Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov
For full trial details, please see the original record at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00565409
Registration number
NCT00565409
Ethics application status
Date submitted
28/11/2007
Date registered
30/11/2007
Date last updated
10/08/2015
Titles & IDs
Public title
Study Comparing Etanercept in Combination With Methotrexate in Subjects With Rheumatoid Arthritis
Query!
Scientific title
A Randomized, Double-Blind Study Comparing the Safety & Efficacy of Once-Weekly Etanercept 50 mg, Etanercept 25 mg, & Placebo in Combination With Methotrexate in Subjects With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
B1801003
Query!
Secondary ID [2]
0
0
0881A1-4423
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
PRESERVE
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Arthritis, Rheumatoid
0
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Musculoskeletal
0
0
0
0
Query!
Osteoarthritis
Query!
Inflammatory and Immune System
0
0
0
0
Query!
Rheumatoid arthritis
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Drugs - Etanercept
Treatment: Drugs - Methotrexate
Treatment: Drugs - Etanercept
Treatment: Drugs - Methotrexate
Treatment: Drugs - Placebo
Treatment: Drugs - Methotrexate
Active Comparator: 1 -
Active Comparator: 2 -
Placebo Comparator: 3 -
Treatment: Drugs: Etanercept
Subcutaneous (SC), 50 mg, once weekly for 88 weeks
Treatment: Drugs: Methotrexate
Oral, 15 to 25 mg (varying based on dosage the subject is receiving at the time of screening and may be increased at the discretion of the investigator through Week 28 to a maximum of 25 mg/week), once weekly for 88 weeks.
If a subject experiences an adverse event (AE) during the study, Methotrexate may be decreased by 2.5 or 5.0 mg weekly (the minimum dose to stay in the study is 10 mg/week).
Treatment: Drugs: Etanercept
Subcutaneous (SC), 25 mg, once weekly from week 36 to week 88.
Treatment: Drugs: Methotrexate
Oral, 15 to 25 mg (varying based on dosage the subject is receiving at the time of screening and may be increased at the discretion of the investigator through Week 28 to a maximum of 25 mg/week), once weekly for 88 weeks.
If a subject experiences an adverse event (AE) during the study, Methotrexate may be decreased by 2.5 or 5.0 mg weekly (the minimum dose to stay in the study is 10 mg/week).
Treatment: Drugs: Placebo
Subcutaneous (SC), once weekly from week 36 to week 88.
Treatment: Drugs: Methotrexate
Oral, 15 to 25 mg (varying based on dosage the subject is receiving at the time of screening and may be increased at the discretion of the investigator through Week 28 to a maximum of 25 mg/week), once weekly for 88 weeks.
If a subject experiences an adverse event (AE) during the study, Methotrexate may be decreased by 2.5 or 5.0 mg weekly (the minimum dose to stay in the study is 10 mg/week).
Query!
Intervention code [1]
0
0
Treatment: Drugs
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving 28 Joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) Less Than or Equal to (=) 3.2 at Week 88
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
DAS28 calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joint count (less than [<]20 percent [%] missing SJC or PJC was prorated), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and Patient's General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS). VAS is a line 0-100 millimeters (mm) in length; ranged from 0 (very well)-100mm (extremely bad). Participants placed a mark indicating their health over the previous 2-3 weeks. Higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. DAS28 = 3.2 units equals (=) low disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Week 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Low Disease Activity or Remission at Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
DAS28 calculated from the number of SJC and PJC using the 28 joints count, the ESR mm/hour and and Patient's General Health VAS. VAS consisted of a line 0 to 100 mm in length; ranged from 0 (very well) to 100mm (extremely bad). Participants placed a mark indicating their health over the previous 2-3 weeks. Higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. DAS28 = 3.2 units = low disease activity, DAS28 < 2.6 units = remission.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving DAS28 Low Disease Activity or Remission
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
DAS28 calculated from the number of SJC and PJC using the 28 joints count, the ESR mm/hour and and Patient's General Health VAS. VAS consisted of a line 0 to 100 mm in length; ranged from 0 (very well) to 100mm (extremely bad). Participants placed a mark indicating their health over the previous 2-3 weeks. Higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. DAS28 = 3.2 units = low disease activity, DAS28 < 2.6 units = remission.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28 at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
The DAS28 is a score on a scale (0 to 10) indicating current activity of rheumatoid arthritis (>5.1=high disease activity; <=3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=remission); a continuous variable which is a composite of 4 variables (the number of tender joints out of 28, the number of swollen joints out of 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and patient's global assessment (PGA) of disease activity measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 100 mm). Change equals (=) Week X observation minus (-) Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in DAS28 at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
The DAS28 is a score on a scale (0 to 10) indicating current activity of rheumatoid arthritis (>5.1=high disease activity; <=3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=remission); a continuous variable which is a composite of 4 variables (the number of tender joints out of 28, the number of swollen joints out of 28 joints, ESR mm/hour and PGA of disease activity measured on a VAS of 100 mm). Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Time to Loss of Low Disease Activity DAS28 and a Change of = 0.6 Units in the DAS28
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
DAS28 calculated from the number of SJC and PJC using the 28 joints count, the ESR mm/hour and Patient's General Health VAS. VAS consisted of a line 0 to 100 mm in length; ranged from 0 (very well) to 100mm (extremely bad). Participants placed a mark indicating their health over the previous 2-3 weeks. Higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. Low disease activity = DAS28 = 3.2 units. DAS28 > 3.2 to 5.1 units = moderate to high disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Week 36 up to Week 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Time to Loss of Low Disease Activity DAS28
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
DAS28 calculated from the number of SJC and PJC using the 28 joints count, the ESR mm/hour and Patient's General Health VAS. VAS consisted of a line 0 to 100 mm in length; ranged from 0 (very well) to 100mm (extremely bad). Participants placed a mark indicating their health over the previous 2-3 weeks. Higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. DAS28 = 3.2 units = low disease activity, DAS28 greater than (>)3.2 to 5.1 units = moderate to high disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Week 36 up to Week 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Proportion of Time Participants Had Low Disease Activity DAS28 Week 36 to Week 88
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
DAS28 calculated from the number of SJC and PJC using the 28 joints, the ESR mm/hour and Patient's General Health VAS. VAS consisted of a line 0 to 100 mm in length; ranged from 0 (very well) to 100mm (extremely bad). Participants placed a mark indicating their health over the previous 2-3 weeks. Higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. DAS28 < 3.2 units = low disease activity. Cumulative proportion calculated as time-averaged Area Under the Curve (AUC) (AUC divided by number of weeks at that time point), with AUC calculated from Week 36 and Week 88.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Week 36 up to Week 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Prorated Swollen Joint Count at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
American College of Rheumatology (ACR), swollen joint count were an assessment of 28 joints. Joints are classified as either swollen or not swollen. If < 20% of swollen joints missing then total swollen joint prorated (multiplied by 28 divided by (/) number of non-missing swollen joints). Total possible score ranged from -28 to 28. An increase in swollen joints from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression and a decrease represented improvement. Change = Week X observation - baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Prorated Swollen Joint Count at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
ACR, swollen joint count was an assessment of 28 joints. Joints were classified as either swollen or not swollen. If < 20% of swollen joints missing then total swollen joint prorated (multiplied by 28 divided by number of non-missing swollen joints). Total possible score of swollen joints ranged from 0-28.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in Prorated Swollen Joint Count at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
ACR, swollen joint count was an assessment of 28 joints. Joints were classified as either swollen or not swollen. If < 20% of swollen joints missing then total swollen joint prorated (multiplied by 28 divided by (/) number of non-missing swollen joints). Total possible score ranged from -28 to 28. An increase in swollen joints from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression and a decrease represented improvement. Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Week 36, Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Painful Joint Count at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
A total of 28 joints were assessed by the investigator using criteria based on pressure and joint manipulation. Total possible scores ranged from -28 to 28. An increase in joint pain count from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression and a decrease represented improvement. Change = Week X observation - Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Painful Joint Count at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
A total of 28 joints were assessed by the investigator using criteria based on pressure and joint manipulation. Total possible score ranged form 0-28.
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in Painful Joint Count at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
Total of 28 joints were assessed by the investigator using criteria based on pressure and joint manipulation. Total possible scores ranged from -28 to 28. An increase in joint pain count from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression and a decrease represented improvement. Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
Weeks 36 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Physician Global Assessment (PGA) at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
PGA of Disease Activity was measured on a 0 to 10 Scale, with 0 = no disease activity and 10 = extreme disease activity. Change = Week X observation - Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
0
0
PGA Score at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [15]
0
0
PGA of Disease Activity was measured on a 0 to 10 Scale, with 0 = no disease activity and 10 = extreme disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [15]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in the PGA Score at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [16]
0
0
PGA of Disease Activity was measured on a 0 to 10 Scale, with 0 = no disease activity and 10 = extreme disease activity. Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [16]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PtGA) of Arthritis Pain at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [17]
0
0
Participants asked to rate their overall arthritis activity by circling a number ranging from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (extreme disease activity). Change = Week X observation - Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [17]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
0
0
PtGA of Arthritis Pain at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [18]
0
0
PtGA asked the participant to assess their overall arthritis activity. Participants responded by circling a number ranging from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (extreme disease activity).
Query!
Timepoint [18]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in PtGA of Arthritis Pain at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88
Query!
Assessment method [19]
0
0
PtGA asked the participant to assess their overall arthritis activity. Participants responded by circling a number ranging from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (extreme disease activity). Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [19]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Duration of Morning Stiffness at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [20]
0
0
Duration of morning stiffness was defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and when the participants were able to resume normal activities without stiffness. No stiffness present = 0; stiffness persisted the entire day = 1440 minutes (24 hour times [*] 60 min) was recorded. Change = Week X observation - Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [20]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
0
0
Duration of Morning Stiffness at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [21]
0
0
Duration of morning stiffness was defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and when the participants were able to resume normal activities without stiffness. No stiffness present = 0; stiffness persisted the entire day = 1440 minutes (24 hour * 60 min) was recorded.
Query!
Timepoint [21]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in Duration of Morning Stiffness at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88
Query!
Assessment method [22]
0
0
Duration of morning stiffness was defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and was able to resume normal activities without stiffness. No stiffness present = 0; stiffness persisted the entire day = 1440 minutes (24 hour * 60 min) was recorded. Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [22]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
0
0
Change From Baseline in General Health at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [23]
0
0
General Health VAS is a 100 millimeter (mm) line marked by the participant. Participants were asked, "In general how would you rate your health over the last 2 to 3 weeks?" Scores ranged from 0 mm = very well to 100 mm = extremely bad. Change = Week X observation - Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [23]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
0
0
General Health at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [24]
0
0
General Health VAS is a 100 mm line marked by the participant. Participants are asked, "In general how would you rate your health over the last 2 to 3 weeks?" Scores ranged from 0 mm = very well to 100 mm = extremely bad.
Query!
Timepoint [24]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in General Health at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88
Query!
Assessment method [25]
0
0
General Health VAS is a 100 mm line marked by the participant. Participants were asked, "In general how would you rate your health over the last 2 to 3 weeks?" Scores ranged from 0 mm = very well to 100 mm = extremely bad. Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [25]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Pain at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [26]
0
0
100 mm line (Visual Analog Scale) marked by participant. Intensity of pain range (over past 2 to 3 days): 0 = no pain to 100 = worst possible pain. Change = Week X observation - Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [26]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
0
0
Pain at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [27]
0
0
100 mm line (Visual Analog Scale) marked by participant. Intensity of pain range (over past 2 to 3 days): 0 = no pain to 100 = pain as bad as it could be. Change = Week x observation minus (-) Baseline observation.
Query!
Timepoint [27]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [28]
0
0
Change From Week 36 in Pain at Weeks 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [28]
0
0
100 mm line (Visual Analog Scale) marked by participant. Intensity of pain range (over past 2 to 3 days): 0 = no pain to 100 = worst possible pain. Change = Week X observation - Week 36 observation.
Query!
Timepoint [28]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [29]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving an Acceptable State on the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) at Baseline and Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [29]
0
0
PASS was a 1 question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 2 days (If you were to remain in the next few months as you were during the last 2 days, would this be acceptable or unacceptable to you?).
Query!
Timepoint [29]
0
0
Baseline, Week 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [30]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving an Acceptable State on the PASS at Week 36 and Weeks 64 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [30]
0
0
PASS was a 1 question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 2 days (If you were to remain in the next few months as you were during the last 2 days, would this be acceptable or unacceptable to you?).
Query!
Timepoint [30]
0
0
Weeks 36, 64 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [31]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good or Moderate Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [31]
0
0
EULAR Response Criteria: Good response was defined as >1.2 units improvement in DAS28 from Baseline and DAS28 attained up to Week 88 of <=3.2 units. Non responders were participants with improvement of <0.6 units or participants with improvement of 0.6 to 1.2 units and DAS28 attained up to Week 88 of > 5.1 units. Remaining participants were defined as having a moderate response. Scores of good and moderate were considered to have therapeutic response.
Query!
Timepoint [31]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [32]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good or Moderate Response at Week 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [32]
0
0
EULAR Response Criteria: Good response was defined as >1.2 units improvement in DAS28 from Baseline and DAS28 attained up to Week 88 of <=3.2 units. Non responders were participants with improvement of <0.6 units or participants with improvement of 0.6 to 1.2 units and DAS28 attained up to Week 88 of > 5.1 units. Remaining participants were defined as having a moderate response. Scores of good and moderate were considered to have therapeutic response.
Query!
Timepoint [32]
0
0
Week 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [33]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20 Percent (%) (ACR20) Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [33]
0
0
ACR20 response, = 20 percent (%) improvement in tender joint count; = 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and = at least 20% improvement in at least 3 of the following 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and acute phase reactant (ESR).
Query!
Timepoint [33]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [34]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an ACR20 Response at Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [34]
0
0
ACR20 response: = 20% improvement in tender joint count; =20% improvement in swollen joint count; and = at least 20% improvement in 3 of the following 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and acute phase reactant (ESR).
Query!
Timepoint [34]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [35]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an ACR50 Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [35]
0
0
ACR50 response: = 50% improvement in tender joint count; = =50% improvement in swollen joint count; and = at least 50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and acute phase reactant (ESR).
Query!
Timepoint [35]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [36]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an ACR50 Response at Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [36]
0
0
ACR50 response: = 50% improvement in tender joint count; = =50% improvement in swollen joint count; and = at least 50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and acute phase reactant (ESR).
Query!
Timepoint [36]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [37]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an ACR70 Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [37]
0
0
ACR70 response: = 70% improvement in tender joint count; = =70% improvement in swollen joint count; and = at least 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and acute phase reactant (ESR).
Query!
Timepoint [37]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [38]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an ACR70 Response at Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [38]
0
0
ACR70 response: = 70% improvement in tender joint count; = =70% improvement in swollen joint count; and = at least 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and C-Reactive Protein CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [38]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [39]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an ACR90 Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Assessment method [39]
0
0
ACR90 response: = 90% improvement in tender joint count; = =90% improvement in swollen joint count; and = at least 90% improvement in 3 of the following 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and acute phase reactant (ESR).
Query!
Timepoint [39]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 20, 28 and 36
Query!
Secondary outcome [40]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an ACR90 Response at Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Assessment method [40]
0
0
ACR90 response: = 90% improvement in tender joint count; = 90% improvement in swollen joint count; and = 90% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and acute phase reactant (ESR).
Query!
Timepoint [40]
0
0
Weeks 36, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80 and 88
Query!
Secondary outcome [41]
0
0
DAS28 at Week 36
Query!
Assessment method [41]
0
0
The DAS28 is a score on a scale (0 to 10) indicating current activity of rheumatoid arthritis (>5.1=high disease activity; <=3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=remission); a continuous variable which is a composite of 4 variables (the number of tender joints out of 28, the number of swollen joints out of 28 joints, ESR mm/hour and PGA of disease activity measured on a VAS of 100 mm).
Query!
Timepoint [41]
0
0
Week 36
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
- Diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis.
- Currently receiving an optimal dose of oral Methotrexate (MTX)(at least 15 mg/week but
no more than 25 mg/week) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.
- Active rheumatoid arthritis at the time of screening.
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
70
Years
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
- Previous or current treatment with etanercept, other tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF)
inhibitors, or other biologic agents.
- Concurrent treatment with any disease-modifying anti-rheumatoid drugs (DMARD), other
than MTX within 28 days before baseline.
- Concurrent treatment with more than 1 non-steroid anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) at
baseline.
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Query!
Masking / blinding
Blinded (masking used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
The people administering the treatment/s
The people assessing the outcomes
The people analysing the results/data
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Phase 4
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Query!
Data analysis
Query!
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Query!
Other reasons
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
1/03/2008
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
1/05/2011
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
834
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
NSW,QLD,SA,VIC
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
Pfizer Investigational Site - Campsie
Query!
Recruitment hospital [2]
0
0
Pfizer Investigational Site - Kogarah
Query!
Recruitment hospital [3]
0
0
Pfizer Investigational Site - Maroochydore
Query!
Recruitment hospital [4]
0
0
Pfizer Investigational Site - Daw Park
Query!
Recruitment hospital [5]
0
0
Pfizer Investigational Site - Heidelberg West
Query!
Recruitment hospital [6]
0
0
Pfizer Investigational Site - Malvern
Query!
Recruitment hospital [7]
0
0
Pfizer Investigational Site - Victoria Park
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
2194 - Campsie
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [2]
0
0
2217 - Kogarah
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [3]
0
0
4558 - Maroochydore
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [4]
0
0
5041 - Daw Park
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [5]
0
0
3081 - Heidelberg West
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [6]
0
0
3145 - Malvern
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [7]
0
0
6100 - Victoria Park
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [1]
0
0
Wien
Query!
Country [2]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [2]
0
0
Bruxelles
Query!
Country [3]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [3]
0
0
Liege
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Yvoir
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
Chile
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Region Metropolitana
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
Colombia
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Atlantico
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
Colombia
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
Cundinamarca
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Brno
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Bruntal
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
Praha 2
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
Praha 5
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
Zlin
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
Former Serbia and Montenegro
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
Belgrade
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
Former Serbia and Montenegro
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Niska Banja
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Corbeil-Essonnes
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Le Kremlin Bicetre
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
Le Mans
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Montpellier
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
Nice
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
Paris
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
Strasbourg
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
Toulouse
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
Berlin
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Hamburg-Eilbek
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Koeln
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Leipzig
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
Wuerzburg
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Budapest
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Debrecen
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
Szombathely
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
CT
Query!
Country [32]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [32]
0
0
TO
Query!
Country [33]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [33]
0
0
Roma
Query!
Country [34]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [34]
0
0
Daejeon
Query!
Country [35]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [35]
0
0
Incheon
Query!
Country [36]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [36]
0
0
Korea
Query!
Country [37]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [37]
0
0
Seoul
Query!
Country [38]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [38]
0
0
Anyang-si Gyeonggi-do
Query!
Country [39]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [39]
0
0
Yucatan
Query!
Country [40]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [40]
0
0
Guadalajara
Query!
Country [41]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [41]
0
0
Mexico City
Query!
Country [42]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [42]
0
0
Mexico DF
Query!
Country [43]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [43]
0
0
Monterrey
Query!
Country [44]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [44]
0
0
Queretaro
Query!
Country [45]
0
0
Netherlands
Query!
State/province [45]
0
0
Heerlen
Query!
Country [46]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [46]
0
0
Bydgoszcz
Query!
Country [47]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [47]
0
0
Lodz
Query!
Country [48]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [48]
0
0
Lublin
Query!
Country [49]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [49]
0
0
Szczecin
Query!
Country [50]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [50]
0
0
Warszawa
Query!
Country [51]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [51]
0
0
Moscow
Query!
Country [52]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [52]
0
0
St Petersburg
Query!
Country [53]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [53]
0
0
St. Petersburg
Query!
Country [54]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [54]
0
0
A Coruña
Query!
Country [55]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [55]
0
0
Barcelona
Query!
Country [56]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [56]
0
0
La Coruña
Query!
Country [57]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [57]
0
0
Malaga
Query!
Country [58]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [58]
0
0
Sevilla
Query!
Country [59]
0
0
Sweden
Query!
State/province [59]
0
0
Falun
Query!
Country [60]
0
0
Sweden
Query!
State/province [60]
0
0
Oskarström
Query!
Country [61]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [61]
0
0
ROC
Query!
Country [62]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [62]
0
0
Kaohsiung City
Query!
Country [63]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [63]
0
0
Lancashire
Query!
Country [64]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [64]
0
0
West Midlands
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/Industry
Query!
Name
Pfizer
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
To compare the efficacy of the combination of etanercept 50 mg once weekly plus methotrexate
with that of methotrexate monotherapy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis over 88 weeks.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00565409
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
0
0
Pfizer CT.gov Call Center
Query!
Address
0
0
Pfizer
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
0
0
Query!
Address
0
0
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Summary Results
For IPD and results data, please see
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00565409
Download to PDF