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/NCT03162796
Registration number
NCT03162796
Ethics application status
Date submitted
19/05/2017
Date registered
22/05/2017
Date last updated
3/02/2021
Titles & IDs
Public title
A Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Guselkumab Administered Subcutaneously in Participants With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Including Those Previously Treated With Biologic Anti -Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) Alpha Agent(s)
Query!
Scientific title
A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Guselkumab Administered Subcutaneously in Subjects With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Including Those Previously Treated With Biologic Anti-TNF Alpha Agents
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
2016-001163-37
Query!
Secondary ID [2]
0
0
CR108218
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
Discover-1
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Arthritis, Psoriatic
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!
Inflammatory and Immune System
0
0
0
0
Query!
Other inflammatory or immune system disorders
Query!
Musculoskeletal
0
0
0
0
Query!
Other muscular and skeletal disorders
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Drugs - Guselkumab
Treatment: Drugs - Placebo
Experimental: Group 1: Guselkumab - Participants will receive subcutaneous (SC) guselkumab 100 milligram (mg) once every 4 weeks (q4w) from Week 0 through Week 48.
Experimental: Group 2: Guselkumab and Placebo - Participants will receive SC guselkumab 100 mg at Weeks 0 and 4, then once every 8 weeks (q8w) (Weeks 12, 20, 28, 36, and 44) and placebo injections at other visits (Weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48) to maintain the blind.
Experimental: Group 3: Placebo Followed by Guselkumab - Participants will receive SC placebo q4w from Week 0 to Week 20, and will crossover at Week 24 to receive guselkumab 100 mg q4w from Week 24 through Week 48.
Treatment: Drugs: Guselkumab
Participants will receive 100mg of guselkumab as a sterile liquid for SC injection.
Treatment: Drugs: Placebo
Participants will receive matching placebo as SC injection.
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 Who Achieved an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
ACR 20 response: >=20% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=20% improvement from baseline in 3 of 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Disability Index of Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI; 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0= no difficulty, 3= inability to perform task in that area), and CRP. Treatment Failure (TF) criteria- discontinued study drug, initiated/increased dose of non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or oral corticosteroids, initiated prohibited psoriatic arthritis treatment.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
HAQ-DI score assess functional status of participant. It is 20 question instrument that assess degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area were scored from 0=indicating no difficulty, to 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Total HAQ score is average of the computed categories scores ranging from 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. Lower scores are indicative of better functioning. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of physical function.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Baseline and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
ACR 50 response was defined as greater than or equal to (>=)50 percent (%) improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=50% improvement from baseline in 3 of 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI; a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=no difficulty, 3=inability to perform a task in that area), and C-Reactive Protein (CRP).
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Psoriasis Response of IGA (Score: 0[Cleared] or 1[Minimal] and >=2 Grade Reduction From Baseline) at Week 24 Among Participants With >=3% Body Surface Area (BSA) Psoriatic Involvement and IGA Score of >=2 (Mild) at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
A psoriasis Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response was defined as an IGA score of 0 (cleared) or 1 (minimal) and >=2 grade reduction from baseline in the IGA psoriasis score. The IGA documents the investigator's assessment of the patient's psoriasis and lesions are graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 point scale: 0 (no evidence), 1 (minimal), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), and 4 (severe). The IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores. The participant's psoriasis was assessed as cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4).
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 16
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
ACR 20 response: >=20% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=20% improvement from baseline in 3 of 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Disability Index of Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI; 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform task in that area), and C-reactive protein (CRP).
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Week 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score (DAS28) (C-reactive Protein [CRP]) Score at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
The Disease Activity Index Score (DAS28) based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is an index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of arthritis.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Baseline and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieve an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
ACR 70 response was defined as >= 70% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=70% improvement from baseline in 3 of 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI; a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=no difficulty, 3=inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 16
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
ACR 50 response was defined as >=50% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=50% improvement from baseline in 3 of 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI; a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=no difficulty, 3=inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Week 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Baseline and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Resolution of Enthesitis at Week 24 Among the Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
Enthesitis was assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI), a tool developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of pain by applying local pressure to the following entheses: left and right lateral epicondyle humerus, left and right medial femoral condyle, and left and right achilles tendon insertion. The enthesitis index score is a total score of the 6 evaluated sites from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness). A LEI score of 0 at a post baseline visit indicates resolution of enthesitis when baseline LEI greater than (>) 0.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Enthesitis Score (Based on LEI) at Week 24 Among the Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
Enthesitis was assessed using the LEI, a tool developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of pain by applying local pressure to the following entheses: left and right lateral epicondyle humerus, left and right medial femoral condyle, and left and right achilles tendon insertion. The enthesitis index score is a total score of the 6 evaluated sites from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness). Negative changes from baseline indicates improvement of enthesitis.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Baseline and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) Score at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
Baseline and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Resolution of Dactylitis at Week 24 Among the Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
The presence and severity of dactylitis was assessed in both hands and feet using a scoring system from 0 to 3 (0-no dactylitis, 1-mild dactylitis, 2-moderate dactylitis, and 3-severe dactylitis) for each digit. The results were summed to produce a final score ranging from 0 to 60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. Resolution of dactylitis was defined as a dactylitis score of 0 with the baseline dactylitis score >0.
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Week 24 Among the Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
The presence and severity of dactylitis was assessed in both hands and feet using a scoring system from 0 to 3 (0-no dactylitis, 1-mild dactylitis, 2-moderate dactylitis, and 3-severe dactylitis) for each digit. The results were summed to produce a final score ranging from 0 to 60. A higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement in dactylitis.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
Baseline and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20 Response by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
ACR 20 response was defined as >=20% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=20% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 50 Response by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [15]
0
0
ACR 50 response was defined as >=50% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=50% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [15]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 70 Response by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [16]
0
0
ACR 70 response was defined as >=70% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=70% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 millimeters [mm], 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [16]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
0
0
ACR Components- Swollen Joint Count and Tender Joint Count Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [17]
0
0
ACR components including swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) were measured.
Query!
Timepoint [17]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
0
0
ACR Components- Patient's Assessment of Pain, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [18]
0
0
ACR components included patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment (PGA) of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis).
Query!
Timepoint [18]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
0
0
ACR Component- C-reactive Protein (CRP) Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [19]
0
0
ACR component including CRP was measured.
Query!
Timepoint [19]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
0
0
ACR Component- Patient's Assessment of Physical Function as Assessed by HAQ-DI Scale Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [20]
0
0
Patient's assessment of physical function was measured by Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI). HAQ-DI score assess functional status of participant. It is 20 question instrument that assess degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area were scored from 0=indicating no difficulty, to 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Total HAQ score is average of the computed categories scores ranging from 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. Lower scores are indicative of better functioning. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of physical function.
Query!
Timepoint [20]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
0
0
Percent Change From Baseline in ACR Components at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [21]
0
0
ACR components include swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI; a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=no difficulty, 3=inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [21]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
0
0
Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [22]
0
0
HAQ-DI score assess functional status of participant. It is 20 question instrument that assess degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area were scored from 0=indicating no difficulty, to 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Total HAQ score is average of the computed categories scores ranging from 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. Lower scores are indicative of better functioning. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of physical function.
Query!
Timepoint [22]
0
0
Baseline, Week 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Clinically Meaningful Improvement (>=0.35 Improvement From Baseline) in HAQ-DI Score by Visit Over Time Through Week 24 Among Participants With HAQ-DI Score >=0.35 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [23]
0
0
HAQ-DI score assess functional status of participant. It is 20 question instrument that assess degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area were scored from 0=indicating no difficulty, to 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Total HAQ score is average of the computed categories scores ranging from 0-3, where 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. Lower scores are indicative of better functioning. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of physical function and a decrease of 0.35 from baseline in HAQ-DI score indicates a meaningful improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [23]
0
0
Week 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a DAS28 (CRP) Response by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [24]
0
0
DAS28 based on CRP is an index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. DAS28 (CRP) response criteria was defined as follows: Good response: less than or equal to (<=) 3.2 at visit and >1.2 improvement; Moderate response: >3.2 at visit and >1.2 improvement or <=5.1 at visit and >0.6-1.2 improvement; No response: <=0.6 improvement, or >5.1 at visit and <=1.2 improvement. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. A DAS28 (CRP) responder was defined as achieving a good or moderate DAS28 response at a specific visit.
Query!
Timepoint [24]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a DAS28 (CRP) Remission by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [25]
0
0
DAS28 based on CRP is an index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. DAS 28 (CRP) remission was defined as DAS 28 (CRP) value <2.6 at the analysis visit.
Query!
Timepoint [25]
0
0
Week 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28 (CRP) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [26]
0
0
DAS28 based on CRP is an index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of arthritis.
Query!
Timepoint [26]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Response Based on Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Responder Criteria (PsARC) by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [27]
0
0
The modified PsARC response was defined as improvement in at least 2 of the four criteria: >=30% decrease in swollen joint count, >=30% decrease in tender joint count, >=20% improvement in patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis) using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), >=20% improvement in physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity using VAS (VAS: 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), and at least one of the 2 joint criteria with no deterioration in the other criteria.
Query!
Timepoint [27]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [28]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Resolution of Enthesitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 Among the Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [28]
0
0
Enthesitis was assessed using the LEI, a tool developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of pain by applying local pressure to the following entheses: left and right lateral epicondyle humerus, left and right medial femoral condyle, and left and right achilles tendon insertion. The enthesitis index score is a total score of the 6 evaluated sites from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness). A LEI score of 0 at a post baseline visit indicates resolution of enthesitis when baseline LEI>0.
Query!
Timepoint [28]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [29]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Enthesitis Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24 Among the Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [29]
0
0
Enthesitis was assessed using the LEI, a tool developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of pain by applying local pressure to the following entheses: left and right lateral epicondyle humerus, left and right medial femoral condyle, and left and right achilles tendon insertion. The enthesitis index score is a total score of the 6 evaluated sites from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of enthesitis.
Query!
Timepoint [29]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [30]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Resolution of Dactylitis by Visit Over Time Through Week 24 Among the Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [30]
0
0
The presence and severity of dactylitis was assessed in both hands and feet using a scoring system from 0 to 3 (0-no dactylitis, 1-mild dactylitis, 2-moderate dactylitis, and 3-severe dactylitis) for each digit. The results were summed to produce a final score ranging from 0 to 60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. Resolution of dactylitis was defined as a dactylitis score of 0 with the baseline dactylitis score >0.
Query!
Timepoint [30]
0
0
Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [31]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24 Among the Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [31]
0
0
The presence and severity of dactylitis was assessed in both hands and feet using a scoring system from 0 to 3 (0-no dactylitis, 1-mild dactylitis, 2-moderate dactylitis, and 3-severe dactylitis) for each digit. The results were summed to produce a final score ranging from 0 to 60. A higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement in dactylitis.
Query!
Timepoint [31]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [32]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [32]
0
0
PASDAS (score range of 0 to 10, where higher score indicated more severe disease) is a compositive score of overall disease activity combining Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis, using VAS [0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (using VAS [0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis]), swollen joint count (0-66 joints), tender joint count (0-68 joints), CRP (mg/L), enthesitis based on LEI (0-6), tender dactylitis count (scoring each digit from 0-3 and recoding to 0-1, where any score > 0 equaled 1), and the PCS score of the SF-36 health survey. The cutoffs for disease activity were 3.2 (low) to 5.4 (high). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of overall disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [32]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [33]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Group of Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Composite (GRACE) Score at Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [33]
0
0
GRACE index is a composite PsA disease activity score converted from Arithmetic Mean of Desirability Function (AMDF), derived from TJC (0-68) and SJC (0-66), HAQ-DI (0-3), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), patient's assessment of skin disease activity (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), PASI (0-72), and PsA Quality of Life Index (derived as PsAQOL=25.355 + [2.367*HAQ-DI]-[0.234*SF-PCS]-[0.244*SF-MCS]), where HAQ-DI: HAQ-DI score (0-3, 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty), SF-PCS (Score ranges from 0-100, higher scores= better quality of life) and SF-MCS (score ranges from 0-100, higher scores= better quality of life). Total score is from 0-10, lower score=better response. Higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of PsA disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [33]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [34]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [34]
0
0
DAPSA assessed the joint domain of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and was derived from the sum of the following components: tender joint count (0-68), swollen joint count (0-66), CRP level (mg/dL, value <lower limit of quantification [LLOQ] is considered equal to half of the value of LLOQ for numerical calculations), patient assessment of pain (0-10 centimeter [cm] VAS, 0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain), and patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (0 to 10 cm VAS, 0=excellent and 10=poor). A higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of PsA disease activity. The assessment does not have a score range with an upper or lower bound.
Query!
Timepoint [34]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [35]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [35]
0
0
MDA was considered achieved if at least 5 of the following 7 criteria were met at the analysis visit: tender joint count <=1; swollen joint count <=1; psoriasis activity and severity index <=1; patient's assessment of pain VAS score of <=15; patient's global assessment of disease activity VAS (arthritis and psoriasis) score of <=20; HAQ-DI <=0.5; and tender entheseal points <=1.
Query!
Timepoint [35]
0
0
Weeks 16 and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [36]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >= 20%, >=50%, >=70%, and >=90% Improvement From Baseline in BASDAI Score Through Week 24 Among the Participants With Spondylitis and Peripheral Arthritis and BASDAI Score >0 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [36]
0
0
Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) is a self-assessment tool that consists of 6 questions relating to the 5 major symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis: fatigue, spinal pain, joint pain, enthesitis, qualitative morning stiffness and quantitative morning stiffness. The first 5 items were scored on a 10 centimeter (cm) VAS ranging from 0=none to 10=very severe. Quantitative morning stiffness was scored on a 10cm VAS ranging from 0=0 hours to 10=2 or more hours. The 2 scores for qualitative and quantitative morning stiffness were averaged, and the total BASDAI score was the average of the 5 scores of each symptom, ranging from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). Higher scores indicate greater disease severity and an improvement of 50% from baseline is considered clinically meaningful. Only participants with spondylitis with peripheral arthritis as their primary arthritic presentation of PsA completed the BASDAI indicate the degree of their symptoms over the past week.
Query!
Timepoint [36]
0
0
Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [37]
0
0
Change From Baseline in BASDAI Score at Week 8, 16, and Week 24 Among Participants With Spondylitis and Peripheral Arthritis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [37]
0
0
Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) is a self-assessment tool that consists of 6 questions relating to the 5 major symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis: fatigue, spinal pain, joint pain, enthesitis, qualitative morning stiffness and quantitative morning stiffness. The first 5 items were scored on a 10 centimeter (cm) VAS ranging from 0=none to 10=very severe. Quantitative morning stiffness was scored on a 10cm VAS ranging from 0=0 hours to 10=2 or more hours. The 2 scores for qualitative and quantitative morning stiffness were averaged, and the total BASDAI score was the average of the 5 scores of each symptom, ranging from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). Higher scores indicate greater disease severity and an improvement of 50% from baseline is considered clinically meaningful. Only participants with spondylitis with peripheral arthritis as their primary arthritic presentation of PsA completed the BASDAI indicate the degree of their symptoms over the past week.
Query!
Timepoint [37]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [38]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Low or Very Low Disease Activity Based on Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [38]
0
0
PASDAS (score range of 0 to 10, where higher score indicated more severe disease) is a compositive score of overall disease activity combining Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis, using VAS [0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (using VAS [0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis]), swollen joint count (0-66 joints), tender joint count (0-68 joints), CRP (mg/L), enthesitis based on LEI (0-6), tender dactylitis count (scoring each digit from 0-3 and recoding to 0-1, where any score > 0 equaled 1), and the PCS score of the SF-36 health survey. The cutoffs for disease activity were 3.2 (low) to 5.4 (high).
Query!
Timepoint [38]
0
0
Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [39]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Low Disease Activity Based on Group of Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Composite (GRACE) Score Index by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [39]
0
0
GRACE index is a composite PsA disease activity score converted from Arithmetic Mean of the Desirability Function (AMDF), which was derived from TJC (0-68) and SJC (0-66), HAQ-DI (0-3), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), patient's assessment of skin disease activity (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), PASI (0-72), and PsA Quality of Life Index (derived as PsAQOL =25.355 + [2.367*HAQ-DI] - [0.234*SF-PCS] - [0.244*SF-MCS]), where HAQ-DI: HAQ-DI score (0-3, 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty), SF-PCS (Score ranges from 0 to 100, higher scores= better quality of life) and SF-MCS (score ranges from 0 to 100, higher scores= better quality of life). The total score is from 0-10, where lower score indicates better response. Higher score indicates more active disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [39]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [40]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Low Disease Activity or Remission Based on Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [40]
0
0
DAPSA assessed the joint domain of PsA and was derived from the sum of the following components: tender joint count (0-68), swollen joint count (0-66), CRP level (mg/dL), patient assessment of pain (0-10 cm VAS, 0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain), and patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (0 to 10 cm VAS, 0=excellent and 10=poor). A higher score indicates more active disease activity. The assessment does not have a score range with an upper or lower bound.
Query!
Timepoint [40]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [41]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Very Low Disease Activity (VLDA) by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [41]
0
0
A measurement that defines a satisfactory state of disease activity that includes the 5 domains of PsA (joint symptoms, skin psoriasis, patient's perspective of pain and disease activity, physical function, and enthesitis). A participant was considered as having achieved VLDA at a visit if the participant fulfilled all 7 criteria (tender joint count <=1; swollen joint count <=1; PASI <=1; patient pain VAS score of <=15; patient global disease activity VAS [arthritis and psoriasis] score of <=20; Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score <=0.5; and tender entheseal points <=1) at that visit.
Query!
Timepoint [41]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [42]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI 75 Response at Weeks 16 and 24 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [42]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severtiy. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. A PASI 75 response: >=75% improvement in PASI score from baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [42]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [43]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI 90 Response at Weeks 16 and 24 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [43]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severtiy. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. A PASI 90 response: >=90% improvement in PASI score from baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [43]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [44]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI 100 Response by Visit Over Time Through Week 24 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [44]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severtiy. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. A PASI 100 response: 100% improvement in PASI score from baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [44]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [45]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Both PASI 75 and ACR 20 Responses at Weeks 16 and 24 Among the Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 (Mild) at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [45]
0
0
In PASI, each area (head, trunk, upper and lower extremities) was assessed for % of area involved and translated to numeric score from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90-100% involvement) and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severtiy. PASI produces numeric score from 0 to 72. Higher scores=more severe disease. PASI 75: >=75% improvement in PASI score from baseline. ACR 20: >=20% improvement in swollen joint count (SJC) (66 joints) + tender joint count (TJC) (68 joints) and >=20% improvement in 3 of 5: patient's assessment of pain (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain to 100=worst possible pain), PtGA of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent to 100=poor), PGA of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis to 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function (HAQ-DI -20-question instrument; range- 0=no difficulty to 3=inability to perform task) and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [45]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [46]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Both PASI 75 and Modified PsARC Response by Visit Over Time Through Week 24 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 (Mild) at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [46]
0
0
In PASI, each area (head, trunk, upper and lower extremities) was assessed separately for % of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severtiy. PASI produces numeric score range from 0 to 72. Higher scores=more severe disease. PASI 75 response: >=75% improvement in PASI score from baseline. Modified PsARC response: improvement in at least 2 of 4 criteria: >=30% decrease in SJC and TJC, >=20% improvement in PtGA of Disease Activity (arthritis) on VAS (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), >=20% improvement in PGA of Disease Activity on VAS (VAS: 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis and 100=extremely active arthritis), and at least 1 of 2 joint criteria with no deterioration in other criteria.
Query!
Timepoint [46]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [47]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an IGA Score of 0 (Cleared) at Weeks 16 and 24 Among the Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 (Mild) at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [47]
0
0
The IGA documents the investigator's assessment of the patient's psoriasis and lesions are graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 point scale: 0 (no evidence), 1 (minimal), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), and 4 (severe). The IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores. The participant's psoriasis was assessed as cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4). Participants who achieved IGA Score of 0 (cleared) at a specific timepoint and did not meet any TF criteria before, were considered as responders at that time point. Participants who met 1 or more TF criteria before or with missing data at that time point were considered as non-responders.
Query!
Timepoint [47]
0
0
Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [48]
0
0
Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 16 and 24 Among the Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 (Mild) at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [48]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severtiy. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of psoriasis.
Query!
Timepoint [48]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [49]
0
0
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) at Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [49]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [49]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [50]
0
0
Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) at Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [50]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [50]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [51]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Norm Based Scores of SF-36 Scales at Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [51]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales: physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health. The scores 0-100 (where higher scores indicated a better quality of life) from each subscale of SF-36 were normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher score indicates better health status. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [51]
0
0
Baseline, Week 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [52]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >=5-point Improvement From Baseline in SF-36 MCS Score by Visit Over Time Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [52]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher score indicates better outcome, with an increase of 5 points considered to be clinically meaningful.
Query!
Timepoint [52]
0
0
Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [53]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >=5 Point Improvement From Baseline in SF-36 PCS Score Through Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [53]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher score indicates better outcome, with an increase of 5 points considered to be clinically meaningful.
Query!
Timepoint [53]
0
0
Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [54]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Assessment method [54]
0
0
The FACIT-Fatigue is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The subscale consists 13-item instrument to measure fatigue. Each of the 13 items has a set of five response categories: Not at all (=0), A little bit (=1), Somewhat (=2), Quite a bit (=3) and Very much (=4). A total FACIT-Fatigue subscale score was calculated as the sum of the 13 item scores (reserved scores [4 - score]) and ranges from 0 to 52, with a higher score indicating less fatigue. Positive changes from baseline indicate improvement of fatigue. Items were reverse scored when appropriate to provide a scale in which higher scores represent better functioning or less fatigue.
Query!
Timepoint [54]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [55]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >=4-point Improvement From Baseline in FACIT-Fatigue Score at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Assessment method [55]
0
0
The FACIT-Fatigue is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The subscale consists 13-item instrument to measure fatigue. Each of the 13 items has a set of five response categories: Not at all (=0), A little bit (=1), Somewhat (=2), Quite a bit (=3) and Very much (=4). A total FACIT-Fatigue subscale score was calculated as the sum of the 13 item scores (reserved scores [4 - score]) and ranges from 0 to 52, with a higher score indicating less fatigue. Items were reverse scored when appropriate to provide a scale in which higher scores represent better functioning or less fatigue.
Query!
Timepoint [55]
0
0
Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [56]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 Scores at Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Assessment method [56]
0
0
PROMIS-29 contains 4 items for each of seven PROMIS domains (Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Pain Interference, Physical Function, Sleep Disturbance, and Satisfaction-Social Role and Activity. PROMIS-29 also includes an additional pain intensity 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS). The raw score of each domain is converted into a standardized score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation (SD) of 10 for the general population in the US (T-Score).
Query!
Timepoint [56]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16 and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [57]
0
0
Change From Baseline in FACIT-Fatigue Score at Week 24 by ACR 20 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [57]
0
0
The FACIT-Fatigue is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The subscale consists 13-item instrument to measure fatigue. Each of the 13 items has a set of five response categories: Not at all (=0), A little bit (=1), Somewhat (=2), Quite a bit (=3) and Very much (=4). A total FACIT-Fatigue subscale score was calculated as the sum of the 13 item scores (reserved scores [4 - score]) and ranges from 0 to 52, with a higher score indicating less fatigue. Positive changes from baseline indicate improvement of fatigue. Items were reverse scored when appropriate to provide a scale in which higher scores represent better functioning or less fatigue.
Query!
Timepoint [57]
0
0
Baseline and Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [58]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >=4-point Improvement From Baseline in FACIT-Fatigue Score at Week 24 by ACR 20 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [58]
0
0
The FACIT-Fatigue is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The subscale consists 13-item instrument to measure fatigue. Each of the 13 items has a set of five response categories: Not at all (=0), A little bit (=1), Somewhat (=2), Quite a bit (=3) and Very much (=4). A total FACIT-Fatigue subscale score was calculated as the sum of the 13 item scores (reserved scores [4 - score]) and ranges from 0 to 52, with a higher score indicating less fatigue. Items were reverse scored when appropriate to provide a scale in which higher scores represent better functioning or less fatigue.
Query!
Timepoint [58]
0
0
Week 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [59]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Improvement of >=3 Points From Baseline in PROMIS-29 Domain Scores at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Assessment method [59]
0
0
PROMIS-29 contains 4 items for each of seven PROMIS domains (Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Pain Interference, Physical Function, Sleep Disturbance, and Satisfaction-Social Role and Activity. PROMIS-29 also includes an additional pain intensity 0-10 NRS. The raw score of each domain is converted into a standardized score with a mean of 50 and a SD of 10 for the general population in the US (T-Score).
Query!
Timepoint [59]
0
0
Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [60]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Improvement of >=5 Points From Baseline in PROMIS-29 Domain Scores at Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Assessment method [60]
0
0
PROMIS-29 contains 4 items for each of seven PROMIS domains (Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Pain Interference, Physical Function, Sleep Disturbance, and Satisfaction-Social Role and Activity. PROMIS-29 also includes an additional pain intensity 0-10 NRS. The raw score of each domain is converted into a standardized score with a mean of 50 and a SD of 10 for the general population in the US (T-Score).
Query!
Timepoint [60]
0
0
Weeks 8, 16, and 24
Query!
Secondary outcome [61]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [61]
0
0
ACR 20 response was defined as >=20% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=20% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [61]
0
0
Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [62]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 50 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [62]
0
0
ACR 50 response was defined as >=50% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=50% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [62]
0
0
Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [63]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 70 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [63]
0
0
ACR 70 response was defined as >=70% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=70% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [63]
0
0
Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [64]
0
0
Percent Change From Baseline in ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [64]
0
0
ACR components include swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), patient's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI; a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=no difficulty, 3=inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [64]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [65]
0
0
Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [65]
0
0
HAQ-DI score assess functional status of participant. It is 20 question instrument that assess degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area were scored from 0=indicating no difficulty, to 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Total HAQ score is average of the computed categories scores ranging from 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. Lower scores are indicative of better functioning. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of physical function.
Query!
Timepoint [65]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [66]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Clinically Meaningful Improvement (>=0.35 Improvement From Baseline) in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52 Among Participants With HAQ-DI Score >=0.35 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [66]
0
0
HAQ-DI score assess functional status of participant. It is 20 question instrument that assess degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area were scored from 0=indicating no difficulty, to 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Total HAQ score is average of the computed categories scores ranging from 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. Lower scores are indicative of better functioning and a decrease of 0.35 from baseline in HAQ-DI score indicates a meaningful improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [66]
0
0
Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [67]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28 (CRP) Score at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [67]
0
0
DAS28 based on CRP is an index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of arthritis.
Query!
Timepoint [67]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [68]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a DAS28 (CRP) Response at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [68]
0
0
DAS28 based on CRP is an index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. DAS28 (CRP) response criteria was defined as follows: Good response: <=3.2 at visit and >1.2 improvement; Moderate response: >3.2 at visit and >1.2 improvement or <=5.1 at visit and >0.6-1.2 improvement; No response: <=0.6 improvement, or >5.1 at visit and <=1.2 improvement. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. A DAS28 (CRP) responder was defined as achieving a good or moderate DAS28 response at a specific visit.
Query!
Timepoint [68]
0
0
Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [69]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a DAS28 (CRP) Remission at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [69]
0
0
DAS28 based on CRP is an index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. DAS28 (CRP) remission was defined as DAS28 (CRP) value <2.6 at the analysis visit.
Query!
Timepoint [69]
0
0
Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [70]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Maintained a HAQ-DI Response (>=0.35 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score) at Week 52 Among Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [70]
0
0
HAQ-DI score assess functional status of participant. It is 20 question instrument that assess degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area were scored from 0=indicating no difficulty, to 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Total HAQ score is average of the computed categories scores ranging from 0-3 where 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty. Lower scores are indicative of better functioning and a decrease of 0.35 from baseline in HAQ-DI score indicates a meaningful improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [70]
0
0
Week 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [71]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Response Based on Modified Psoriatic Arthritis Responder Criteria (PsARC) at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [71]
0
0
The modified PsARC response was defined as improvement in at least 2 of the four criteria: >=30% decrease in swollen joint count, >=30% decrease in tender joint count, >=20% improvement in patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis) on a VAS (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), >=20% improvement in physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity using VAS (VAS: 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), and at least one of the 2 joint criteria with no deterioration in the other criteria.
Query!
Timepoint [71]
0
0
Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [72]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [72]
0
0
DAPSA assessed the joint domain of PsA and was derived from the sum of the following components: tender joint count (0-68), swollen joint count (0-66), CRP level (mg/dL), patient assessment of pain (0-10cm VAS, 0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain), and patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (0 to 10cm VAS, 0=excellent and 10=poor). A higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of PsA disease activity. The assessment does not have a score range with an upper or lower bound.
Query!
Timepoint [72]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [73]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Both PASI 75 and Modified PsARC Response at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [73]
0
0
In PASI, each area (head, trunk, upper and lower extremities) was assessed separately for % of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4. PASI produces numeric score range from 0 to 72. Higher scores=more severe disease. PASI75 response: >=75% improvement in PASI score from baseline. Modified PsARC response: improvement in at least 2 of 4 criteria: >=30% decrease in SJC and TJC, >=20% improvement in PtGA of Disease Activity (arthritis) on VAS (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), >=20% improvement in PGA of Disease Activity on VAS (VAS: 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis and 100=extremely active arthritis), and at least 1 of 2 joint criteria with no deterioration in other criteria.
Query!
Timepoint [73]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [74]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Both PASI 75 and ACR 20 Responses at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [74]
0
0
In PASI, each area (head, trunk, upper and lower extremities) was assessed for % of area involved and translated to numeric score from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90-100% involvement) and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4. PASI produces numeric score from 0 to 72. Higher scores=more severe disease. PASI 75: >=75% improvement in PASI score from baseline. ACR 20: >=20% improvement in SJC (66 joints)+TJC (68 joints) and >=20% improvement in 3 of 5: patient's assessment of pain (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no pain to 100=worst possible pain), PtGA of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent to 100=poor), PGA of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis to 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function (HAQ-DI -20-question instrument; range- 0=no difficulty to 3=inability to perform task) and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [74]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [75]
0
0
Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [75]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severity. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of psoriasis.
Query!
Timepoint [75]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [76]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI 75 Response at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [76]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severity. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. PASI 75 response: >=75% improvement in PASI score from baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [76]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [77]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI 90 Response at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [77]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severity. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. PASI 90 response: >=90% improvement in PASI score from baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [77]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [78]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [78]
0
0
PASI is a tool to assess and grade severity of psoriasis and response to therapy. In PASI, body is divided into 4 areas: head, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities. Each area was assessed separately for percentage of area involved and translated to numeric score ranging from 0 (no involvement) to 6 (90 to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, each rated on scale of 0 to 4 that is none to maximum severity. PASI numeric score range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. Higher scores indicate more severe disease. PASI 100 response: 100% improvement in PASI score from baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [78]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [79]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >=5 Point Improvement From Baseline in SF-36 PCS Score at Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [79]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher score indicates better outcome, with an increase of 5 points considered to be clinically meaningful.
Query!
Timepoint [79]
0
0
Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [80]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >=5 Point Improvement From Baseline in SF-36 MCS Score at Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [80]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher score indicates better outcome, with an increase of 5 points considered to be clinically meaningful.
Query!
Timepoint [80]
0
0
Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [81]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [81]
0
0
MDA is a measure that defines a satisfactory state of disease activity that includes the 5 domains of PsA (joint symptoms, skin psoriasis, patient's perspective of pain and disease activity, physical function, and enthesitis). A participant was considered as having achieved the PsA MDA at a visit if the participant has fulfilled at least 5 of the following 7 criteria at that visit: Tender joint count (68 joints)<=1, Swollen joint count (66 joints) <=1, Psoriasis activity and severity index <=1, Patient's Assessment of Pain <=15 on a 100-unit VAS, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis) <=20 on a 100-unit VAS, HAQ-DI score <=0.5, and Tender entheseal points <= 1 (LEI index score <= 1).
Query!
Timepoint [81]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [82]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Group of Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Composite (GRACE) Score Index at Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [82]
0
0
GRACE index is a composite PsA disease activity score converted from AMDF, which was derived from TJC (0-68) and SJC (0-66), HAQ-DI (0-3), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), patient's assessment of skin disease activity (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), PASI (0-72), and PsA Quality of Life Index (derived as PsAQOL =25.355 + [2.367*HAQ-DI] - [0.234*SF-PCS] - [0.244*SF-MCS]), where HAQ-DI: HAQ-DI score (0-3, 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty), SF-PCS (Score ranges from 0 to 100, higher scores= better quality of life) and SF-MCS (score ranges from 0 to 100, higher scores= better quality of life). The total score is from 0-10, where lower score indicates better response. Higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement of PsA disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [82]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [83]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [83]
0
0
PASDAS (score range of 0 to 10, where higher score indicated more severe disease) is a compositive score of overall disease activity combining Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis, using VAS [0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (using VAS [0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis]), swollen joint count (0-66 joints), tender joint count (0-68 joints), CRP (mg/L), enthesitis based on LEI (0-6), tender dactylitis count (scoring each digit from 0-3 and recoding to 0-1, where any score > 0 equaled 1), and the PCS score of the SF-36 health survey. The cutoffs for disease activity were 3.2 (low) to 5.4 (high). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of overall disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [83]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [84]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Maintained an ACR 20 Response at Week 52 Among Participants Who Achieved an ACR 20 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [84]
0
0
ACR 20 response was defined as >=20% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=20% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [84]
0
0
Week 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [85]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Maintained an ACR 50 Response at Week 52 Among Participants Who Achieved an ACR 50 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [85]
0
0
ACR 50 response was defined as >=50% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=50% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [85]
0
0
Week 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [86]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Maintained an ACR 70 Response at Week 52 Among Participants Who Achieved an ACR 70 Response at Week 24
Query!
Assessment method [86]
0
0
ACR 70 response was defined as >=70% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints), and >=70% improvement from baseline in 3 of the 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using VAS (0-100 millimeters [mm], 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis, VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100 mm, 0=no arthritis activity and 100=extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas; range: 0-3, 0=indicating no difficulty, 3=indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and CRP.
Query!
Timepoint [86]
0
0
Week 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [87]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >= 20%, >=50%, >=70%, and >=90% Improvement From Baseline in BASDAI Score at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With Spondylitis and Peripheral Arthritis as Their Primary Arthritic Presentation of PsA
Query!
Assessment method [87]
0
0
Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) is a self-assessment tool that consists of 6 questions relating to the 5 major symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis: fatigue, spinal pain, joint pain, enthesitis, qualitative morning stiffness and quantitative morning stiffness. The first 5 items were scored on a 10 centimeter (cm) VAS ranging from 0=none to 10=very severe. Quantitative morning stiffness was scored on a 10cm VAS ranging from 0=0 hours to 10=2 or more hours. The 2 scores for qualitative and quantitative morning stiffness were averaged, and the total BASDAI score was the average of the 5 scores of each symptom, ranging from 0 (none) to 10 (very severe). Higher scores indicate greater disease severity and an improvement of 50% from baseline is considered clinically meaningful. Only participants with spondylitis with peripheral arthritis as their primary arthritic presentation of PsA completed the BASDAI indicate the degree of their symptoms over the past week.
Query!
Timepoint [87]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [88]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Resolution of Enthesitis at Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52 Among the Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [88]
0
0
Enthesitis was assessed using the LEI, a tool developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of pain by applying local pressure to the following entheses: left and right lateral epicondyle humerus, left and right medial femoral condyle, and left and right achilles tendon insertion. The enthesitis index score is a total score of the 6 evaluated sites from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness). A LEI score of 0 at a post baseline visit indicates resolution of enthesitis when baseline LEI>0.
Query!
Timepoint [88]
0
0
Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [89]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Resolution of Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52 Among Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [89]
0
0
The presence and severity of dactylitis was assessed in both hands and feet using a scoring system from 0 to 3 (0-no dactylitis, 1-mild dactylitis, 2-moderate dactylitis, and 3-severe dactylitis) for each digit. The results were summed to produce a final score ranging from 0 to 60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. Resolution of dactylitis was defined as a dactylitis score of 0 with the baseline dactylitis score >0.
Query!
Timepoint [89]
0
0
Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [90]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Enthesitis Score (Based on SPARCC) at Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52 Among the Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [90]
0
0
Enthesitis was assessed using the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC). The SPARCC developed a measure for enthesitis in general spondyloarthritis which evaluates the presence or absence of pain by applying local pressure to the following entheses: supraspinatus insertion (left and right), medial epicondyle humerus (left and right), lateral epicondyle humerus (left and right), greater trochanter (left and right), quadriceps-to-patella (left and right), patellar-tibia (left and right), achilles tendon insertion (left and right), plantar fascia (left and right). Tenderness on examination was recorded as either present (1) or absent (0) for each of the 16 sites for an overall score range of 0-16. Higher scores indicate more severe enthesitis. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of enthesitis.
Query!
Timepoint [90]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [91]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Enthesitis Score (Based on LEI) at Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52 Among the Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [91]
0
0
Enthesitis was assessed using the LEI, a tool developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence (score of 0) of pain by applying local pressure to the following entheses: left and right lateral epicondyle humerus, left and right medial femoral condyle, and left and right achilles tendon insertion. The enthesitis index score is a total score of the 6 evaluated sites from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of enthesitis.
Query!
Timepoint [91]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [92]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Score at Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52 Among the Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [92]
0
0
The presence and severity of dactylitis was assessed in both hands and feet using a scoring system from 0 to 3 (0-no dactylitis, 1-mild dactylitis, 2-moderate dactylitis, and 3-severe dactylitis) for each digit. The results were summed to produce a final score ranging from 0 to 60. A higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement in dactylitis.
Query!
Timepoint [92]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36, 44 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [93]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an IGA Score of 0 (Cleared) or 1 (Cleared) at Weeks 24 and 52 Among Participants With >=3% BSA Psoriatic Involvement and an IGA Score of >=2 at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [93]
0
0
A psoriasis IGA response was defined as an IGA score of 0 (cleared) or 1 (minimal) and >= 2 grade reduction from baseline in the IGA psoriasis score. The IGA documents the investigator's assessment of the patient's psoriasis and lesions are graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 point scale: 0 (no evidence), 1 (minimal), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate), and 4 (severe). The IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores. The participant's psoriasis was assessed as cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4).
Query!
Timepoint [93]
0
0
Weeks 24 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [94]
0
0
Change From Baseline in SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score at Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [94]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [94]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [95]
0
0
Change From Baseline in SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) Score at Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [95]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [95]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [96]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Norm Based Scores of SF-36 Scales at Week 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [96]
0
0
SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales: physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health. The scores 0-100 (where higher scores indicated a better quality of life) from each subscale of SF-36 were normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher score indicates better health status. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [96]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [97]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Score at Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [97]
0
0
The FACIT-Fatigue is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The subscale consists 13-item instrument to measure fatigue. Each of the 13 items has a set of five response categories: Not at all (=0), A little bit (=1), Somewhat (=2), Quite a bit (=3) and Very much (=4). A total FACIT-Fatigue subscale score was calculated as the sum of the 13 item scores (reserved scores [4 - score]) and ranges from 0 to 52, with a higher score indicating less fatigue. Positive changes from baseline indicate improvement of fatigue. Items were reverse scored when appropriate to provide a scale in which higher scores represent better functioning or less fatigue.
Query!
Timepoint [97]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [98]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved >=4-point Improvement From Baseline in FACIT-Fatigue Score at Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [98]
0
0
The FACIT-Fatigue is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The subscale consists 13-item instrument to measure fatigue. Each of the 13 items has a set of five response categories: Not at all (=0), A little bit (=1), Somewhat (=2), Quite a bit (=3) and Very much (=4). A total FACIT-Fatigue subscale score was calculated as the sum of the 13 item scores (reserved scores [4 - score]) and ranges from 0 to 52, with a higher score indicating less fatigue. Positive changes from baseline indicate improvement of fatigue. Items were reverse scored when appropriate to provide a scale in which higher scores represent better functioning or less fatigue.
Query!
Timepoint [98]
0
0
Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Secondary outcome [99]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 Scores at Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Assessment method [99]
0
0
PROMIS-29 contains 4 items for each of seven PROMIS domains (Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Pain Interference, Physical Function, Sleep Disturbance, and Satisfaction-Social Role and Activity. PROMIS-29 also includes an additional pain intensity 0-10 NRS. The raw score of each domain is converted into a standardized score with a mean of 50 and a SD of 10 for the general population in the US (T-Score).
Query!
Timepoint [99]
0
0
Baseline, Weeks 24, 36 and 52
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
- Have a diagnosis of Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) for at least 6 months before the first
administration of study agent and meet Classification criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis
(CASPAR) at screening
- Have active PsA as defined by: at least 3 swollen joints and at least 3 tender joints
at screening and at baseline; and C-reactive protein (CRP) greater than or equal to
(>=) 0.3 milligram per deciLitre (mg/dL) at screening from the central laboratory
- Have at least 1 of the PsA subsets: distal interphalangeal joint involvement,
polyarticular arthritis with absence of rheumatoid nodules, arthritis mutilans,
asymmetric peripheral arthritis, or spondylitis with peripheral arthritis
- Have active plaque psoriasis, with at least one psoriatic plaque of >= 2 centimeter
(cm) diameter or nail changes consistent with psoriasis or documented history of
plaque psoriasis
- Have active PsA despite previous non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs
(DMARD), apremilast, and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy :
Non-biologic DMARD therapy is defined as taking a non-biologic DMARD for at least 3
months or evidence of intolerance; Apremilast therapy is defined as taking apremilast
at the marketed dose approved in the country where the study is being conducted for at
least 4 months or evidence of intolerance; NSAID therapy is defined as taking an NSAID
for at least 4 weeks or evidence of intolerance
- Participants may have been previously treated with up to 2 anti-TNF (tumor necrosis
factor) alpha agents (approximately 30 percent [%] of the overall study population),
and must document the reason for discontinuation
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
- Has other inflammatory diseases that might confound the evaluations of benefit of
guselkumab therapy, including but not limited to rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial
spondyloarthritis (this does not include a primary diagnosis of PsA with spondylitis),
systemic lupus erythematosus, or Lyme disease
- Has ever received more than 2 anti-TNFalpha agents
- Has previously received any biologic treatment (other than anti-TNF alpha agents),
including, but not limited to ustekinumab, abatacept, secukinumab, tildrakizumab,
ixekizumab, brodalumab, risankizumab, or other investigative biologic treatment
- Has previously received any systemic immunosuppressants (for example, azathioprine,
cyclosporine, 6 thioguanine, mercaptopurine, mycophenolate mofetil, hydroxyurea,
tacrolimus) within 4 weeks of the first administration of study agent
- Has received apremilast within 4 weeks prior to the first administration of study
agent
- Has previously received tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib (ASP015K),
decernotinib (VX-509), or any other Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor
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 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
24/08/2017
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
18/11/2019
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
383
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
Barwon Rheumatology Services - Geelong
Query!
Recruitment hospital [2]
0
0
Southern Clinical Research - Hobart
Query!
Recruitment hospital [3]
0
0
Liverpool Hospital - Liverpool
Query!
Recruitment hospital [4]
0
0
Rheumatology Research Unit - Maroochydore
Query!
Recruitment hospital [5]
0
0
Eastern Health - Box Hill Hospital - Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment hospital [6]
0
0
Queen Elizabeth Hospital - Woodville South
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
3220 - Geelong
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [2]
0
0
7000 - Hobart
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [3]
0
0
2170 - Liverpool
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [4]
0
0
4558 - Maroochydore
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [5]
0
0
3128 - Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [6]
0
0
5011 - Woodville South
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
Connecticut
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Indiana
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Michigan
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Missouri
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
New Jersey
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Texas
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Newfoundland and Labrador
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
Ontario
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
Quebec
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
Brno
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
Ostrava
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Praha 4
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Praha
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Uherske Hradiste
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
Zlin
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Berlin
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
Frankfurt
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
Hamburg
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
Herne
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
Wuppertal
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
Budapest
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Debrecen
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Kistarcsa
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Szombathely
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
Bundang
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Seoul
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Suwon
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
Malaysia
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
Batu Caves
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Malaysia
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
Georgetown
Query!
Country [32]
0
0
Malaysia
Query!
State/province [32]
0
0
Ipoh
Query!
Country [33]
0
0
Malaysia
Query!
State/province [33]
0
0
Melaka
Query!
Country [34]
0
0
Malaysia
Query!
State/province [34]
0
0
Seremban
Query!
Country [35]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [35]
0
0
Bialystok
Query!
Country [36]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [36]
0
0
Bydgoszcz
Query!
Country [37]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [37]
0
0
Dabrowka
Query!
Country [38]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [38]
0
0
Elblag
Query!
Country [39]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [39]
0
0
Olsztyn
Query!
Country [40]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [40]
0
0
Poznan
Query!
Country [41]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [41]
0
0
Torun
Query!
Country [42]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [42]
0
0
Warsaw
Query!
Country [43]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [43]
0
0
Warszawa
Query!
Country [44]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [44]
0
0
Wroclaw
Query!
Country [45]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [45]
0
0
Chelyabinsk
Query!
Country [46]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [46]
0
0
Cherepovets
Query!
Country [47]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [47]
0
0
Ekaterinburg
Query!
Country [48]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [48]
0
0
Krasnoyarsk
Query!
Country [49]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [49]
0
0
Lipetsk
Query!
Country [50]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [50]
0
0
Rostov
Query!
Country [51]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [51]
0
0
Ryazan
Query!
Country [52]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [52]
0
0
Ufa
Query!
Country [53]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [53]
0
0
Yaroslavl
Query!
Country [54]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [54]
0
0
A Coruna
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
Madrid
Query!
Country [57]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [57]
0
0
Málaga
Query!
Country [58]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [58]
0
0
Santiago de Compostela
Query!
Country [59]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [59]
0
0
Sevilla
Query!
Country [60]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [60]
0
0
Valencia
Query!
Country [61]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [61]
0
0
Hualien City
Query!
Country [62]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [62]
0
0
Kaohsiung
Query!
Country [63]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [63]
0
0
Taichung
Query!
Country [64]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [64]
0
0
Tainan
Query!
Country [65]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [65]
0
0
Taipei
Query!
Country [66]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [66]
0
0
Taoyuan
Query!
Country [67]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [67]
0
0
Chernihiv
Query!
Country [68]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [68]
0
0
Ivano-Frankivsk
Query!
Country [69]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [69]
0
0
Kharkiv
Query!
Country [70]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [70]
0
0
Khmelnytsky
Query!
Country [71]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [71]
0
0
Kyiv
Query!
Country [72]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [72]
0
0
Lviv
Query!
Country [73]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [73]
0
0
Odessa
Query!
Country [74]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [74]
0
0
Ternopil
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/Industry
Query!
Name
Janssen Research & Development, LLC
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of guselkumab treatment in
participants with active Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) by assessing the reduction in signs and
symptoms of PsA.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03162796
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
0
0
Janssen Research & Development, LLC Clinical Trial
Query!
Address
0
0
Janssen Research & Development, LLC
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/NCT03162796
Download to PDF