Arthritis, Rheumatoid Clinical Trial
Official title:
A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Maraviroc in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Subjects Receiving Methotrexate
| Verified date | October 2014 |
| Source | Pfizer |
| Contact | n/a |
| Is FDA regulated | No |
| Health authority | United States: Food and Drug Administration |
| Study type | Interventional |
The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether maraviroc, an investigational drug given with methotrexate (MTX) is safe and effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in adult patients.
| Status | Terminated |
| Enrollment | 128 |
| Est. completion date | October 2008 |
| Est. primary completion date | October 2008 |
| Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
| Gender | Both |
| Age group | 18 Years and older |
| Eligibility |
Inclusion Criteria: - Must be legal age of consent - Must have active rheumatoid arthritis based upon the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1987 (Revised Criteria); minimum disease criteria required for entry into the efficacy component of the study - Must meet ACR 1991 Revised Criteria for Global Functional Status in RA, Class I, II, or III - Must be receiving methotrexate for at least 12 weeks duration and on a stable dose for 4 weeks. Exclusion Criteria: - Diagnosed with any other inflammatory arthritis or a secondary non-inflammatory arthritis that would interfere with disease activity assessments. - Subject receiving prior treatment with certain medications for rheumatoid arthritis - Tuberculosis and/or a positive tuberculin reaction - Significant trauma or major surgery within 2 months - History of alcohol and/or drug abuse outside of a defined period of abstinence - History of or a finding at screening of postural hypotension - Any condition that would affect the oral absorption of the drug - History of cancer and in remission less than 3 years or Grade III-IV congestive heart failure - Having an infection of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), Hepatitis B or C or evidence of any active infection - Abnormalities of clinical or laboratory assessments completed at the screening visit such as elevated liver enzymes, decreased hemoglobin or an abnormal ECG - Having a positive chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) delta 32 mutation - Requiring the use of certain medications - Lactating or pregnant women or subjects have reproductive potential unwilling to use an adequate method of birth control - Chronic or recent serious or life-threatening infection; severe , progressive and/or uncontrollable renal, hepatic, hematological, gastrointestinal, endocrine, pulmonary, cardiac, neurological disease within 12 weeks of the first dose. |
Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Double Blind (Subject, Investigator), Primary Purpose: Treatment
| Country | Name | City | State |
|---|---|---|---|
| Australia | Pfizer Investigational Site | Hobart | Tasmania |
| Australia | Pfizer Investigational Site | Maroochydore | Queensland |
| Australia | Pfizer Investigational Site | Woodville | South Australia |
| Germany | Pfizer Investigational Site | Berlin | |
| Germany | Pfizer Investigational Site | Berlin | |
| Germany | Pfizer Investigational Site | Leipzig | |
| India | Pfizer Investigational Site | Bangalore | Karnataka |
| India | Pfizer Investigational Site | Bangalore | Karnataka |
| India | Pfizer Investigational Site | Hyderabad | Andhra Pradesh |
| Italy | Pfizer Investigational Site | Genova | |
| Italy | Pfizer Investigational Site | Pavia | |
| Mexico | Pfizer Investigational Site | Guadalajara | Jalisco |
| Mexico | Pfizer Investigational Site | Guadalajara | Jalisco |
| Portugal | Pfizer Investigational Site | Coimbra | |
| Portugal | Pfizer Investigational Site | Lisboa | |
| Portugal | Pfizer Investigational Site | Lisbon | |
| Spain | Pfizer Investigational Site | Barcelona | |
| Spain | Pfizer Investigational Site | Madrid | |
| Spain | Pfizer Investigational Site | Santiago de Compostela | A Coruña |
| Spain | Pfizer Investigational Site | Sevilla | |
| Ukraine | Pfizer Investigational Site | Dnipropetrovsk | |
| Ukraine | Pfizer Investigational Site | Kharkiv | |
| Ukraine | Pfizer Investigational Site | Simferopol | |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Daytona Beach | Florida |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Duncansville | Pennsylvania |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Hamden | Connecticut |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Hickory | North Carolina |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Hickory | North Carolina |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Huntington Beach | California |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Kalamazoo | Michigan |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Kalamazoo | Michigan |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Las Vegas | Nevada |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Madisonville | Kentucky |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Meriden | Connecticut |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Minot | North Dakota |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Moline | Illinois |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | New Haven | Connecticut |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | New Haven | Connecticut |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Omaha | Nebraska |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Port Orange | Florida |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | San Francisco | California |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Savannah | Georgia |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Savannah | Georgia |
| United States | Pfizer Investigational Site | Syracuse | New York |
| Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
|---|---|
| Pfizer |
United States, Australia, Germany, India, Italy, Mexico, Portugal, Spain, Ukraine,
| Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% Responders at Week 12 | A subject was an ACR 20 responder if: the counts for both tender and swollen joints had reduced by 20% or more from baseline; and 3 out of the following 5 assessments showed reduction of 20% or more from baseline assessment: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]), Patient's Global Assessment of Arthritis (VAS), Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis (Categorical), Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and C-Reactive Protein (CRP). | Week 12 | No |
| Secondary | ACR 20% Responders at Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 8 | A subject was an ACR 20 responder if: the counts for both tender and swollen joints had reduced by 20% or more from baseline; and 3 out of the following 5 assessments showed reduction of 20% or more from baseline assessment: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain, Patient's Global Assessment of Arthritis, Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis, HAQ-DI, and CRP. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 ACR 20% data were collected, but not analyzed. | Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 8 | No |
| Secondary | ACR 50% Responders at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | A subject was an ACR 50 responder if: the counts for both tender and swollen joints had reduced by 50% or more from baseline; and 3 out of the following 5 assessments showed reduction of 50% or more from baseline assessment: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain, Patient's Global Assessment of Arthritis, Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis, HAQ-DI, and CRP. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 ACR 50% data were collected, but not analyzed. | Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | ACR 70% Responders at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | A subject was an ACR 70 responder if: the counts for both tender and swollen joints had reduced by 70% or more from baseline; and 3 out of the following 5 assessments showed reduction of 70% or more from baseline assessment: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain, Patient's Global Assessment of Arthritis, Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis, HAQ-DI, and CRP. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 ACR 70% data were collected, but not analyzed. | Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Tender/Painful Joint Count at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | Change from baseline at each visit was analyzed for tender/painful joint count. Twenty-eight tender and swollen joint scores included the same joints: shoulders, elbows, wrists, metacarpophalangeal joints (MCP), proximal interphalangeal joints (PIP), and the knees. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 tender/painful joint count data were collected, but not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | Change from baseline at each visit was analyzed for swollen joint count. Twenty-eight tender and swollen joint scores included the same joints: shoulders, elbows, wrists, MCP joints, PIP joints, and the knees. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 swollen joint count data were collected, but not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | The severity of arthritis was scored by the subject between 0 (no pain) and 100 (most severe pain) on a 100 mm VAS. Change from baseline at each visit was analyzed for Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain data were collected, but not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | Subjects answered: "Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, how are you feeling today?" Subjects responded by using a 0 - 100 mm VAS where 0=very well and 100=very poorly. Change from baseline at each visit was analyzed for Patient's Global Assessment. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 Patient's Global Assessment of Arthritis Pain data were collected, but not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis Pain at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | Physician's evaluation based on subject's disease signs, functional capacity and physical exam. Response recorded using 5-point scale: 1=Very Good, 2=Good, 3=Fair, 4=Poor and 5=Very Poor. Change from baseline at each visit was analyzed for Physician's Global Assessment. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy thus Week 16 Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis Pain data were collected but not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | HAQ-DI assesses degree of difficulty experienced in daily activity categories (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and other activities) over the past week. There are 20 questions and difficulty is scored from 0 (none), 1 (some), 2 (much) and 3 (unable to do). Scores were then averaged to give the disability index (scale of 0 to 3). Change from baseline at each visit was analyzed. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 HAQ-DI data were collected but not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in CRP at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | Change from baseline at each visit were analyzed for CRP. The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 CRP data were collected, but not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Using CRP (DAS28-4[CRP]) at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | DAS28-4 (CRP) was calculated using the following formula: DAS28- 4(CRP) = 0.56 v28 Tender Joint Count + 0.28 v28 Swollen Joint Count + 0.36*natural logarithm(CRP + 1) + 0.014*Patient Global Assessment + 0.96. DAS28 provides a number on a scale (0 to 10) indicating current disease activity. A score above 5.1 means high disease activity and a score below 3.2 indicates low disease activity. Change from baseline at each visit was analyzed for DAS28-4 (CRP). The Week 16 visit (follow-up) was designed for safety rather than efficacy, thus Week 16 DAS28-4 (CRP) data were collected, but not analyzed. |
Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Mean Orthostatic Blood Pressure (BP) | Supine BP was recorded after 5 minutes lying down; subjects then sat for 2 minutes then stood for 2 minutes and standing BP was recorded. Orthostatic BP = either a systolic BP drop > 20 mmHg, or diastolic BP drop > 10 mmHg and/or drop in systolic BP < 90 mmHg. If a subject met the orthostatic criteria, they were required to complete 2 additional readings to provide a triplicate reading. The means of replicate BP values were used in the analysis. Baseline = the latest non-missing value from a range of pre-treatment visits. Change from baseline to Week 16 was analyzed for orthostatic BP. | Baseline, 16 weeks | Yes |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Mean Heart Rate | Heart rate = standing and supine at the same time the orthostatic BP measurements were obtained. Baseline was defined to be the latest non-missing value from a range of pre-treatment visits. Means of replicate values were not used. | Baseline, 16 weeks | Yes |
| Secondary | Number of Subjects With Categorical Absolute Vital Signs and Vital Sign Changes Compared to Baseline | Baseline was defined to be the latest non-missing value from a range of pre-treatment visits. Maximum increase from baseline in supine and standing systolic BP was > = 30 mmHg, and maximum increase from baseline in supine and standing diastolic BP was > = 20 mmHg. | Baseline, 16 weeks | Yes |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in 12-Lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters (RR Interval, PR Interval, QRS Complex, QT Interval, Corrected QT [QTc] Interval, QTcB Interval [Bazett's Correction], QTcF Interval [Fridericia's Correction]). | Baseline was defined to be the latest non-missing value from a range of pre-treatment visits. Means of replicate values were used. QTc interval was not measured for the PK populations. | Baseline, 16 weeks | Yes |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in 12-Lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters (Heart Rate). | Baseline was defined to be the latest non-missing value from a range of pre-treatment visits. Means of replicate values were used. | Baseline, 16 weeks | Yes |
| Secondary | Number of Subjects With Categorical Absolute ECG Parameters and ECG Changes Compared to Baseline | Maximum QTcB, QTcF, and QTc intervals were defined as 450 to < 480 msec, 480 to < 500 msec, or > = 500 msec. | Baseline, 16 weeks | Yes |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Short Form-36 (SF-36) Physical Component Summary at Weeks 4 and 12 | The SF-36 v.2 (Acute version) is a 36-item generic health status measure that measures 8 general health concepts: Physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Each domain of the eight domains and the summary concept (physical component score) are scored to yield values between 0 (worst) and 100 (best). Change from baseline at Weeks 4 and 12 were analyzed for SF-36. Due to the termination of the study, SF-36 results for the PK component group were not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 4 and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in SF-36 Mental Component Summary at Weeks 4 and 12 | The SF-36 v.2 (Acute version) [12] is a 36-item generic health status measure that measures 8 general health concepts: Physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health. Each domain of the eight domains and the summary concept (mental component score) are scored to yield values between 0 (worst) and 100 (best). Change from baseline at Weeks 4 and 12 were analyzed for SF-36. Due to the termination of the study, SF-36 results for the PK component group were not analyzed. | Baseline, Weeks 4 and 12 | No |
| Secondary | Number of Subjects With Withdrawal From Study Due to Lack of Efficacy | Withdrawal is the total number of withdrawals from the study. Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy was collected based on the investigator's judgement. | 16 weeks | No |
| Secondary | Survival Analysis of Time to Withdrawal: Proportion of Subjects Who Did Not Withdraw From the Study Due to Lack of Efficacy. | Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy was collected based on the investigator's judgement. Time to withdrawal was measured by the probability that a subject did not withdraw due to lack of efficacy by a particular visit. This was a statistical estimate (Kaplan-Meier Survival Analysis) of the probability that a participant would not withdraw due to lack of efficacy. | Weeks 1 to 12 | No |
| Secondary | Area Under the Plasma Concentration-Time Profile From Time Zero to Four Hours Postdose (AUC 0-4) for MTX at Screening and Week 1 and Maraviroc at Week 1 | Effect of maraviroc on the PK of MTX (comparison of AUC0-4 of MTX at screening versus at Week 1 after coadministration with 150 mg or 300 mg of maraviroc). PK was assessed at screening (MTX) and at Week 1 (maraviroc and MTX). | Screening (1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post-dose), Week 1 (0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post-dose) | No |
| Secondary | Maximum Observed Concentration (Cmax) During the Dosing Interval for MTX at Screening and Week 1 and Maraviroc at Week 1 | Effect of maraviroc on the PK of MTX (comparison of Cmax of MTX at screening versus at Week 1 after coadministration with 150 mg or 300 mg of maraviroc). PK was assessed at screening (MTX) and at Week 1 (maraviroc and MTX). | Screening (1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post-dose), Week 1 (0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post-dose) | No |
| Secondary | Time for Cmax (Tmax) for MTX at Screening and Week 1 and Maraviroc at Week 1 | PK was assessed at screening (MTX) and at Week 1 (maraviroc and MTX). | Screening (1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post-dose), Week 1 (0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours post-dose) | No |
| Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminated |
NCT01682512 -
Efficacy, Pharmacokinetics, and Safety of BI 695500 in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis
|
Phase 3 | |
| Completed |
NCT00539760 -
A Phase I Rheumatoid Arthritis Study in Healthy Volunteers
|
Phase 1 | |
| Active, not recruiting |
NCT03312465 -
Anatomical Shoulder Domelock System Study
|
||
| Completed |
NCT01208181 -
A Two-Part, 12-Week Study of Etoricoxib as a Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) (MK-0663-107)
|
Phase 3 | |
| Completed |
NCT03254810 -
Comparison of the Safety and PK of SYN060 to Humira® in Healthy Adult Subjects
|
Phase 1 | |
| Completed |
NCT01711814 -
A Study to Evaluate the Long-term Safety and Efficacy of ASP015K in Subjects Previously Enrolled in a Phase 2 ASP015K Rheumatoid Arthritis Study
|
Phase 2 | |
| Completed |
NCT03315494 -
Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Multiple Ascending Doses of SKI-O-703 in Healthy Volunteers
|
Phase 1 | |
| Withdrawn |
NCT03241446 -
Pharmacokinetics and Dosimetry of Tc 99m Tilmanocept Following a Single Intravenous Dose Administration in Male and Female Subjects Diagnosed With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)
|
Phase 1 | |
| Completed |
NCT02553018 -
Comparison of Compliance and Evolution of Functional Capacity of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated by Methotrexate Either by Auto-injector or by Conventional Sub-cutaneous Syringe
|
Phase 3 | |
| Completed |
NCT02748785 -
MTX Discontinuation and Vaccine Response
|
Phase 4 | |
| Active, not recruiting |
NCT02260778 -
Treat-to-target in RA: Collaboration To Improve adOption and adhereNce
|
N/A | |
| Completed |
NCT02569736 -
Characterization of the Effect of Tocilizumab in Vivo and in Vitro on T Follicular Helper Cells in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients and Consequence on B Cells Maturation
|
||
| Completed |
NCT01750931 -
This Study is Randomised, Single Oral Dose Bioequivalence Study of Meloxicam GSK 15 MG Tablets.
|
Phase 2 | |
| Not yet recruiting |
NCT01154647 -
Pain Inhibition in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and Central Sensitivity Syndromes
|
N/A | |
| Withdrawn |
NCT01204138 -
Concomitant Use of Apremilast for the Treatment of Active RA Despite TNF-Inhibition and Methotrexate- CATARA
|
Phase 2 | |
| Completed |
NCT00913458 -
Study Evaluating Etanercept Plus Methotrexate in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis
|
Phase 4 | |
| Completed |
NCT00973479 -
An Effectiveness and Safety Study of Intravenous Golimumab in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Despite Treatment With Methotrexate Therapy
|
Phase 3 | |
| Completed |
NCT00975130 -
Subcutaneous Golimumab (GLM) Plus DMARDs for Rheumatoid Arthritis, Followed by Intravenous/Subcutaneous GLM Strategy (P06129 AM2)
|
Phase 3 | |
| Completed |
NCT00550446 -
A Phase 2 Study For Patients With A Physician's Diagnosis Of Rheumatoid Arthritis
|
Phase 2 | |
| Completed |
NCT00660647 -
Optimized Treatment Algorithm for Patients With Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)
|
Phase 3 |