
| Tramadol PR oralTramadol PR oral | Biological | Tramadol PR oral |
Primary outcome
Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score for Tanezumab Versus (Vs) Placebo at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Average low back pain was assessed on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) captured through an interactive response technology (IRT). Participants described their average low back pain during the past 24 hours on a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain.
65 secondary outcomes
Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at Week 16 for Tanezumab Versus (Vs) Placebo
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score for Tanezumab Versus (Vs) Tramadol at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Daily Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score at Week 64
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16 (for Tanezumab vs Tramadol) 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score at Weeks 64 and 80: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Low Back Pain at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Low Back Pain at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Percent Change From Baseline in Daily Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score at Weeks 16, 24 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 24 and 56
Percentage of Participants Achieving Average LBPI Reduction of >=30 Percent(%), >=50%, >=70% and >=90% From Baseline at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Percentage of Participants Achieving RMDQ Reduction of >=30%, >=50%, >=70% and >=90% From Baseline at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Percent Change From Baseline in Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score at Weeks 16, 24 and 56
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 24 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-short Form (BPI-sf) Score Worst Pain at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Worst Pain at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Scores Average Pain at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Average Pain at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference Index at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference Index at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With General Activity at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With General Activity at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Walking Ability at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Walking Ability at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Sleep at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Sleep at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Normal Work at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf) Score Pain Interference With Normal Work at Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline, Week 64
Number of Participants Who Responded for Chronic Low Back Pain Responder Index at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Percentage of Participants Achieving Improvement of >=2 Points in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Low Back Pain From Baseline at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Mixed Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)/ Last Observation CF (LOCF)
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
European Quality of Life- 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Dimensions Score
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40 and 56
European Quality of Life- 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Overall Health Utility Score/ Index Value
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64
Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Low Back Pain (WPAI:LBP) Scores at Baseline: Observed Data
Time frame: Baseline
Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Low Back Pain (WPAI:LBP) Scores at Weeks 16, 56 and 64
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 16, 56 and 64
Number of Participants Who Withdrew Due to Lack of Efficacy
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 56
Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of Efficacy
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 56
Number of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication During Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64
Number of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication During Week 64: Observed Data
Time frame: Week 64
Number of Days of Rescue Medication Used at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Number of Days of Rescue Medication Used at Week 64
Time frame: Week 64
Amount of Rescue Medication Used at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16
Time frame: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16
Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Visits of Services Received Directly Related to Low Back Pain
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Feb 2020.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35962939Markman JD, Schnitzer TJ, Perrot S, Beydoun SR, Ohtori S, Viktrup L, Yang R, Bramson C, West CR, Verburg KM. Clinical Meaningfulness of Response to Tanezumab in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: Analysis From a 56-Week, Randomized, Placebo- and Tramadol-Controlled, Phase 3 Trial. Pain Ther. 2022 Dec;11(4):1267-1285. doi: 10.1007/s40122-022-00424-7. Epub 2022 Aug 13.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32453139Markman JD, Bolash RB, McAlindon TE, Kivitz AJ, Pombo-Suarez M, Ohtori S, Roemer FW, Li DJ, Viktrup L, Bramson C, West CR, Verburg KM. Tanezumab for chronic low back pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, phase 3 study of efficacy and safety. Pain. 2020 Sep 1;161(9):2068-2078. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001928.
- To obtain contact information for a study center near you, click here.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Pfizer will provide access to individual de-identified participant data and related study documents (e.g. protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), Clinical Study Report (CSR)) upon request from qualified researchers, and subject to certain criteria, conditions, and exceptions. Further details on Pfizer's data sharing criteria and process for requesting access can be found at: https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical_trials/trial_data_and_results/data_requests.
Related trials for Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Hip Hinge Exercises on Pain, Range of Motion and Functional Disability in Non-specific Low Back Pain.
Low Back 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
Effects of Whole-Body Vibration and Cervical Stabilization With Core Stabilization in Young Adults With Non-Specific Low Back Pain
Nonspecific Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Spinery Basivertebral Nerve Ablation for Vertebrogenic Chronic Low Back Pain
Low Back Pain, Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP)
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
262 sites in 9 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Tanezumab 5 mg SC, Tanezumab 10 mg SC and Tramadol PR oral in people with Low Back Pain, run by Pfizer at 262 sites in 9 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 7 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 21 Feb 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 262 sites in United States, Japan, Spain, Hungary, South Korea and 4 more countries. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 21 Feb 2020). 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 Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) Score for Tanezumab Versus (Vs) Placebo at Week 16 (time frame: Baseline, Week 16). 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 NCT02528253, which also lists 2 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 21 Feb 2020.