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 ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.
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/study/NCT01424566
Registration number
NCT01424566
Ethics application status
Date submitted
25/08/2011
Date registered
29/08/2011
Date last updated
12/04/2023
Titles & IDs
Public title
A Two-Part Study of Sativex® Oromucosal Spray for Relieving Uncontrolled Persistent Pain in Patients With Advanced Cancer
Query!
Scientific title
A Two-part, Placebo-controlled, Study of the Safety and Efficacy of Sativex® Oromucosal Spray (Sativex®; Nabiximols) as Adjunctive Therapy in Relieving Uncontrolled Persistent Chronic Pain in Patients With Advanced Cancer, Who Have Inadequate Analgesia Even With Optimized Chronic Opioid Therapy.
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
2010-022905-17
Query!
Secondary ID [2]
0
0
GWCA1103
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Pain
0
0
Query!
Advanced Cancer
0
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Experimental: Nabiximols - Nabiximols was self-administered by participants as a 100 microliter (µL) oromucosal spray in the morning and evening, up to a maximum of 10 sprays per day for 2 or 7 weeks. Nabiximols oromucosal spray contained delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) (27 milligrams \[mg\]/milliliter \[mL\]):cannabidiol (CBD) (25 mg/mL), in ethanol:propylene glycol (50:50) excipients, with peppermint oil (0.05%)flavoring. Each 100 µL actuation delivered 2.7 mg THC and 2.5 mg CBD.
Placebo comparator: Placebo (GA-0034) - Placebo was self-administered by participants as a 100 µL oromucosal spray in the morning and evening, up to a maximum of 10 sprays per day for 5 weeks. Placebo oromucosal spray contained ethanol:propylene glycol (50:50) excipients, with peppermint oil (0.05%) flavoring and colorings.
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Change From Randomization Baseline In Mean NRS Average Pain At End Of Treatment
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Participants indicated the level of pain experienced in the last 24 hours on an 11-point NRS, where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine." Change in mean NRS average pain was calculated as: End of Treatment NRS average pain score - Randomization (Part B) Baseline NRS average pain score. The participant's Randomization (Part B) baseline pain 0-10 NRS value was the mean over the last 4 consecutive days of the single-blind treatment period (Part A; pre-randomization). A negative value indicates an improvement in average pain score from Randomization (Part B) Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Randomization Baseline, End of Treatment (Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Percent Improvement From Eligibility Baseline In Mean NRS Average Pain Score At End Of Treatment
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Participants indicated level of pain in the last 24 hours on an 11-point NRS, where a score of 0 was "no pain" and 10 was "pain as bad as you can imagine". Eligibility Baseline = mean score from the 3-day eligibility period. End of Treatment = mean score over last (up to) 4 days to the final pain score at End of Treatment or up until Day 36 of the double-blind period, whichever is earlier, or final score available (prematurely terminated).
Percentage improvement from baseline (Imp%) was calculated as:
Imp% = (Eligibility Baseline pain NRS mean - End of Treatment pain NRS mean)/Eligibility Baseline pain NRS mean \* 100.
For participants who died or withdrew due to disease progression, Imp% values were used. For participants who died or withdrew unrelated to disease progression before end of Week 5, Imp% was zero for participants whose Imp% value was positive and it was Imp% for participants whose Imp% value was not positive.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Eligibility Baseline, End of Treatment (Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Change From Randomization Baseline In Mean NRS Worst Pain At End Of Treatment
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
Participants indicated the level of worst pain experienced in the last 24 hours on an 11-point NRS, where a score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 indicated "pain as bad as you can imagine." Change in mean NRS worst pain was calculated as: End of Treatment NRS worst pain score - Randomization (Part B) Baseline NRS worst pain score. The participant's Randomization (Part B) baseline worst pain 0-10 NRS value was the mean over the last 4 consecutive days of the single-blind treatment period (Part A; pre-randomization). A negative value indicates an improvement in worst pain score from Randomization (Part B) Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Randomization Baseline, End of Treatment (Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Change From Randomization Baseline In Mean Sleep Disruption NRS At End Of Treatment
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
Participants indicated the level of sleep disruption experienced in the last 24 hours on an 11-point NRS, where a score of 0 indicated "did not disrupt sleep" and a score of 10 indicated "completely disrupted (unable to sleep at all)." Change in mean sleep disruption NRS was calculated as: End of Treatment sleep disruption NRS score - Randomization (Part B) Baseline sleep disruption NRS score. The participant's Randomization (Part B) baseline sleep disruption 0-10 NRS value was the mean over the last 4 consecutive days of the single-blind treatment period (Part A; pre-randomization). A negative value indicates an improvement in sleep disruption score from Randomization (Part B) Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
Randomization Baseline, End of Treatment (Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Subject Global Impression Of Change At Last Visit (Up To Day 36 Of The Double-blind Period)
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
The Subject Global Impression of Change (SGIC) was used to assess the overall status of the participant related to their cancer pain, with the markers "very much improved, much improved, slightly improved, no change, slightly worse, much worse, or very much worse". The SGIC was assessed at Day 36 of the double-blind period or the day at which a participant's last evaluation was performed, such as in the case of early termination. Last visit refers to the last visit that a participant completed the assessment; this could be either Day 22 or Day 36 of the double-blind period.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Last Visit (up to Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Physician Global Impression Of Change At Last Visit (Up To Day 36 Of The Double-blind Period)
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
The Physician Global Impression of Change (PGIC) was used by the treating physician (investigator/sub-investigator) to assess if there was any change in the general functional abilities of the participant since prior to commencement of study medication, with the markers: "very much worse, much worse, slightly worse, no change, slightly improved, much improved, very much improved". Last visit refers to the last visit that a participant completed the assessment; this could be either Day 22 or Day 36 of the double-blind period.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Last Visit (up to Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire At Last Visit (Up To Day 36 Of The Double-blind Period)
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ) was used to assess level of satisfaction of the participant with the study drug, with the markers "extremely satisfied, very satisfied, slightly satisfied, neutral, slightly dissatisfied, very dissatisfied, extremely dissatisfied". Last visit refers to the last visit that a participant completed the assessment; this could be either Day 22 or Day 36 of the double-blind period.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Last Visit (up to Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Change From Randomization Baseline In Daily Total Opioid Use (Morphine Equivalent) At End Of Treatment
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
The total daily opioid use (in morphine equivalence) was the sum of morphine equivalence of daily maintenance dose and break-through dose.
Change in daily total opioid use was calculated as: End of Treatment daily total opioid use - Randomization (Part B) Baseline daily total opioid use. The participant's Randomization (Part B) baseline daily total opioid use value was the mean over the last 4 consecutive days of the single-blind treatment period (Part A; pre-randomization). A negative value indicates a decrease in use from Randomization (Part B) Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Randomization Baseline, End of Treatment (Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Change From Randomization Baseline In Daily Maintenance Opioid Dose (Morphine Equivalent) At End Of Treatment
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
The prescribed daily quantity of opioid maintenance dose was calculated as the product of dose per use and daily frequency of use. Participants were asked: "Have you used your maintenance dose painkiller today as prescribed?" If the participant answered "No" to the question, the daily opioid maintenance dose usage on that day was set to 0.
Change in daily maintenance opioid dose was calculated as: End of Treatment daily maintenance opioid dose - Randomization (Part B) Baseline daily maintenance opioid dose. The participant's Randomization (Part B) baseline daily maintenance opioid dose value was the mean over the last 4 consecutive days of the single-blind treatment period (Part A; pre-randomization). A negative value indicates a decrease in dose from Randomization (Part B) Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Randomization Baseline, End of Treatment (Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Change From Randomization Baseline In Daily Break-through Opioid Dose (Morphine Equivalent) At End Of Treatment
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
Daily break-through opioid dose usage was calculated as the product of prescribed dose per use, and the number of uses per day. If participants took more than 1 different break-through opioid for more than 1 day, the sum of morphine equivalence dose usages for each break-through opioid was calculated for the summary.
Change in daily break-through opioid dose was calculated as: End of Treatment daily break-through opioid dose - Randomization (Part B) Baseline daily maintenance opioid dose. The participant's Randomization (Part B) baseline daily break-through opioid dose value was the mean over the last 4 consecutive days of the single-blind treatment period (Part A; pre-randomization). A negative value indicates a decrease in dose from Randomization (Part B) Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Randomization Baseline, End of Treatment (Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Change From Randomization Baseline In NRS Constipation At Last Visit (Up To Day 36 Of The Double-blind Period)
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
Participants indicated level of constipation on an 11-point NRS, where a score of 0 was "no constipation", and 10 was "constipation as bad as you can imagine." Last visit refers to the last visit that a participant completed the assessment.
Change in NRS constipation score was calculated as: Last Visit NRS constipation score - Randomization (Part B) Baseline NRS constipation score. The participant's Randomization (Part B) baseline constipation NRS value was the last evaluation (including unscheduled visits) in the single-blind treatment period (Part A) prior to the first dose of study drug in the double-blind treatment period (Part B). A negative value indicates improvement in condition from Randomization (Part B) Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Randomization Baseline, Last Visit (up to Day 36 of the double-blind period)
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria (abbreviated):
* The participant had advanced cancer for which there is no known curative therapy
* The participant had a clinical diagnosis of cancer related pain, which was not alleviated with their current optimized opioid treatment
* The participant received an optimized maintenance dose of Step 3 opioid therapy, preferably with a sustained release preparation, but also allowing a regular maintenance dose of around the clock use of immediate release preparations
* The participant received a daily maintenance dose Step 3 opioid therapy of less than or equal to a total daily opioid dose of 500 mg/day of morphine equivalence (including maintenance and break-through opioids)
* The participant was using no more than one type of break-through opioid analgesia
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
Exclusion Criteria (abbreviated):
* Had any planned clinical interventions that would have affected their pain (for example, chemotherapy or radiation therapy where, in the clinical judgment of the investigator, these would be expected to affect pain)
* The participant was currently using or had used cannabis or cannabinoid-based medications within 30 days of study entry and was unwilling to abstain for the duration of the study
* Had experienced myocardial infarction or clinically significant cardiac dysfunction within the last 12 months or had a cardiac disorder that, in the opinion of the investigator would have put the participant at risk of a clinically significant arrhythmia or myocardial infarction
* Had significantly impaired renal function
* Had significantly impaired hepatic function
* Female participants of child-bearing potential and male participants whose partner was of child-bearing potential, unless willing to ensure that they or their partner used effective contraception, for example, oral contraception, double barrier, intra-uterine device, during the study and for three months thereafter (however, a male condom was not to be used in conjunction with a female condom as this may not have proven effective)
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 receiving the treatment/s
The people administering the treatment/s
The people analysing the results/data
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Phase 3
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
29/06/2012
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
28/12/2015
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
406
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
- East Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment hospital [2]
0
0
- Parkville
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
3002 - East Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [2]
0
0
3050 - Parkville
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
0
0
Bulgaria
Query!
State/province [1]
0
0
Shumen
Query!
Country [2]
0
0
Bulgaria
Query!
State/province [2]
0
0
Varna
Query!
Country [3]
0
0
Bulgaria
Query!
State/province [3]
0
0
Vratsa
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Lunen
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Stadtroda
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Wetzlar
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
Budapest
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Deszk
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Komárom
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
Nyíregyháza
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
Szikszó
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
India
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
Bangalore
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
India
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
Jaipur
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
India
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Pune
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Ashkelon
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Beer Sheva
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
Haifa
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Jerusalem
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
Ramat Gan
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
Zerifin
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
Garbagnate Milanese
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
Piacenza
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
Torino
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
Lithuania
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Klaipeda
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
Lithuania
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Siauliai
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
Lithuania
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Vilnius
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
Bydgoszcz
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Czeladz
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Gdansk
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
Gliwice
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
Klodzko
Query!
Country [32]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [32]
0
0
Opole
Query!
Country [33]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [33]
0
0
Ostrowiec Swietokrzyski
Query!
Country [34]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [34]
0
0
Poznan
Query!
Country [35]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [35]
0
0
Warszawa
Query!
Country [36]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [36]
0
0
Wloclawek
Query!
Country [37]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [37]
0
0
Alba Iulia
Query!
Country [38]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [38]
0
0
Baia Mare
Query!
Country [39]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [39]
0
0
Braila
Query!
Country [40]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [40]
0
0
Bucuresti
Query!
Country [41]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [41]
0
0
Foc?ani
Query!
Country [42]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [42]
0
0
Oradea
Query!
Country [43]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [43]
0
0
Satu Mare
Query!
Country [44]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [44]
0
0
Sibiu
Query!
Country [45]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [45]
0
0
Suceava
Query!
Country [46]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [46]
0
0
Cadiz
Query!
Country [47]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [47]
0
0
Granada
Query!
Country [48]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [48]
0
0
Madrid
Query!
Country [49]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [49]
0
0
Salamanca
Query!
Country [50]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [50]
0
0
Sevilla
Query!
Country [51]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [51]
0
0
Changhua City
Query!
Country [52]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [52]
0
0
Taichung
Query!
Country [53]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [53]
0
0
Tainan City
Query!
Country [54]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [54]
0
0
Taipei
Query!
Country [55]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [55]
0
0
Bury Saint Edmunds
Query!
Country [56]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [56]
0
0
Edinburgh
Query!
Country [57]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [57]
0
0
Glasgow
Query!
Country [58]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [58]
0
0
Manchester
Query!
Country [59]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [59]
0
0
Norwich
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/industry
Query!
Name
Jazz Pharmaceuticals
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Other collaborator category [1]
0
0
Commercial sector/industry
Query!
Name [1]
0
0
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc.
Query!
Address [1]
0
0
Query!
Country [1]
0
0
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of nabiximols (Sativex®), compared with placebo, when used as an adjunctive measure in relieving uncontrolled persistent chronic pain (not breakthrough pain) in participants with advanced cancer, who had inadequate analgesia even with optimized chronic opioid therapy. This multi-center study was conducted in two parts. All participants enrolled into the trial received nabiximols during one of two parts of the study, but they did not know which part. Eligible participants were not required to stop any of their current treatments or medications.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01424566
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Fallon MT, Albert Lux E, McQuade R, Rossetti S, Sanchez R, Sun W, Wright S, Lichtman AH, Kornyeyeva E. Sativex oromucosal spray as adjunctive therapy in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy: two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 studies. Br J Pain. 2017 Aug;11(3):119-133. doi: 10.1177/2049463717710042. Epub 2017 May 17.
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
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 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
No information has been provided regarding IPD availability
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Results publications and other study-related documents
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Results are available at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01424566
Download to PDF