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
MY TRIALS
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Register a trial
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
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov
For full trial details, please see the original record at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02996500
Registration number
NCT02996500
Ethics application status
Date submitted
13/10/2016
Date registered
19/12/2016
Titles & IDs
Public title
Safety and Efficacy of Pf-06650833 In Subjects With Rheumatoid Arthritis, With An Inadequate Response To Methotrexate
Query!
Scientific title
A 12 WEEK RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, DOUBLE DUMMY, PARALLEL GROUP, ACTIVE AND PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, MULTICENTER STUDY TO ASSESS THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY PROFILE OF PF-06650833 IN SUBJECTS WITH ACTIVE RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS WITH AN INADEQUATE RESPONSE TO METHOTREXATE
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
2016-002337-30
Query!
Secondary ID [2]
0
0
B7921005
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Rheumatoid Arthritis
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 - PF-06650833
Treatment: Drugs - Placebo
Treatment: Drugs - Tofacitinib
Experimental: Arm 1: 20 mg QD - PF-06650833 , 20 mg QD
Experimental: Arm 2: 60 mg QD - PF-06650833, 60 mg QD
Experimental: Arm 3: 200 mg QD - Pf-06650833, 200 mg QD
Experimental: Arm 4: 400 mg QD - PF-06650833, 400 mg QD
Placebo comparator: Placebo - Placebo, 0 mg BID
Active comparator: Arm 5: Tofacitinib - Tofacitinib 5 mg BID
Treatment: Drugs: PF-06650833
Investigational
Treatment: Drugs: Placebo
Placebo
Treatment: Drugs: Tofacitinib
Investigational
Query!
Intervention code [1]
0
0
Treatment: Drugs
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
The SDAI is a continuous composite measure derived from components of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Core Dataset.The SDAI was calculated using the following formula: SDAI = Tender / Painful Joint Count(TJC) (using 28 joints) + Swollen Joint Count (SJC) (using 28 joints) + Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis (PtGA) (0-10 cm scale) + Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis (PhGA) (0-10 cm scale) + high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) (mg/dL). SDAI total score= 0-86. SDAI \<=3.3 indicates disease remission, \>3.4 to 11 = low disease activity, \>11 to 26 = moderate disease activity, and \>26 = high disease activity. The primary analysis utilized a Bayesian ANCOVA model with an informative placebo prior distribution with borrowing from tofacitinib historical placebo data. The confidence interval was credible interval in this statistical analysis. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Baseline and Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Change From Baseline in SDAI at Weeks 4 and 8
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
The SDAI is a continuous composite measure derived from components of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Core Dataset.The SDAI was calculated using the following formula: SDAI = TJC (using 28 joints) + SJC (using 28 joints) + PtGA (0-10 cm scale) + PhGA (0-10 cm scale) + hsCRP (mg/dL). SDAI total score= 0-86. SDAI \<=3.3 indicates disease remission, \>3.4 to 11 = low disease activity, \>11 to 26 = moderate disease activity, and \>26 = high disease activity. The descriptive summary of change from baseline in SDAI was based on a mixed effect model repeat measurement MMRM model with observed data. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4 and 8
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With SDAI Low Disease Activity Score (LDAS) (SDAI <=11) at 4, 8, and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
The SDAI is a continuous composite measure derived from components of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Core Dataset.The SDAI was calculated using the following formula: SDAI = TJC (using 28 joints) + SJC (using 28 joints) + PtGA (0-10 cm scale) + PhGA (0-10 cm scale) + hsCRP (mg/dL). The criterion of SDAI LDAS was SDAI\<=11. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With SDAI Remission (SDAI <=3.3) at 4, 8, and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
The SDAI is a continuous composite measure derived from components of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Core Dataset.The SDAI was calculated using the following formula: SDAI = TJC (using 28 joints) + SJC (using 28 joints) + PtGA (0-10 cm scale) + PhGA (0-10 cm scale) + hsCRP (mg/dL). The criterion of SDAI remission was SDAI\<=3.3. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score-28 (4 Components Based on Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) (DAS28-4 [ESR]) LDAS (DAS28 <3.2) at 4, 8, and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-4 (ESR) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed, ESR and PGA. DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 ln(ESR \[mm/first hour\] + 0.014 (PtGA \[mm\]). Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-4 (ESR) LDAS was DAS28\<3.2. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3 (ESR) LDAS (DAS28 <3.2) at 4, 8, and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-3 (ESR) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed and ESR. DAS28-3 (ESR) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 ln(ESR \[mm/first hour\]\*1.08+0.16. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-3 LDAS was DAS28\<3.2. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score-28 (4 Components Based on High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein) (DAS28-4 [CRP]) LDAS (DAS28 <3.2) at 4, 8, and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-4 (CRP) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed, hs-CRP and PtGA. DAS28-4 (CRP) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.36 ln(CRP \[mg/L\] +1) + 0.014 (PtGA \[mm\]) + 0.96. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-4 LDAS was DAS28\<3.2. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3 (CRP) LDAS (DAS28 <3.2) at 4, 8, and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-3 (CRP) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed and hs-CRP. DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.36 ln(CRP \[mg/L\] +1)\*1.10+ 1.15. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-3 LDAS was DAS28\<3.2. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4 (ESR) Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-4 (ESR) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed, ESR and PtGA. DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 ln(ESR \[mm/first hour\] + 0.014 (PtGA \[mm\]). Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-4 remission was DAS28\<2.6. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3 (ESR) Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-3 (ESR) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed and ESR. DAS28-3 (ESR) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 ln(ESR \[mm/first hour\]\*1.08+0.16. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-3 remission was DAS28\<2.6. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4 (CRP) Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-4 (CRP) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed, hs-CRP and PtGA. DAS28-4 (CRP) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.36 ln(CRP \[mg/L\] +1) + 0.014 (PtGA \[mm\]) + 0.96. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-4 remission was DAS28\<2.6. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3 (CRP) Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-3 (CRP) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed and hs-CRP. DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.36 ln(CRP \[mg/L\] +1)\*1.10+1.15. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. The criterion of DAS28-3 remission was DAS28\<2.6. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28-4 (ESR) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-4 (ESR) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed, ESR and PtGA. DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 ln(ESR \[mm/first hour\] + 0.014 (PtGA \[mm\]). Higher score indicated more disease activity. Total score range: 0-9.4. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28-3 (ESR) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-3 (ESR) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed and ESR. DAS28-3 (ESR) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 ln(ESR) \[mm/first hour\]\*1.08+0.16. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28-4 (CRP) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-4 (CRP) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed, hs-CRP and PtGA. DAS28-4 (CRP) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.36 ln(CRP \[mg/L\] +1) + 0.014 (PtGA \[mm\]) + 0.96. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28-3 (CRP) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [15]
0
0
The DAS assessment is a continuous composite measure derived using differential weighting given to each component. The components of the DAS28-3 (CRP) assessment included: tender joint count with 28 joints assessed, swollen joint count with 28 joints assessed and hs-CRP. DAS28-3 (CRP) was calculated as 0.56 sqrt (DAS 28 tender joint count) + 0.28 sqrt (DAS 28 swollen joint count) + 0.36 ln(CRP \[mg/L\] +1)\*1.10+ 1.15. Total score range: 0-9.4. Higher score indicated more disease activity. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [15]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [16]
0
0
ACR20 was calculated as a 20% improvement in TJC and SJC and 20% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR core set measures: PtGA and PhGA, pain, disability, and an acute phase reactant which for this study was CRP or ESR. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [16]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [17]
0
0
ACR50 was calculated as a 50% improvement in TJC and SJC and 50% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR core set measures: PtGA and PhGA, pain, disability, and an acute phase reactant which for this study was CRP or ESR. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [17]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [18]
0
0
ACR70 was calculated as a 70% improvement in TJC and SJC and 70% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR core set measures: PtGA and PhGA, pain, disability, and an acute phase reactant which for this study was CRP or ESR. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [18]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Tender/Painful and Swollen Joint Counts at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [19]
0
0
The TJC (28) included the following joints: shoulders, elbows, wrists, metatarsophalangeal (MCP) joints, PIP joints, and knees. This count was calculated from the TJC (68) assessed. The SJC (28) included the same joints as TJC (28), and was calculated from the SJC 66 assessed for swelling.Sixty eight (68) joints were assessed by a blinded joint assessor to determine the number of joints that were considered tender or painful. The 68 joints assessed were: temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular; shoulder, elbow, wrist, MCPs, thumb interphalangeal, proximal interphalangeals, and distal interphalangeals; hip, knee, ankle, tarsus, metatarsophalangeals, great toe interphalangeal, proximal and distal interphalangeals combined. Sixty-six (66) joints were assessed for swelling, the same as those listed for TJC, excluding the right and left hip joints. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [19]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
0
0
Change From Baseline in High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) at 4, 8 and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [20]
0
0
Serum samples were analyzed to determine the level of hs-CRP, which was an acute-phase reactant. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [20]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis (PhGA) at 4, 8, and 12 Weeks
Query!
Assessment method [21]
0
0
The investigator assessed how the participant's overall arthritis appeared at the time of the visit. This was an evaluation based on the participant's disease symptoms, functional capacity and physical examination, and was independent of the participant's reported assessments of PtGA (patient's global assessment of arthritis). The investigator's response was recorded using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), with the 0 mm end labeled "None" and the 100 mm end labeled "Extreme". Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [21]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
0
0
Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Treatment-Related TEAEs
Query!
Assessment method [22]
0
0
AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a product or medical device, regardless of the causal relationship to study treatment. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were defined as AEs which occurred for the first time during the effective duration of treatment or AEs that increased in severity during treatment. Serious AEs (SAEs) were defined as any untoward medical occurrence at any dose that resulted in death; was life-threatening (immediate risk of death); required inpatient hospitalization or caused prolongation of existing hospitalization; resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity (substantial disruption of the ability to conduction normal life functions). AEs included SAEs and non-serious AEs. Causality to study treatment was determined by the investigator.
Query!
Timepoint [22]
0
0
Baseline up to 28 calendar days after the last administration of the investigational product (about 21 months)
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
0
0
Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities (Without Regard to Baseline Abnormality)
Query!
Assessment method [23]
0
0
Laboratory evaluation included hematology, clinical chemistry, and urinalysis. Laboratory parameters included: hematology (hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell, platelet and white blood cell count, neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes, basophils and lymphocytes), chemistry (blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, sodium, potassium, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, albumin, total protein and serum pregnancy test \[for all female participants\]) and urine (urine pregnancy test \[for all female participants\]). Each parameter was evaluated against commonly used and widely accepted criteria. Clinical significance of laboratory parameters was determined at the investigator's discretion. The investigator judged the abnormality.
Query!
Timepoint [23]
0
0
Baseline up to 28 calendar days after the last administration of the investigational product (about 21 months)
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
0
0
Number of Participants With Vital Signs Data Meeting Pre-sepcified Criteria
Query!
Assessment method [24]
0
0
Vital Signs tests included sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and pulse rate. Vital signs categorical summarization criteria were 1), systolic BP (SBP) \<90 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) or change from baseline (Chg) \>=30mm Hg; diastolic BP (DBP) \<50mm Hg or change from baseline \>=20mm Hg; 2), pulse rate \<40bpm or \> 120bpm.
Query!
Timepoint [24]
0
0
Baseline up to 28 calendar days after the last administration of the investigational product (about 21 months)
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
0
0
Number of Participants With Electrocardiogram (ECG) Data Meeting Pre-sepcified Criteria
Query!
Assessment method [25]
0
0
ECG evaluation included: PR interval, time from ECG Q wave to the end of the S wave corresponding to ventricle depolarization (QRS interval), time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave in the heart's electrical cycle (QT interval), QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula (QTcF interval), and QTc calculated using Bazett's correction factor (QTcB interval).
Query!
Timepoint [25]
0
0
Baseline up to 28 calendar days after the last administration of the investigational product (about 21 months)
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
0
0
Number of Participants With Urinalysis Data Meeting Pre-specified Criteria
Query!
Assessment method [26]
0
0
The urine sample was collected for central laboratory urinalysis and urine microscopy. The urinalysis included pH, protein, glucose, erythrocytes, leukocytes, ketones, nitrite, urobilinogen, urine bilirubin, urine hemoglobin, leukocyte esterase, granular casts, hyaline casts, bacteria, atypical, needle-like crystals urine, specific gravity, microscopy and urine albumin test.
Query!
Timepoint [26]
0
0
Baseline up to 28 calendar days after the last administration of the investigational product (about 21 months)
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (PAAP) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Weeks 4, 8, 12
Query!
Assessment method [27]
0
0
Patients assess the severity of their arthritis pain using a 100 mm VAS by placing a mark on the scale between 0 (no pain) and 100 (most severe pain), which corresponds to the magnitude of their pain. This assessment was performed early in the clinic visit and before the participant had extensive contact with site personnel and/or Investigator. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [27]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [28]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis (PtGA) VAS at Weeks 4, 8, 12
Query!
Assessment method [28]
0
0
Patients answer the following question: "Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, how are you feeling today?" The patient's response is recorded using a 100 mm VAS. This assessment was performed early in the clinic visit and before the participant had extensive contact with site personnel and/or Investigator. The higher score indicated more severe disease. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [28]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [29]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Weeks 4, 8, and 12
Query!
Assessment method [29]
0
0
The HAQ-DI was defined as participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom; arise; eat; walk; reach; grip; hygiene; and common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [29]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [30]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the 36 Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Version 2 (Acute) 8 Domain Scores at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [30]
0
0
The SF-36 version 2 (acute) is a 36 item generic health status measure. It measures 8 general health domains: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The SF-36 summary scores range from 0-100, with higher scores representing better self-reported health. This was performed early in the clinic visit and before the participant had extensive contact with site personnel and/or Investigator. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [30]
0
0
Baseline and Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [31]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [31]
0
0
The SF 36 version 2 (acute) is a 36 item generic health status measure. It measures 8 general health domains. These domains can also be summarized as physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS). The PCS and MCS summary scores range from 0-100, with higher scores representing better self-reported health. The lower the score the more disability. This was performed early in the clinic visit and before the participant had extensive contact with site personnel and/or Investigator. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [31]
0
0
Baseline and Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [32]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) Score at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [32]
0
0
The EQ-5D-3L health state profile is a patient completed questionnaire designed to assess impact on health related quality of life in 5 domains: mobility, self care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Additionally, scores from the 5 domains might have been used to calculate a single index value, also known as a utility score. The validity and reliability of the EQ-5D-3L have been established in a number of disease states, including RA. EQ-5D-3L scores marked health status from 0 and 100. There were notes at the both ends of the scale that the bottom rate (0) corresponded to " the worst health you could imagine", and the highest rate (100) corresponded to "the best health you could imagine". Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [32]
0
0
Baseline and Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [33]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) Total Score at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [33]
0
0
The FACIT-F is a patient completed questionnaire consisting of 13 items that assess fatigue. Instrument scoring yields a range from 0 to 52, with higher scores representing better patient status (less fatigue). This questionnaire was performed early in the clinic visit and before the participant had extensive contact with site personnel and/or investigator. Tofacitinib was included in this study as an active control. The efficacy endpoint for the tofatinicib arm was an exploratory endpoint and neither primary nor secondary endpoints.
Query!
Timepoint [33]
0
0
Baseline and Week 12
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
1. Male and female (including WOCBP) subjects between the ages of 18 and 75 years, inclusive.
2. Diagnosis of RA and meeting the 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) classification criteria for RA with a Total Score =6/10.
3. The subject has active disease at both Screening and Baseline, as defined by both:
* 6 joints tender or painful on motion, AND
* 6 joints swollen; and fulfills 1 of the following 2 criteria at Screening:
* High sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP) >7 mg/L at screening
* Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (Westergren method) >28 mm/hr;
4. Meets Class I, II or III of the ACR 1991 Revised Criteria for Global Functional Status in RA.
5. Subjects must be ACPA positive between screening and randomization.
6. Subjects must have been taking oral MTX for at least 3 months at an adequate dose to determine that the subject had an inadequate response to MTX
7. Up to 50 % of subjects may have received one (and only one) approved TNF-inhibiting biologic agent administered that was inadequately effective and/or not tolerated. The anti-TNF biologic could also have been discontinued due to lack of continued access.
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
75
Years
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
1. Subjects with a known immunodeficiency disorder or a first degree relative with a hereditary immunodeficiency.
2. Subjects with any of the following infections or infections history:
1. Any infection requiring treatment within 2 weeks prior to screening (Visit 1).
2. Any infection requiring hospitalization, parenteral antimicrobial therapy within 60 days, or as otherwise judged to be an opportunistic infection or clinically significant by the investigator, within the past 6 months.
3. Infected joint prosthesis at any time with the prosthesis still in situ.
4. Recurrent (more than one episode) herpes zoster or disseminated (a single episode) herpes zoster or disseminated (a single episode) herpes simplex.
5. Subjects will be screened for HIV. Subjects who test positive for HIV will be excluded from the study.
6. Subjects will be screened for hepatitis B virus infection and will be excluded if positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). Subjects with HBsAg negative testing but who test positive for hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) must have further testing for hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb). If HBsAb is negative, the subject will be excluded from the study.
7. Subjects with clinically significant active hepatic disease or hepatic impairment by laboratory assessment.
8. Subjects will be screened for hepatitis C virus (HCV Ab). Subjects with positive HCV Ab tests will be reflex tested for HCV ribonucleic acid (HCV RNA). Only subjects with negative HCV Ab or HCV RNA will be allowed to enroll in the study.
3. Evidence of active or latent, untreated or inadequately treated infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB)
4. Pre-existing chronic autoimmune disease.
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 assessing the outcomes
The people analysing the results/data
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Phase 2
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
10/11/2016
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
15/08/2018
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
269
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
ACT,NSW
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
Canberra Hospital - Garran
Query!
Recruitment hospital [2]
0
0
Genesis Research Services - Broadmeadow
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
2605 - Garran
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [2]
0
0
2292 - Broadmeadow
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [1]
0
0
Alabama
Query!
Country [2]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [2]
0
0
Arizona
Query!
Country [3]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [3]
0
0
Florida
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Georgia
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Kentucky
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Louisiana
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
Tennessee
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Texas
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Kanton Sarajevo
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
Republika Srpska
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
Bulgaria
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
Plovdiv
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
Bulgaria
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
Sofia
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
Croatia
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
GRAD Zagreb
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
Croatia
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Zagreb
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Ostrava
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Praha
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
Uherske Hradiste
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
Georgia
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Tbilisi
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
Georgia
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
Telavi
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
Puettlingen
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
Budapest
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
Kistarcsa
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
Miskolc
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Szeged
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Szentes
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Veszprem
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
Seoul
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Morelos
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Yucatan
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
Mexico
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
San Luis Potosí
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
Bytom
Query!
Country [32]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [32]
0
0
Gdansk
Query!
Country [33]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [33]
0
0
Gdynia
Query!
Country [34]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [34]
0
0
Grodzisk Mazowiecki
Query!
Country [35]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [35]
0
0
Katowice
Query!
Country [36]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [36]
0
0
Poznan
Query!
Country [37]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [37]
0
0
Warszawa
Query!
Country [38]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [38]
0
0
Wroclaw
Query!
Country [39]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [39]
0
0
Bucuresti
Query!
Country [40]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [40]
0
0
Iasi
Query!
Country [41]
0
0
Romania
Query!
State/province [41]
0
0
Tirgu Mures
Query!
Country [42]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [42]
0
0
Kazan
Query!
Country [43]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [43]
0
0
Moscow
Query!
Country [44]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [44]
0
0
Ryazan
Query!
Country [45]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [45]
0
0
Saint-Petersburg
Query!
Country [46]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [46]
0
0
St. Petersburg
Query!
Country [47]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [47]
0
0
Vladimir
Query!
Country [48]
0
0
Serbia
Query!
State/province [48]
0
0
Belgrade
Query!
Country [49]
0
0
Serbia
Query!
State/province [49]
0
0
Niska Banja
Query!
Country [50]
0
0
Serbia
Query!
State/province [50]
0
0
Novi Sad
Query!
Country [51]
0
0
Slovakia
Query!
State/province [51]
0
0
Trenciansky Kraj.
Query!
Country [52]
0
0
Slovakia
Query!
State/province [52]
0
0
Dunajska Streda
Query!
Country [53]
0
0
Slovakia
Query!
State/province [53]
0
0
Kosice-Saca
Query!
Country [54]
0
0
Slovakia
Query!
State/province [54]
0
0
Považská Bystrica
Query!
Country [55]
0
0
Slovakia
Query!
State/province [55]
0
0
Rimavska Sobota
Query!
Country [56]
0
0
Slovakia
Query!
State/province [56]
0
0
Zilina
Query!
Country [57]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [57]
0
0
A Coruna
Query!
Country [58]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [58]
0
0
A Coruña
Query!
Country [59]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [59]
0
0
Vizcaya
Query!
Country [60]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [60]
0
0
Sevilla
Query!
Country [61]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [61]
0
0
Taichung
Query!
Country [62]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [62]
0
0
Taipei
Query!
Country [63]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [63]
0
0
Chernihiv
Query!
Country [64]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [64]
0
0
Kharkiv
Query!
Country [65]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [65]
0
0
Kyiv
Query!
Country [66]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [66]
0
0
Poltava
Query!
Country [67]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [67]
0
0
Ternopil
Query!
Country [68]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [68]
0
0
Vinnytsia
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
This is a Phase 2, multicenter, randomized, double blind, double dummy, placebo and active-controlled, parallel group study to assess the efficacy and safety of PF 06650833 at Week 12 in subjects with moderate-severe, active, RA who have had an inadequate response to MTX. PF-06650833 or matching placebo tablets will be administered orally QD under fasting conditions, and tofacitinib or matching tofacitinib placebo tablets will be administered orally BID for 12 weeks in a blinded fashion.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02996500
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
Data sharing statement
Will individual participant data (IPD) for this trial be available (including data dictionaries)?
Yes
Query!
What data in particular will be shared?
Pfizer will provide access to individual de-identified participant data and related study documents (e.g. protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), Clinical Study Report (CSR)) upon request from qualified researchers, and subject to certain criteria, conditions, and exceptions. Further details on Pfizer's data sharing criteria and process for requesting access can be found at: https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical_trials/trial_data_and_results/data_requests.
Query!
When will data be available (start and end dates)?
Query!
Available to whom?
Query!
Available for what types of analyses?
Query!
How or where can data be obtained?
IPD available at link: https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical_trials/trial_data_and_results/data_requests
Query!
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Type
Other Details
Attachment
Statistical analysis plan
https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/00/NCT02996500/SAP_000.pdf
Study protocol
https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/00/NCT02996500/Prot_001.pdf
Results publications and other study-related documents
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Results not provided in
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02996500