Outcome
| Type |
Measure |
Description |
Time frame |
Safety issue |
| Other |
Number of Participants With Intravenous (IV) Doses of Study Medication |
Number of participants are reported based on the maximum number of IV doses of either tanezumab or placebo received. |
Day 1 up to Week 16 |
|
| Primary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 8: ITT Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis (OA) in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. |
Baseline, Week 8 |
|
| Primary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 8: Modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. |
Baseline, Week 8 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
The WOMAC physical function subscale is a 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 17 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse function. Total score range for WOMAC physical function subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse function. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. |
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
The WOMAC physical function subscale is a 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 17 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse function. Total score range for WOMAC physical function subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate worse function. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
PGA: Participants answered the following question: "Considering all the ways the OA in your index (knee/hip) affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants rated their condition by using a 5-point Likert scale: 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 score indicated severe condition. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
PGA: Participants answered the following question: "Considering all the ways the OA in your index (knee/hip) affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants rated their condition by using a 5-point Likert scale: 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 score indicated severe condition. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
OMERACT-OARSI response: greater than or equal to (>=) 50 percent (%) improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of >=2 units at Week of interest in WOMAC pain or physical function subscales, or at least 2 of the following 3 being true: >=20% improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of >=1 unit at Week of interest in 1) WOMAC pain subscale, 2) WOMAC physical function subscale, 3) PGA of osteoarthritis (score: 1-5, higher score=more affected). WOMAC pain, physical function subscales assess amount of pain/difficulty experienced (score: 0-10, higher score=higher pain/difficulty). |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
OMERACT-OARSI response: >=50 percent (%) improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of >=2 units at Week of interest in WOMAC pain or physical function subscales, or at least 2 of the following 3 being true: >=20% improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of >=1 unit at Week of interest in 1) WOMAC pain subscale, 2) WOMAC physical function subscale, 3) PGA of osteoarthritis (score: 1-5, higher score=more affected). WOMAC pain, physical function subscales assess amount of pain/difficulty experienced (score: 0-10, higher score=higher pain/difficulty). |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With At Least (>=) 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With At Least (>=) 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16: mITT Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 8: ITT Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during the past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Participants with specified reduction (as percent) from baseline at Week 8 are reported. |
Week 8 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 8: mITT Population |
The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on an NRS of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. |
Week 8 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Improvement of At Least (>=) 2 Points From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16: ITT Population |
PGA: Participants answered the following question: "Considering all the ways the OA in your index (knee/hip) affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants rated their condition by using a 5-point Likert scale: 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 score indicated severe condition. |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Improvement of At Least (>=) 2 Points From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8 12 and 16: mITT Population |
PGA: Participants answered the following question: "Considering all the ways the OA in your index (knee/hip) affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants rated their condition by using a 5-point Likert scale: 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 score indicated severe condition. |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score in the Index Knee or Index Hip at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
Participants assessed daily average pain in the index joint (knee/hip) during the past 24 hours on an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Higher score indicated greater pain. The baseline mean was calculated using the daily pain scores in the index joint (knee/hip) over the 3 days in the initial pain assessment period and the weekly mean was calculated using the daily pain scores in the index joint (knee/hip) within each assessment week. |
Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score in the Index Knee or Index Hip at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
Participants assessed daily average pain in the index joint (knee/hip) during the past 24 hours on an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Higher score indicated greater pain. The baseline mean was calculated using the daily pain scores in the index joint (knee/hip) over the 3 days in the initial pain assessment period and the weekly mean was calculated using the daily pain scores in the index joint (knee/hip) within each assessment week. |
Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
The WOMAC stiffness subscale is a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 2 individual questions scored on NRS of 0 to 10; with higher scores indicating more stiffness. Total score range for WOMAC stiffness subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate more stiffness. Stiffness is defined as a sensation of decreased ease in moving the index joint (knee/hip). |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
The WOMAC stiffness subscale is a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours. It is calculated as the mean of the scores from the 2 individual questions scored on NRS of 0 to 10; with higher scores indicating more stiffness. Total score range for WOMAC stiffness subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate more stiffness. Stiffness is defined as a sensation of decreased ease in moving the index joint (knee/hip). |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain (5 items), stiffness (2 items) and physical function (17 items) in participants with OA of the index knee or index hip. WOMAC average score is the mean of WOMAC pain, physical function and stiffness subscale scores and ranges from 0 to 10, where higher score indicates worse response. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain (5 items), stiffness (2 items) and physical function (17 items) in participants with OA of the index knee or index hip. WOMAC average score is the mean of WOMAC pain, physical function and stiffness subscale scores and ranges from 0 to 10, where higher score indicates worse response. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item (Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
Participants answered: "How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?" Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain. Higher score indicated greater pain. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item (Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
Participants answered: "How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?" Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain. Higher score indicated greater pain. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item (Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: ITT Population |
Participants answered: "How much pain have you had when going up or down stairs?" Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain. Higher score indicated greater pain. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item (Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16: mITT Population |
Participants answered: "How much pain have you had when going up or down stairs?" Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain. Higher score indicated greater pain. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Domain Scores at Week 12: ITT Population |
SF-36v2: standardized survey evaluating 8 health concepts (physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health). Total score for each health concept was scaled 0-100 (100 = highest level of functioning). |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Domain Scores at Week 12: mITT Population |
SF-36v2: standardized survey evaluating 8 health concepts (physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health). Total score for each health concept was scaled 0-100 (100 = highest level of functioning). |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical and Mental Component Aggregate Scores at Week 12: ITT Population |
SF-36v2: standardized survey evaluating 8 health concepts (physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health). Total score for each health concept was scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). For obtaining physical and mental component scores, z-score for each scale = (observed score - mean score for general 1990 United States [US] population)/corresponding standard deviation. The 2 component scores were obtained by multiplying each aspect z-score by physical or mental factor score coefficient (1990 general US population) and summing the eight products. Component scores indicated how many standard deviations higher (in case of positive z-score [better functioning])/lower (in case of negative z-score [worse functioning]) participant's value was relative to the mean of the reference population. Change from baseline >0 indicates an improvement. |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical and Mental Component Aggregate Scores at Week 12: mITT Population |
SF-36v2: standardized survey evaluating 8 health concepts (physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health). Total score for each health concept was scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). For obtaining physical and mental component scores, z-score for each scale = (observed score - mean score for general 1990 United States [US] population)/corresponding standard deviation. The 2 component scores were obtained by multiplying each aspect z-score by physical or mental factor score coefficient (1990 general US population) and summing the eight products. Component scores indicated how many standard deviations higher (in case of positive z-score [better functioning])/lower (in case of negative z-score [worse functioning]) participant's value was relative to the mean of the reference population. Change from baseline >0 indicates an improvement. |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score at Week 12: ITT Population |
EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains/items: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. Each item has 3 possible responses: no problems (level 1), some problems (level 2), and extreme problems (level 3). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) - Health State Profile Utility Score at Week 12: mITT Population |
EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains/items: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. Each item has 3 possible responses: no problems (level 1), some problems (level 2), and extreme problems (level 3). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state. |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) - Individual Dimensions at Week 12: ITT Population |
EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 dimensions/domains/items: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. Each item has 3 possible responses: no dysfunction (level 1), moderate/some dysfunction (level 2), and extreme dysfunction (level 3). Change from baseline at Week 12 is defined as: Improved (positive change), No change, and Worsened (negative change). Number of participants with response is reported. |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) - Individual Dimensions at Week 12: mITT Population |
EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 dimensions/domains/items: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression. Each item has 3 possible responses: no dysfunction (level 1), moderate/some dysfunction (level 2), and extreme dysfunction (level 3). Change from baseline at Week 12 is defined as: Improved (positive change), No change, and Worsened (negative change). Number of participants with response is reported. |
Baseline, Week 12 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants Who Discontinued From Study Due to Lack of Efficacy |
|
Baseline up to Week 24 |
|
| Secondary |
Time to Discontinuation From Study Due to Lack of Efficacy |
|
Baseline up to Week 24 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Rescue Medication (RM) Usage |
In the event of inadequate pain relief for OA during the double-blind treatment period, participants were allowed to take up to 3000 mg of acetaminophen (tablet/capsule/caplets) per day up to 3 days per week as a rescue medication. |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Days With Rescue Medication (RM) Usage |
In the event of inadequate pain relief for OA during the double-blind treatment period, participants were allowed to take up to 3000 mg of acetaminophen (tablet/capsule/caplets) per day up to 3 days per week as a rescue medication. Results are shown in number of days of rescue medication usage per week. |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Amount of Rescue Medication Used |
In the event of inadequate pain relief for OA during the double-blind treatment period, participants were allowed to take up to 3000 mg of acetaminophen (tablet/capsule/caplets) per day up to 3 days per week as a rescue medication. Results are presented as total dose of acetaminophen (in mg) per week. |
Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 |
|
| Secondary |
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 18 |
NIS: 74 items, assess muscle weakness, reflexes and sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each side). Components of muscle weakness are 24 items and scored on scale 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis), higher score=greater weakness. Components of reflexes and sensation are 13 items and scored 0 = normal, 1= decreased, or 2 = absent. Total NIS score is the sum of the left and right limb scores. Total possible NIS score range 0 to 244, higher score=greater impairment. |
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 18 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Anti-Drug (Tanezumab) Antibody (ADA) |
Human serum samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using the semi-quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Only participants receiving tanezumab were to be analyzed for this measure. A participant may be represented in more than 1 category. |
Baseline, Week 8 and 18 |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) |
An AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. An 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 are events between first dose of study drug and up to 112 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included SAEs as well as non-serious AEs which occurred during the trial. |
Baseline up to 112 days after last intravenous dose |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Pre-Specified Opioid-Related Adverse Events According to Severity |
Pre-specified opioid-related adverse events: fatigue, drowsiness, inability to concentrate, nausea, dizziness, constipation, itching, difficulty urinating, confusion and vomiting. Number of participants who experienced any of the pre-specified opioid-related adverse event are reported. Pre-specified opioid-related adverse events were assessed according to severity: mild (did not interfere with participant's usual function); moderate (interfered to some extent with participant's usual function); and severe (interfered significantly with participant's usual function). |
Baseline up to 112 days after last intravenous dose |
|
| Secondary |
Number of Participants With Adverse Event of Abnormal Peripheral Sensation According to Severity |
Adverse event of abnormal peripheral sensation: allodynia, burning sensation, decreased vibratory sense, dysaesthesia, hyperaesthesia, hyperpathia, hypoaesthesia, neuralgia, neuritis, neuropathy peripheral, pallanesthesia, paraesthesia, paraesthesia oral, peripheral sensory neuropathy, polyneuropathy, sensory disturbance, sensory loss and thermohypoaesthesia. Adverse event of abnormal peripheral sensation was assessed according to severity: mild (did not interfere with participant's usual function); moderate (interfered to some extent with participant's usual function); and severe (interfered significantly with participant's usual function). |
Baseline up to 112 days after last intravenous dose |
|
| Secondary |
Tanezumab Plasma Concentration |
Plasma concentration of tanezumab was measured using a validated, sensitive and specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Only participants receiving tanezumab were to be analyzed for this measure. |
Predose, 1 hour post-dose on Day 1, Week 8; Week 18 |
|
| Secondary |
Total Nerve Growth Factor (NGF) Serum Concentration |
Serum samples were analyzed for determining total NGF concentration. Total NGF was analyzed using a validated, sensitive, and specific immune-affinity enrichment liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometric (IA/LC/MS/MS) method. |
Predose, 1 hour post-dose on Day 1, Week 8; Predose: Week 18 |
|
