Upper Limb Spasticity Clinical Trial
— NT-SpinOfficial title:
Prospective, Randomized, Observer-blind, Parallel-group, Multi-center Trial to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Two Different Dilutions of incobotulinumtoxinA (Xeomin) in Patients With Upper Limb Spasticity
This study will investigate the efficacy and safety of incobotulinumtoxinA (Xeomin) in the treatment of arm tightness (upper limb spasticity) using two different dilutions of incobotulinumtoxinA (Xeomin).
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 216 |
Est. completion date | May 2008 |
Est. primary completion date | January 2008 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | Both |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility |
Main Inclusion Criteria: - Female or male patients = 18 years - Stable upper limb spasticity of diverse etiology - Focal spasticity with equal or more than 2 points on the Ashworth scale in the wrist flexors - Disability Assessment Scale (DAS) = 2 points for primary therapeutic target at both screening and baseline visits Main Exclusion Criteria: - Fixed contracture - Bilateral upper limb paresis/paralysis - Previous treatment with BoNT of any serotype and for any body region within the 4 months prior to screening - Previous or planned treatment with phenol- or alcohol-injection in the target limb - Other muscle hypertonia (e.g. rigidity) - Diagnosis of myasthenia gravis, Lambert-Eaton-Syndrome, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or any other significant neuromuscular disease which might interfere with the study - Severe atrophy of the target limb muscles |
Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Single Blind (Outcomes Assessor), Primary Purpose: Treatment
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
n/a |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH |
Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom,
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Responder in Disability Assessment Scale (DAS) at Week 4 - Per Protocol Set | The primary efficacy endpoint is the number of responder at Week 4; response defined as an improvement (reduction) of at least one point in the DAS for the primary therapeutic target from baseline visit to Week 4. The DAS determines the functional impairment for the domains hygiene, dressing, limb position and pain according to the following scale: 0 = no disability; 1 = mild disability; 2 = moderate disability; 3 = severe disability. At Screening visit, the subject and investigator, selected together one of the four domains as the primary therapeutic target. | At week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in DAS at Week 4 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement (reduction) of at least one point in the DAS for the primary therapeutic target from baseline visit. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in DAS at Week 12 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement (reduction) of at least one point in the DAS for the primary therapeutic target from baseline visit. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Responder in DAS at Follow up - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement (reduction) of at least one point in the DAS for the primary therapeutic target from baseline visit. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Frenchay Arm Test (FAT) at Week 4 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the FAT from baseline visit. For the FAT the investigator assessed the extent of functionality of the upper limb according to five standardized tests. Each test is rated with 0 = failed or 1 = successfully passed. For the evaluation, the sum of all test scores was calculated resulting in a total score from 0 to 5. | Week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in FAT at Week 12 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the FAT from baseline visit. For the FAT the investigator assessed the extent of functionality of the upper limb according to five standardized tests. Each test is rated with 0 = failed or 1 = successfully passed. For the evaluation, the sum of all test scores was calculated resulting in a total score from 0 to 5. | Week 12 | No |
Secondary | Responder in FAT at Follow up - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the FAT from baseline visit. For the FAT the investigator assessed the extent of functionality of the upper limb according to five standardized tests. Each test is rated with 0 = failed or 1 = successfully passed. For the evaluation, the sum of all test scores was calculated resulting in a total score from 0 to 5. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Elbow Flexors) at Week 4 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. The Ashworth Scale is a 5-point-scale to rate to degree of spasticity: 0 = No increase in tone; 1 = Slight increase in tone giving a "catch" when the limb was moved in flexion or extension; 2 = More marked increase in tone, but limb easily flexed; 3 = Considerable increase in tone - passive movements difficult; 4 = Limb rigid in flexion or extension. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Elbow Flexors) at Week 12 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Elbow Flexors) at Follow up - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Wrist Flexors) at Week 4 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Wrist Flexors) at Week 12 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Wrist Flexors) at Follow up - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Thumb Flexors) at Week 4 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Thumb Flexors) at Week 12 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Thumb Flexors) at Follow up - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Fingers Flexors) at Week 4 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Fingers Flexors) at Week 12 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Fingers Flexors) at Follow up - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Forearm Pronators) at Week 4 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Forearm Pronators) at Week 12 - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Responder in Ashworth Scale (Forearm Pronators) at Follow up - Full Analysis Set | Response is defined as an improvement of at least one point in the Ashworth Scale for the treated muscle group from baseline visit. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Change From Baseline in Passive Range of Motion (PROM) - Wrist Extension | For the PROM all motions of wrist and elbow were measured from a defined neutral starting point position. The degrees of motion were added in the direction the wrist and elbow moved from the neutral starting position. The neutral starting position was the position of an upright standing/sitting person. The angle of the motion from the neutral starting position was measured in degrees using a goniometer. Angles were measured for the wrist with maximal dorsal extension, neutral position and maximal palmar flexion, and for the elbow with maximal extension, neutral position and maximal flexion. | baseline, week 4, week 12, follow up (between week 12 and week 20) | No |
Secondary | Change From Baseline in Passive Range of Motion (PROM) - Elbow Extension | For the PROM all motions of wrist and elbow were measured from a defined neutral starting point position. The degrees of motion were added in the direction the wrist and elbow moved from the neutral starting position. The neutral starting position was the position of an upright standing/sitting person. The angle of the motion from the neutral starting position was measured in degrees using a goniometer. Angles were measured for the wrist with maximal dorsal extension, neutral position and maximal palmar flexion, and for the elbow with maximal extension, neutral position and maximal flexion. | baseline, week 4, week 12, follow up (between week 12 and week 20) | No |
Secondary | Change From Baseline in Passive Range of Motion (PROM) - Wrist Maximum Flexion | For the PROM all motions of wrist and elbow were measured from a defined neutral starting point position. The degrees of motion were added in the direction the wrist and elbow moved from the neutral starting position. The neutral starting position was the position of an upright standing/sitting person. The angle of the motion from the neutral starting position was measured in degrees using a goniometer. Angles were measured for the wrist with maximal dorsal extension, neutral position and maximal palmar flexion, and for the elbow with maximal extension, neutral position and maximal flexion. | baseline, week 4, week 12, follow up (between week 12 and week 20) | No |
Secondary | Change From Baseline in Passive Range of Motion (PROM) - Elbow Maximum Flexion | For the PROM all motions of wrist and elbow were measured from a defined neutral starting point position. The degrees of motion were added in the direction the wrist and elbow moved from the neutral starting position. The neutral starting position was the position of an upright standing/sitting person. The angle of the motion from the neutral starting position was measured in degrees using a goniometer. Angles were measured for the wrist with maximal dorsal extension, neutral position and maximal palmar flexion, and for the elbow with maximal extension, neutral position and maximal flexion. | baseline, week 4, week 12, follow up (between week 12 and week 20) | No |
Secondary | Investigator's Global Assessment of Treatment Response (GATR) - Full Analysis Set | The investigator's global assessment of response to treatment were determined with the use of the Global Response Scale using the following scores: -4 = very marked worsening; -3 = marked worsening; -2 = moderate worsening; -1 = mild worsening; 0 = no change; +1 = mild improvement; +2 = moderate improvement; +3 = marked improvement; +4 = very marked improvement. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Patient's Global Assessment of Treatment Response (GATR) - Full Analysis Set | The patient's global assessment of response to treatment were determined with the use of the Global Response Scale using the following scores: -4 = very marked worsening; -3 = marked worsening; -2 = moderate worsening; -1 = mild worsening; 0 = no change; +1 = mild improvement; +2 = moderate improvement; +3 = marked improvement; +4 = very marked improvement. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 4 - Item Feeding | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 12 - Item Feeding | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Follow up - Item Feeding | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 4 - Item Grooming | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 12 - Item Grooming | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Follow up - Item Grooming | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 4 - Item Toilet Use | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 12 - Item Toilet Use | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Follow up - Item Toilet Use | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 4 - Item Bathing/Showering | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 12 - Item Bathing/Showering | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Follow up - Item Bathing/Showering | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 4 - Item Dressing | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 4 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Week 12 - Item Dressing | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | week 12 | No |
Secondary | Response Rates in Activity of Daily Living (Barthel Index) at Follow up - Item Dressing | Response is defined as an improvement (increase) of at least one point in the Barthel Index from baseline visit. The Barthel Index was assessed for the items feeding, grooming, toilet use, bathing and dressing. Feeding: 0 = unable; 1 = needs help cutting, spreading butter etc.; 2 = independent; Grooming: 0 = needs help with personal care; 1 = independent face/hair/teeth/shaving; Toilet use: 1 = need some help, but could do something alone; 2 = independent; Bathing: 0 = dependent; 1 = independent; Dressing: 0 = dependent; 1 = needs help but could do about half unaided; 2 = independent. | follow up visit, between week 12 and week 20 | No |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Recruiting |
NCT04936542 -
A Study to Compare the Safety and Efficacy of Dysport® and Botox® in Adults With Upper Limb Spasticity.
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT02454803 -
Attainment of Person-centred Goals After Botulinum Toxin Treatment for Upper Limb Spasticity in Real Life Practice
|
||
Completed |
NCT00945295 -
Efficacy and Safety Study of Botulinum Neurotoxin A With Rehabilitation Versus Botulinum Neurotoxin A Alone in Treatment of Post-stroke Spasticity
|
N/A | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT05956509 -
Study of Intramuscular Injections of ABBV-950 to Assess Adverse Events and Change in Disease Activity in Adult Participants With Upper Limb Spasticity
|
Phase 1/Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT02321436 -
Study to Assess Impact of Dysport Injections Early After Stroke on Upper Limb Spasticity Progression
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT00430196 -
BOTOX® Versus Zanaflex® for the Treatment of Post-Stroke or Traumatic Brain Injury Upper Limb Spasticity
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT03821402 -
Efficacy and Safety of DaxibotulinumtoxinA for Injection for the Treatment of Adult Upper Limb Spasticity
|
Phase 2 | |
Terminated |
NCT02888548 -
Randomised, Evaluation-blinded, Crossover, Controlled Study Assessing Dynamic Hand Splinting in Adults With Post-stroke Hemiplegia (Orthox)
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01863901 -
Study Evaluating Treatment of Upper Limb Spasticity Using the Cryo-Touch III Device
|
N/A |