AzTrials
AzTrials

NarcolepsyPhase 2NCT02806908

Study Assessing Effects of JZP-110 on Driving Performance in the Treatment of Excessive Sleepiness in Narcolepsy

A Phase 2 study testing JZP-110 in people with Narcolepsy and Excessive Sleepiness, run by Jazz Pharmaceuticals at 1 site in Netherlands.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study to evaluate the effect of JZP-110 on driving performance in subjects with excessive sleepiness due to narcolepsy. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 21 to 65 years
Conditions the study is for
Narcolepsy, Excessive Sleepiness
What is being tested?
JZP-110
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
24 participants
Where
1 siteNetherlands
Study dates
Jun 2016to 19 May 2019
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 21 to 65 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Male or female, age 21 to 65 years inclusive
  • Diagnosis of narcolepsy per International Classification of Sleep Disorders (ICSD-3) or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th Edition (DSM-5)
  • BMI 18 to <40 kg/m2
  • Willing and able to provide written informed consent

Who cannot join

  • Female subjects who are pregnant, nursing, or lactating
  • Moderate or severe sleep apnea
  • Any other clinically relevant medical, behavioral, or psychiatric disorder other than narcolepsy that is associated with excessive sleepiness
  • History or presence of bipolar disorder, bipolar related disorders, schizophrenia, schizophrenia spectrum disorders, or other psychotic disorders according to DSM-5 criteria
  • History or presence of any unstable medical condition, behavioral or psychiatric disorder (including active suicidal ideation), or surgical history that could affect the safety of the subject or interfere with study efficacy and/or safety assessments per the judgment of the investigator
  • History of bariatric surgery within the past year or a history of any gastric bypass procedure
  • Presence or history of significant cardiovascular disease
  • Unable to washout or refrain from taking any over-the-counter (OTC) or prescription medications that could affect sleep-wake function

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Netherlands1 site
  • Maastricht University

    Maastricht, Limburg, 6229

Other trials in Netherlands

About this study

Official title: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover On-Road Driving Study Assessing the Effect of JZP-110 on Driving Performance in Subjects With Excessive Sleepiness Due to Narcolepsy

This trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study to evaluate the effect of JZP-110 on driving performance in subjects with excessive sleepiness due to narcolepsy.

Being tested
JZP-110, Placebo
Keywords
Driving
Medical subject headings
Narcolepsy, Disorders of Excessive Somnolence

What participants receive

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

  • JZP-110Drug

    Also called solriamfetol

  • PlaceboDrug

Study groups in NCT02806908
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
PlaceboPlacebo comparatorOnce daily dosing
Receives: Drug: Placebo
JZP-110Active comparator150 mg/day for first 3 days and 300 mg/day for next 4 days
Receives: Drug: JZP-110

What is being measured

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

  1. Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) at 2 Hours Post-dose (Approximately at Tmax)

    Subjects were instructed to drive with steady lateral position between the delineated boundaries of the slower (right) traffic lane, while maintaining a constant speed of 95 kilometers (km) per hour (hr). Deviation was measured by the vehicle's speed and lateral distance to the left lane line and was continuously recorded. Individual improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP below the negative value of threshold; individual impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

Secondary outcomes (26)
  1. SDLP at 6 Hours Post-dose

    Subjects were instructed to drive with steady lateral position between the delineated boundaries of the slower (right) traffic lane, while maintaining a constant speed of 95 kilometers (km) per hour (hr). Deviation was measured by the vehicle's speed and lateral distance to the left lane line and was continuously recorded. Individual improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP below the negative value of threshold; individual impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  2. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 1 Centimeter (cm) on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 2 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 2 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 2 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  3. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 1.5 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 2 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 2 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 2 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  4. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 2.0 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 2 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 2 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 2 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  5. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 2.5 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 2 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 2 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 2 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  6. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 3.0 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 2 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 2 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 2 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  7. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 3.5 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 2 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 2 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 2 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  8. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 1 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 6 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 6 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 6 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  9. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 1.5 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 6 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 6 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 6 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  10. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 2.0 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 6 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 6 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 6 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  11. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 2.5 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 6 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 6 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 6 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  12. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 3.0 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 6 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 6 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 6 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  13. Number of Subjects With Improved or Impaired Driving at a Threshold 3.5 cm on JZP-110 Compared to Placebo 6 Hours Post-dose

    Individual changes (solriamfetol minus placebo) in driving performance were measured by SDLP at 6 hours postdose. The Maximum McNemar symmetry analyses was used to detect an asymmetry in the distribution of the change in driving performance at 6 hours postdose. The test examined the differences in the proportions of impaired drivers and improved drivers following treatment using a generalized single McNemar test statistics were obtained at each threshold (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 cm), which was the vehicle weaving amount. Changes in SDLP exceeding 2.4 cm have been evaluated as clinically relevant. Improvement was defined as a decrease in SDLP comparing JZP-110 and placebo below the threshold and impairment was defined as an increase in SDLP above the threshold or failure to complete the driving test due to sleepiness or subjects related safety concerns.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  14. Standard Deviation of Speed (SDS) at 2 Hours Post-dose

    Mean SDS was a common measure of the driver's ability to maintain a constant driving speed. Variations in driving speed were recorded and analyzed.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  15. SDS at 6 Hours Post-dose

    Mean SDS was a common measure of the driver's ability to maintain a constant driving speed. Variations in driving speed were recorded and analyzed.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  16. Number of Lapses in Driving Test at 2 Hours Post-dose

    Number of driving lapses (also known as lane drift, was defined as deviations > 100 cm from the mean lateral position and from the absolute lateral position for 8 seconds. Driving performance will be assessed using a standardized on-road driving test on Day 7 (Visit 4) and on Day 14 (Visit 5). A practice driving test will be done during the screening period to familiarize the subject with the vehicle and test scenario, assess if the subject can adequately operate the manual transmission vehicle, and determine if any safety concerns exist that exclude the subject from participating in the study.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  17. Number of Lapses in Driving Test at 6 Hours Post-dose

    Number of driving lapses (also known as lane drift, was defined as deviations > 100 cm from the mean lateral position and from the absolute lateral position for 8 seconds. Driving performance will be assessed using a standardized on-road driving test on Day 7 (Visit 4) and on Day 14 (Visit 5). A practice driving test will be done during the screening period to familiarize the subject with the vehicle and test scenario, assess if the subject can adequately operate the manual transmission vehicle, and determine if any safety concerns exist that exclude the subject from participating in the study.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  18. Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT) Number of Lapses at 2 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Lapses were measured as (RT > 500 msec).

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  19. PVT Number of Lapses at 6 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Lapses were measured as (RT > 500 msec).

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  20. PVT Mean Reaction Time at 2 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Mean RT is measured in msec.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  21. PVT Mean Reaction Time at 6 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Mean RT is measured in msec.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  22. PVT Inverse Reaction Time at 2 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Inverse reaction time was expressed as 1/reaction time in msec.

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  23. PVT Inverse Reaction Time at 6 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Inverse reaction time was expressed as 1/reaction time in msec.

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  24. PVT Number of Errors of Commission at 2 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Errors of commission were measured as the number of responses without a stimulus or false starts with (RT < 100 msec).

    Measured: 2 hours post-dose

  25. PVT Number of Errors of Commission at 6 Hours Post-dose

    The PVT was administered at screening for practice only, and at predose and within 30 minutes before each driving test on Days 7 and 14 (Visits 4 and 5, respectively). The test was administered over 10 minutes with visual stimuli appearing randomly at variable intervals of 2 to 10 seconds. Subjects were instructed to respond to the appearance of a visual stimulus on a computer screen by pushing a response button as quickly as possible. Errors of commission were measured as the number of responses without a stimulus or false starts with (RT < 100 msec).

    Measured: 6 hours post-dose

  26. Toronto Hospital Alert Test (THAT)

    THAT is a 10-item self-report questionnaire designed to measure perceived alertness in the preceding week. The THAT was administered at baseline and the end of each treatment period. The total score of THAT can range between 0 to 50 where the higher score indicates greater alertness.

    Measured: Post Treatment at day 21

Timeline

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

  1. First posted21 Jun 2016 (estimated)
  2. Study startJun 2016
  3. Primary completion19 May 2019
  4. Study completion19 May 2019

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Crossover
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Investigator
Enrolment
24 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02806908
Sponsor's protocol ID
15-005
Status last verified
Dec 2020
First submitted
10 Jun 2016
Last updated
13 Jan 2021
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Devine JK, Schwartz L, Hursh S, Asin J, de Vries N, Vonk PE, Vermeeren A, Donjacour CEHM, Vinckenbosch F, Ramaekers JG, Janssen H, Wang G, Chen D, Carter LP, Overeem S, Lammers GJ. Psychomotor Vigilance Performance in Participants with Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in Obstructive Sleep Apnea or Narcolepsy Compared with SAFTE-FAST Model Predictions. Neurol Ther. 2023 Feb;12(1):249-265. doi: 10.1007/s40120-022-00425-w. Epub 2022 Dec 10.

    PubMed 36494591

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing JZP-110 in people with Narcolepsy and Excessive Sleepiness, run by Jazz Pharmaceuticals at 1 site in Netherlands.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 8 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 13 Jan 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

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

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

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

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 13 Jan 2021). 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?

Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) at 2 Hours Post-dose (Approximately at Tmax) (time frame: 2 hours post-dose). 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 NCT02806908, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Jan 2021.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in