Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Register a trial
The ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov
For full trial details, please see the original record at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03349060
Registration number
NCT03349060
Ethics application status
Date submitted
17/11/2017
Date registered
21/11/2017
Titles & IDs
Public title
Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of PF-04965842 in Subjects Aged 12 Years And Older With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Query!
Scientific title
A PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, PARALLEL GROUP, MULTI-CENTER STUDY TO EVALUATE THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF PF-04965842 MONOTHERAPY IN SUBJECTS AGED 12 YEARS AND OLDER, WITH MODERATE TO SEVERE ATOPIC DERMATITIS
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
2017-003651-29
Query!
Secondary ID [2]
0
0
B7451012
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
JADE Mono-1
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Dermatitis, Atopic
0
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Skin
0
0
0
0
Query!
Dermatological conditions
Query!
Skin
0
0
0
0
Query!
Other skin conditions
Query!
Inflammatory and Immune System
0
0
0
0
Query!
Other inflammatory or immune system disorders
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Drugs - PF-04965842 100 mg
Treatment: Drugs - PF-04965842 200 mg
Treatment: Drugs - Placebo
Experimental: PF-04965842 100 mg -
Experimental: PF-04965842 200 mg -
Placebo comparator: Placebo -
Treatment: Drugs: PF-04965842 100 mg
PF-04965842 100 mg, administered as two tablets to be taken orally once daily for 12 weeks
Treatment: Drugs: PF-04965842 200 mg
PF-04965842 200 mg, administered as two tablets to be taken orally once daily for 12 weeks
Treatment: Drugs: Placebo
Placebo, administered as two tablets to be taken orally once daily for 12 weeks
Query!
Intervention code [1]
0
0
Treatment: Drugs
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Response of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) and Greater Than or Equal to 2 Points Improvement From Baseline at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
IGA assesses severity of AD on a 5 point scale (0 to 4, higher scores indicate more severity). Scores: 0= clear, no inflammatory signs of AD; 1= almost clear, AD not fully cleared- light pink residual lesions (except post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation), just perceptible erythema, papulation/induration lichenification, excoriation, and no oozing/crusting; 2= mild AD with light red lesions, slight but definite erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and no oozing/crusting; 3= moderate AD with red lesions, moderate erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and slight oozing/crusting; 4= severe AD with deep dark red lesions, severe erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and moderate to severe oozing/crusting. Assessment excluded sole, palms and scalp.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Baseline, Week 12
Query!
Primary outcome [2]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Response of >=75 Percent (%) Improvement From Baseline at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
EASI evaluates severity of participants' AD (excluded scalp, palms, soles) based on severity of AD clinical signs and % of body surface area (BSA) affected. Severity of clinical signs of AD (erythema, induration/papulation, excoriation and lichenification) scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk \[including axillae and groin)\] and lower limbs \[including buttocks\]) on 4-point scale: 0= absent; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe. EASI area score was based upon % BSA with AD in body region: 0 (0%), 1 (\>0 to \<10%), 2 (10 to \<30%), 3 (30 to \<50%), 4 (50 to \<70%), 5 (70 to \<90%) and 6 (90 to 100%). Total EASI score =0.1\*Ah\*(Eh+Ih+Exh+Lh) + 0.2\*Au\*(Eu+Iu+ExU+Lu) + 0.3\*At\*(Et+It+Ext+Lt) + 0.4\*Al\*(El+Il+Exl+Ll); A = EASI area score; E = erythema; I = induration/papulation; Ex = excoriation; L = lichenification; h = head and neck; u = upper limbs; t = trunk; l = lower limbs. Total EASI score ranged from 0.0 to 72.0, higher scores = greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Baseline, Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With at Least 4 Points Improvement From Baseline in the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for Severity of Pruritus at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12: Full Analysis Set (FAS)
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Participants were asked to assess their worst pruritus/itching due to AD over the past 24 hours on an NRS scale ranged from 0 (no itching) to 10 (worst possible itching), where higher scores indicated greater severity.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With at Least 4 Points Improvement From Baseline in the Numerical Rating Scale for Severity of Pruritus at Week 2, 4 and 12: Per Protocol Analysis Set (PPAS)
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
Participants were asked to assess their worst pruritus/itching due to AD over the past 24 hours on an NRS scale ranged from 0 (no itching) to 10 (worst possible itching), where higher scores indicated greater severity.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12: Full Analysis Set
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
PSAAD is a daily participant reported symptom electronic diary. Participants rated their symptoms of AD over the past 24 hours, using 11 items (itchy skin, painful skin, dry skin, flaky skin, cracked skin, bumpy skin, red skin, discolored skin \[lighter or darker\], bleeding from skin, seeping or oozing fluid from skin \[other than blood\], and skin swelling). Participant had to think about all the areas of their body affected by their skin condition and chose the number that best described their experience for each of the 11 items, from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms), higher scores signified worse skin condition. Total PSAAD score = arithmetic mean of 11 items, 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms), where higher score = worse skin condition.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis Total Score at Week 12: Per Protocol Analysis Set
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
PSAAD is a daily participant reported symptom electronic diary. Participants rated their symptoms of AD over the past 24 hours, using 11 items (itchy skin, painful skin, dry skin, flaky skin, cracked skin, bumpy skin, red skin, discolored skin \[lighter or darker\], bleeding from skin, seeping or oozing fluid from skin \[other than blood\], and skin swelling). Participant had to think about all the areas of their body affected by their skin condition and chose the number that best described their experience for each of the 11 items, from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms), higher scores signified worse skin condition. Total PSAAD score = arithmetic mean of 11 items, 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms), where higher score = worse skin condition.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Baseline, Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Time to Achieve >=4 Points Improvement From Baseline in Numerical Rating Scale for Severity of Pruritus
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
Participants were asked to assess their worst itching/pruritus due to AD over the past 24 hours on an NRS scale ranged from 0 (no itching) to 10 (worst itch imaginable), where higher scores indicated greater severity. 95% CI was based on the Brookmeyer and Crowley method.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Baseline up to Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index Response of >=75% Improvement From Baseline at Week 2, 4 and 8
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
EASI evaluates severity of participants' AD (excluded scalp, palms, soles) based on severity of AD clinical signs and % of body surface area (BSA) affected. Severity of clinical signs of AD (erythema, induration/papulation, excoriation and lichenification) scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk \[including axillae and groin)\] and lower limbs \[including buttocks\]) on 4-point scale: 0= absent; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe. EASI area score was based upon % BSA with AD in body region: 0 (0%), 1 (\>0 to \<10%), 2 (10 to \<30%), 3 (30 to \<50%), 4 (50 to \<70%), 5 (70 to \<90%) and 6 (90 to 100%). Total EASI score =0.1\*Ah\*(Eh+Ih+Exh+Lh) + 0.2\*Au\*(Eu+Iu+ExU+Lu) + 0.3\*At\*(Et+It+Ext+Lt) + 0.4\*Al\*(El+Il+Exl+Ll); A = EASI area score; E = erythema; I = induration/papulation; Ex = excoriation; L = lichenification; h = head and neck; u = upper limbs; t = trunk; l = lower limbs. Total EASI score ranged from 0.0 to 72.0, higher scores = greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Investigator's Global Assessment Response of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) and >=2 Points Improvement From Baseline at Week 2, 4 and 8
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
IGA assesses severity of AD on a 5 point scale (0 to 4, higher scores indicate more severity). Scores: 0= clear, no inflammatory signs of AD; 1= almost clear, AD not fully cleared- light pink residual lesions (except post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation), just perceptible erythema, papulation/induration lichenification, excoriation, and no oozing/crusting; 2= mild AD with light red lesions, slight but definite erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and no oozing/crusting; 3= moderate AD with red lesions, moderate erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and slight oozing/crusting; 4= severe AD with deep dark red lesions, severe erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and moderate to severe oozing/crusting. Assessment excluded sole, palms and scalp.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Investigator's Global Assessment Response of Clear (0) at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
IGA assesses severity of AD on a 5 point scale (0 to 4, higher scores indicate more severity). Scores: 0= clear, no inflammatory signs of AD; 1= almost clear, AD not fully cleared- light pink residual lesions (except post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation), just perceptible erythema, papulation/induration lichenification, excoriation, and no oozing/crusting; 2= mild AD with light red lesions, slight but definite erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and no oozing/crusting; 3= moderate AD with red lesions, moderate erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and slight oozing/crusting; 4= severe AD with deep dark red lesions, severe erythema, papulation/induration, lichenification, excoriation and moderate to severe oozing/crusting. Assessment excluded sole, palms and scalp.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index Response of >=50% Improvement From Baseline at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
EASI evaluates severity of participants' AD (excluded scalp, palms, soles) based on severity of AD clinical signs and % of body surface area (BSA) affected. Severity of clinical signs of AD (erythema, induration/papulation, excoriation and lichenification) scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk \[including axillae and groin)\] and lower limbs \[including buttocks\]) on 4-point scale: 0= absent; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe. EASI area score was based upon % BSA with AD in body region: 0 (0%), 1 (\>0 to \<10%), 2 (10 to \<30%), 3 (30 to \<50%), 4 (50 to \<70%), 5 (70 to \<90%) and 6 (90 to 100%). Total EASI score =0.1\*Ah\*(Eh+Ih+Exh+Lh) + 0.2\*Au\*(Eu+Iu+ExU+Lu) + 0.3\*At\*(Et+It+Ext+Lt) + 0.4\*Al\*(El+Il+Exl+Ll); A = EASI area score; E = erythema; I = induration/papulation; Ex = excoriation; L = lichenification; h = head and neck; u = upper limbs; t = trunk; l = lower limbs. Total EASI score ranged from 0.0 to 72.0, higher scores = greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index Response of >=90% Improvement From Baseline at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
EASI evaluates severity of participants' AD (excluded scalp, palms, soles) based on severity of AD clinical signs and % of body surface area (BSA) affected. Severity of clinical signs of AD (erythema, induration/papulation, excoriation and lichenification) scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk \[including axillae and groin)\] and lower limbs \[including buttocks\]) on 4-point scale: 0= absent; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe. EASI area score was based upon % BSA with AD in body region: 0 (0%), 1 (\>0 to \<10%), 2 (10 to \<30%), 3 (30 to \<50%), 4 (50 to \<70%), 5 (70 to \<90%) and 6 (90 to 100%). Total EASI score =0.1\*Ah\*(Eh+Ih+Exh+Lh) + 0.2\*Au\*(Eu+Iu+ExU+Lu) + 0.3\*At\*(Et+It+Ext+Lt) + 0.4\*Al\*(El+Il+Exl+Ll); A = EASI area score; E = erythema; I = induration/papulation; Ex = excoriation; L = lichenification; h = head and neck; u = upper limbs; t = trunk; l = lower limbs. Total EASI score ranged from 0.0 to 72.0, higher scores = greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index Response of 100% Improvement From Baseline at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
EASI evaluates severity of participants' AD (excluded scalp, palms, soles) based on severity of AD clinical signs and % of body surface area (BSA) affected. Severity of clinical signs of AD (erythema, induration/papulation, excoriation and lichenification) scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk \[including axillae and groin)\] and lower limbs \[including buttocks\]) on 4-point scale: 0= absent; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe. EASI area score was based upon % BSA with AD in body region: 0 (0%), 1 (\>0 to \<10%), 2 (10 to \<30%), 3 (30 to \<50%), 4 (50 to \<70%), 5 (70 to \<90%) and 6 (90 to 100%). Total EASI score =0.1\*Ah\*(Eh+Ih+Exh+Lh) + 0.2\*Au\*(Eu+Iu+ExU+Lu) + 0.3\*At\*(Et+It+Ext+Lt) + 0.4\*Al\*(El+Il+Exl+Ll); A = EASI area score; E = erythema; I = induration/papulation; Ex = excoriation; L = lichenification; h = head and neck; u = upper limbs; t = trunk; l = lower limbs. Total EASI score ranged from 0.0 to 72.0, higher scores = greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
EASI evaluates severity of participants' AD (excluded scalp, palms, soles) based on severity of AD clinical signs and % of body surface area (BSA) affected. Severity of clinical signs of AD (erythema, induration/papulation, excoriation and lichenification) scored separately for each of 4 body regions (head and neck, upper limbs, trunk \[including axillae and groin)\] and lower limbs \[including buttocks\]) on 4-point scale: 0= absent; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe. EASI area score was based upon % BSA with AD in body region: 0 (0%), 1 (\>0 to \<10%), 2 (10 to \<30%), 3 (30 to \<50%), 4 (50 to \<70%), 5 (70 to \<90%) and 6 (90 to 100%). Total EASI score =0.1\*Ah\*(Eh+Ih+Exh+Lh) + 0.2\*Au\*(Eu+Iu+ExU+Lu) + 0.3\*At\*(Et+It+Ext+Lt) + 0.4\*Al\*(El+Il+Exl+Ll); A = EASI area score; E = erythema; I = induration/papulation; Ex = excoriation; L = lichenification; h = head and neck; u = upper limbs; t = trunk; l = lower limbs. Total EASI score ranged from 0.0 to 72.0, higher scores = greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Percentage Body Surface Area at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
4 body regions were evaluated: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin) and lower limbs (including buttocks). Scalp, palms and soles were excluded. BSA was calculated using handprint method. Number of handprints (size of participant's hand with fingers in a closed position) fitting in the affected area of a body region was estimated. Maximum number of handprints were 10 for head and neck, 20 for upper limbs, 30 for trunk and 40 for lower limbs. Surface area of body region equivalent to 1 handprint: 1 handprint was equal to 10% for head and neck, 5% for upper limbs, 3.33% for trunk and 2.5% for lower limbs. Percent BSA for a body region was calculated as = total number of handprints in a body region \* % surface area equivalent to 1 handprint. Overall % BSA for an individual: arithmetic mean of % BSA of all 4 body regions, ranges from 0 to 100%, with higher values representing greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Percentage Body Surface Area Less Than (<) 5% at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
4 body regions were evaluated: head and neck, upper limbs, trunk (including axillae and groin) and lower limbs (including buttocks). Scalp, palms and soles were excluded. BSA was calculated using handprint method. Number of handprints (size of participant's hand with fingers in a closed position) fitting in the affected area of a body region was estimated. Maximum number of handprints were 10 for head and neck, 20 for upper limbs, 30 for trunk and 40 for lower limbs. Surface area of body region equivalent to 1 handprint: 1 handprint was equal to 10% for head and neck, 5% for upper limb, 3.33% for trunk and 2.5% for lower limb. % BSA for a body region was calculated as = total number of handprints in a body region \* % surface area equivalent to 1 handprint. Overall % BSA for an individual: arithmetic mean of % BSA of all 4 body regions, ranges from 0 to 100%, with higher values representing greater severity of AD.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Response of >=50% Improvement From Baseline at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [15]
0
0
SCORAD: scoring index for AD combining extent, severity, subjective symptoms. Extent (A): rule of 9 was used to calculate BSA affected by AD as a % of whole BSA for each body region- head and neck 9%; upper limbs 9% each; lower limbs 18% each; anterior trunk 18%; back 18%; 1% for genitals. The score for each body region was added to determine A (0-100). Severity (B): severity of each sign (erythema; edema; oozing; excoriation; skin thickening; dryness) was assessed as none=0, mild=1, moderate=2,severe=3. The severity scores were summed to give B (0-18). Subjective symptoms (C): pruritus and sleep, each of these 2 were scored by participant/caregiver using visual analogue scale (VAS) where "0" = no itch/no sleeplessness and "10" = the worst imaginable itch/sleeplessness, higher scores=worse symptoms. Scores for itch and sleeplessness were added to give 'C' (0-20). The SCORAD for an individual was calculated: A/5 + 7\*B/2 + C; range from 0 to 103; higher values of SCORAD=worse outcome.
Query!
Timepoint [15]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Scoring Atopic Dermatitis Response of >=75% Improvement From Baseline at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [16]
0
0
SCORAD: scoring index for AD combining extent, severity, subjective symptoms. Extent (A): rule of 9 was used to calculate BSA affected by AD as a % of whole BSA for each body region- head and neck 9%; upper limbs 9% each; lower limbs 18% each; anterior trunk 18%; back 18%; 1% for genitals. The score for each body region was added to determine A (0-100). Severity (B): severity of each sign (erythema; edema; oozing; excoriation; skin thickening; dryness) was assessed as none (0), mild (1), moderate (2) or severe (3). The severity scores added to give B (0-18). Subjective symptoms (C): pruritus and sleep loss, each of these 2 were scored by participant/caregiver using VAS where "0" = no itch or no sleeplessness and "10" = the worst imaginable itch or sleeplessness, higher scores worse symptoms. Scores for itch and sleeplessness added to give 'C' (0-20). The SCORAD for an individual was calculated: A/5 + 7\*B/2 + C; range from 0 to 103; higher values of SCORAD = worse outcome.
Query!
Timepoint [16]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Scoring Atopic Dermatitis: Visual Analogue Scale of Sleep Loss at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [17]
0
0
SCORAD: scoring index for AD combining extent, severity, subjective symptoms. Extent (A): rule of 9 was used to calculate BSA affected by AD as a % of whole BSA for each body region- head and neck 9%; upper limbs 9% each; lower limbs 18% each; anterior trunk 18%; back 18%; 1% for genitals. The score for each body region was added to determine A (0-100). Severity (B): severity of each sign (erythema; edema; oozing; excoriation; skin thickening; dryness) was assessed as none (0), mild (1), moderate (2) or severe (3). The severity scores added to give B (0-18). Subjective symptoms (C): pruritus and sleep loss, each of these 2 were scored by participant/caregiver using VAS where "0" = no itch or no sleeplessness and "10" = the worst imaginable itch or sleeplessness, higher scores worse symptoms. Scores for itch and sleeplessness added to give 'C' (0-20). The SCORAD for an individual was calculated: A/5 + 7\*B/2 + C; range from 0 to 103; higher values of SCORAD = worse outcome.
Query!
Timepoint [17]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Scoring Atopic Dermatitis: Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [18]
0
0
SCORAD: scoring index for AD combining extent, severity, subjective symptoms. Extent (A): rule of 9 was used to calculate BSA affected by AD as a % of whole BSA for each body region- head and neck 9%; upper limbs 9% each; lower limbs 18% each; anterior trunk 18%; back 18%; 1% for genitals. The score for each body region was added to determine A (0-100). Severity (B): severity of each sign (erythema; edema; oozing; excoriation; skin thickening; dryness) was assessed as none (0), mild (1), moderate (2) or severe (3). The severity scores added to give B (0-18). Subjective symptoms (C): pruritus and sleep loss, each of these 2 were scored by participant/caregiver using VAS where "0" = no itch or no sleeplessness and "10" = the worst imaginable itch or sleeplessness, higher scores worse symptoms. Scores for itch and sleeplessness added to give 'C' (0-20). The SCORAD for an individual was calculated: A/5 + 7\*B/2 + C; range from 0 to 103; higher values of SCORAD = worse outcome.
Query!
Timepoint [18]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving >=1 Point Improvement From Baseline in Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [19]
0
0
PSAAD is a daily participant reported symptom electronic diary. Participants rated their symptoms of AD over the past 24 hours, using 11 items (itchy skin, painful skin, dry skin, flaky skin, cracked skin, bumpy skin, red skin, discolored skin \[lighter or darker\], bleeding from skin, seeping or oozing fluid from skin \[other than blood\], and skin swelling). Participant had to think about all the areas of their body affected by their skin condition and chose the number that best described their experience for each of the 11 items, from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms), higher scores signified worse skin condition. Total PSAAD score = arithmetic mean of 11 items, 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms), where higher score = worse skin condition.
Query!
Timepoint [19]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [20]
0
0
DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on participant's (aged above 17 years) quality of life over the last week. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life. Scores from all 10 questions added up to give DLQI total score range from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of participants.
Query!
Timepoint [20]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [21]
0
0
CDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on adolescents (aged 12-17 years) quality of life over the last week. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. CDLQI total score was the sum of individual scores of question 1-10 and ranges from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of children.
Query!
Timepoint [21]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Baseline Dermatology Life Quality Index Score >=2 and Achieving <2 DLQI Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [22]
0
0
DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on participant's (aged above 17 years) quality of life over the last week. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life. Scores from all 10 questions added up to give DLQI total score range from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of participants.
Query!
Timepoint [22]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Baseline Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index Score >=2 and Achieving <2 CDLQI Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [23]
0
0
CDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on adolescents (aged 12-17 years) quality of life over the last week. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. CDLQI total score was the sum of individual scores of question 1-10 and ranges from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of children.
Query!
Timepoint [23]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Baseline Dermatology Life Quality Index Score >=4 and Achieving >=4 Point Improvement From Baseline in DLQI Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [24]
0
0
DLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on participant's (aged above 17 years) quality of life over the last week. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life. Scores from all 10 questions added up to give DLQI total score range from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of participants.
Query!
Timepoint [24]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Baseline Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index Score >=2.5 and Achieving >=2.5 Point Improvement From Baseline in CDLQI Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [25]
0
0
CDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on adolescents (aged 12-17 years) quality of life over the last week. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. CDLQI total score was the sum of individual scores of question 1-10 and ranges from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of children.
Query!
Timepoint [25]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS): Depression Subscale at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [26]
0
0
HADS: participant rated 14-item questionnaire. HADS consisted of 2 subscales: HADS-anxiety scale (HADS-A) and HADS-depression scale (HADS-D), both of these subscales comprised of 7 items each. Each item was rated on a 4-point scale, score range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicates more anxiety/depression symptoms. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks). HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). HADS-D: sum of all 7 items resulted in score range of 0 (no presence of depression) to 21 (severe feeling of depression); higher score indicating greater severity of depression symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [26]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: Anxiety Subscale at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [27]
0
0
HADS: participant rated 14-item questionnaire. HADS consisted of 2 subscales: HADS-anxiety scale (HADS-A) and HADS-depression scale (HADS-D), both of these subscales comprised of 7 items each. Each item was rated on a 4-point scale, score range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicates more anxiety/depression symptoms. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks). HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). HADS-A: sum of all 7 items resulted in score range of 0 (no presence of anxiety) to 21 (severe feeling of anxiety); higher score indicating greater severity of anxiety.
Query!
Timepoint [27]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [28]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With >=8 Points at Baseline and Achieving Score of <8 Points in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: Anxiety Subscale at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [28]
0
0
HADS: participant rated 14-item questionnaire. HADS consisted of 2 subscales: HADS-anxiety scale (HADS-A) and HADS-depression scale (HADS-D), both of these subscales comprised of 7 items each. Each item was rated on a 4-point scale, score range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicates more anxiety/depression symptoms. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks). HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). HADS-A: sum of all 7 items resulted in score range of 0 (no presence of anxiety) to 21 (severe feeling of anxiety); higher score indicating greater severity of anxiety.
Query!
Timepoint [28]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [29]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With >=8 Points at Baseline and Achieving Score of <8 Points in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: Depression Subscale at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [29]
0
0
HADS: participant rated 14-item questionnaire. HADS consisted of 2 subscales: HADS-anxiety scale (HADS-A) and HADS-depression scale (HADS-D), both of these subscales comprised of 7 items each. Each item was rated on a 4-point scale, score range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicates more anxiety/depression symptoms. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks). HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). HADS-D: sum of all 7 items resulted in score range of 0 (no presence of depression) to 21 (severe feeling of depression); higher score indicating greater severity of depression symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [29]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [30]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With >=11 Points at Baseline and Achieving Score of <11 Points in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: Anxiety Subscale at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [30]
0
0
HADS: participant rated 14-item questionnaire. HADS consisted of 2 subscales: HADS-anxiety scale (HADS-A) and HADS-depression scale (HADS-D), both of these subscales comprised of 7 items each. Each item was rated on a 4-point scale, score range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicates more anxiety/depression symptoms. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks). HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). HADS-A: sum of all 7 items resulted in score range of 0 (no presence of anxiety) to 21 (severe feeling of anxiety); higher score indicating greater severity of anxiety.
Query!
Timepoint [30]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [31]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With >=11 Points at Baseline and Achieving Score of <11 Points in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: Depression Subscale at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [31]
0
0
HADS: participant rated 14-item questionnaire. HADS consisted of 2 subscales: HADS-anxiety scale (HADS-A) and HADS-depression scale (HADS-D), both of these subscales comprised of 7 items each. Each item was rated on a 4-point scale, score range from 0 to 3, where higher scores indicates more anxiety/depression symptoms. HADS-A assesses state of generalized anxiety (anxious mood, restlessness, anxious thoughts, panic attacks). HADS-D assesses state of lost interest and diminished pleasure response (lowering of hedonic tone). HADS-D: sum of all 7 items resulted in score range of 0 (no presence of depression) to 21 (severe feeling of depression); higher score indicating greater severity of depression symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [31]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [32]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [32]
0
0
POEM is a 7-item participant reported outcome (PRO) measure used to assess the impact of AD (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding and weeping) over the past week. Each item is scored as "no days (0)", "1-2 days (1)", "3-4 days (2)", "5-6 days (3)" and "every day (4)". The score ranges from 0 to 28, where higher score indicated greater severity.
Query!
Timepoint [32]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [33]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [33]
0
0
Participant responded to "Overall, how would you describe your Atopic Dermatitis right now?" on a scale: 0= clear; 1= almost clear; 2= mild; 3= moderate; and 4= severe. Higher scores indicated more severity.
Query!
Timepoint [33]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [34]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Achieving 'Clear' or 'Almost Clear' and >=2 Points Improvement From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [34]
0
0
Participant responded to "Overall, how would you describe your Atopic Dermatitis right now?" on a scale: 0= clear; 1= almost clear; 2= mild; 3= moderate; and 4= severe. Higher scores indicated more severity.
Query!
Timepoint [34]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [35]
0
0
Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level Scale (EQ-5D-5L): Index Value at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [35]
0
0
EQ-5D-5L: standardized participant (aged \>17 years) completed questionnaire consisted of 2 components: a health state profile and an optional VAS. EQ-5D health state profile had 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1= no problems, 2= slight problems, 3= moderate problems, 4= severe problems, and 5= extreme problems. Responses to 5 dimensions comprised a health state/a single utility index value. E.g. if a participant responded "no problems" for each 5 dimensions, then health state was coded as "11111" with a predefined index value to it. Every health state (coded as combination of responses on each of 5 dimensions) had a unique predefined utility index value assigned to it, by EuroQol. US value sets (with all possible health states) was used for adults in the study, range from 1 to -0.109. Higher (positive) scores = better health state.
Query!
Timepoint [35]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [36]
0
0
Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level Scale (EQ-5D-5L)- Visual Analogue Scale Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [36]
0
0
EQ-5D-5L is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional VAS. EQ-5D VAS was used to record a participant's (aged above 17 years) rating for his/her current health-related quality of life state and captured on a vertical VAS (0-100), where 0 = worst imaginable health state and 100 = best imaginable health state.
Query!
Timepoint [36]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [37]
0
0
Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life 5-Dimension Youth Scale (EQ-5D-Y): Index Value at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [37]
0
0
EQ-5D-Y: standardized participant (aged 12-17 years) completed questionnaire consisted of 2 components: a health state profile and an optional VAS. EQ-5D health state profile had 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1= no problems, 2= slight problems, 3= moderate problems, 4= severe problems, and 5= extreme problems. Responses to 5 dimensions comprised a health state/a single utility index value. E.g. if a participant responded "no problems" for each 5 dimensions, then health state was coded as "11111" with a predefined index value to it. Every health state (coded as combination of responses on each of 5 dimensions) had a unique predefined utility index value assigned to it, by EuroQol. UK value sets (with all possible health states) was used for adolescents in the study, range from 1 to -0.594. Higher (positive) scores = better health state.
Query!
Timepoint [37]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [38]
0
0
Change From Baseline in EuroQol Quality of Life 5-Dimension Youth Scale (EQ-5D-Y): Visual Analogue Scale Score at Week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Query!
Assessment method [38]
0
0
EQ-5D-Y is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score specifically developed and validated for use by youths age 12-17 years. EQ-5D-Y consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional VAS. EQ-5D VAS was used to record a participant's rating for his/her current health-related quality of life state and captured on a vertical VAS (0-100), where 0 = worst imaginable health state and 100 = best imaginable health state.
Query!
Timepoint [38]
0
0
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [39]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale (FACIT-F) at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [39]
0
0
FACIT-F is a 13-item questionnaire. Participants (aged above 17 years) scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Higher the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated) greater was the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-F score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (the best score) where higher scores indicated better overall health status (less fatigue).
Query!
Timepoint [39]
0
0
Baseline, Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [40]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Pediatric Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale (Peds-FACIT-F) at Week 12
Query!
Assessment method [40]
0
0
Peds-FACIT-F is a 13-item questionnaire for adolescents of 12-17 years of age. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (none of the time) to 4 (all of the time). Higher the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), greater was the participant's fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as (4 minus the participant's response). The sum of all responses resulted in the Peds-FACIT-F score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (the best score) where higher scores indicated better overall health status (less fatigue).
Query!
Timepoint [40]
0
0
Baseline, Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [41]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Short Form-36v2 (SF-36v2) Acute Summary Score at Week 12: Physical Component Summary
Query!
Assessment method [41]
0
0
SF-36v2 health survey is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 36 questions, measuring 8 health domains: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. These domains were also summarized as physical and mental component summary scores. Physical component summary: the minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 100. Higher scores indicates a better health state.
Query!
Timepoint [41]
0
0
Baseline, Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [42]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Short Form-36v2 Acute Summary Score at Week 12: Mental Component Summary
Query!
Assessment method [42]
0
0
SF-36v2 health survey is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 36 questions, measuring 8 health domains: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. These domains were also summarized as physical and mental component summary scores. Mental component summary: the minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 100. Higher scores indicates a better health state.
Query!
Timepoint [42]
0
0
Baseline, Week 12
Query!
Secondary outcome [43]
0
0
Plasma Concentration Versus Time Summary of PF-04965842
Query!
Assessment method [43]
0
0
Concentration versus time summary was calculated by setting concentration values below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ) = =1.00 nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL) to zero.
Query!
Timepoint [43]
0
0
Day 1 of Week 4: 0 hour(Pre-dose), 0.5 hours post-dose; Day 1 of Week 12: 0.5, 4 hours post-dose
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
* 12 years of age or older with a minimum body weight of 40 kg
* Diagnosis of atopic dermatitis (AD) for at least 1 year and current status of moderate to severe disease (>= the following scores: BSA 10%, IGA 3, EASI 16, Pruritus NRS 4)
* Recent history of inadequate response or inability to tolerate topical AD treatments or require systemic treatments for AD control
Query!
Minimum age
12
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
* Unwilling to discontinue current AD medications prior to the study or require treatment with prohibited medications during the study
* Prior treatment with JAK inhibitors
* Other active nonAD inflammatory skin diseases or conditions affecting skin
* Medical history including thrombocytopenia, coagulopathy or platelet dysfunction, Q wave interval abnormalities, current or history of certain infections, cancer, lymphoproliferative disorders and other medical conditions at the discretion of the investigator
* Pregnant or breastfeeding women, or women of childbearing potential who are unwilling to use contraception
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Query!
Masking / blinding
Blinded (masking used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
The people receiving the treatment/s
The people administering the treatment/s
The people assessing the outcomes
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
7/12/2017
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
26/03/2019
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
387
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
NSW,QLD,VIC
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
Australian Clinical Research Network (ACRN) - Maroubra
Query!
Recruitment hospital [2]
0
0
Spectrum Medical Imaging - Maroubra
Query!
Recruitment hospital [3]
0
0
Queensland X-Ray - Upper Mount Gravatt
Query!
Recruitment hospital [4]
0
0
Veracity Clinical Research Pty Ltd - Woolloongabba
Query!
Recruitment hospital [5]
0
0
Emeritus Research - Camberwell
Query!
Recruitment hospital [6]
0
0
Skin and Cancer Foundation Inc - Carlton
Query!
Recruitment hospital [7]
0
0
Melbourne Radiology Clinic - East Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment hospital [8]
0
0
Sinclair Dermatology - East Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment hospital [9]
0
0
The Royal Children's Hospital - Parkville
Query!
Recruitment hospital [10]
0
0
Bridge Road Imaging - Richmond
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
2035 - Maroubra
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [2]
0
0
4122 - Upper Mount Gravatt
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [3]
0
0
4102 - Woolloongabba
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [4]
0
0
3124 - Camberwell
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [5]
0
0
3053 - Carlton
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [6]
0
0
3002 - East Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [7]
0
0
3052 - Parkville
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [8]
0
0
3121 - Richmond
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
California
Query!
Country [3]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [3]
0
0
Florida
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Georgia
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Illinois
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Indiana
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
Massachusetts
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Michigan
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Missouri
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
Oklahoma
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
Oregon
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
South Carolina
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
Texas
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Virginia
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Washington
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Alberta
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
British Columbia
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Manitoba
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
Ontario
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
Quebec
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
Kutna Hora
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
Ostrava - Poruba
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
Praha 1
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Praha 2
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
Czechia
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Usti nad Labem
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Schleswig-holstein
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
Bad Bentheim
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Berlin
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Dresden
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
Erlangen
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
Kiel
Query!
Country [32]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [32]
0
0
Munich
Query!
Country [33]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [33]
0
0
Münster
Query!
Country [34]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [34]
0
0
Schwerin
Query!
Country [35]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [35]
0
0
Bács-kiskun
Query!
Country [36]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [36]
0
0
Debrecen
Query!
Country [37]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [37]
0
0
Kecskemet
Query!
Country [38]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [38]
0
0
Miskolc
Query!
Country [39]
0
0
Hungary
Query!
State/province [39]
0
0
Pecs
Query!
Country [40]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [40]
0
0
Katowice
Query!
Country [41]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [41]
0
0
Lodz
Query!
Country [42]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [42]
0
0
Ostrowiec Swietokrzyski
Query!
Country [43]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [43]
0
0
Warszawa
Query!
Country [44]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [44]
0
0
Devon
Query!
Country [45]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [45]
0
0
Greater London
Query!
Country [46]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [46]
0
0
South Yorkshire, England
Query!
Country [47]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [47]
0
0
South Yorkshire
Query!
Country [48]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [48]
0
0
Dudley
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/industry
Query!
Name
Pfizer
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
B7451012 is a Phase 3 study to evaluate PF-04965842 in patients aged 12 years and older with a minimum body weight of 40 kg who have moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. The efficacy and safety of two dosage strengths of PF-04965842, 100 mg and 200 mg taken orally once daily, will be evaluated relative to placebo over 12 weeks of study participation. Eligible patients will have an option to enter a long-term extension study after completing 12 weeks of treatment.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03349060
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Blauvelt A, Boguniewicz M, Brunner PM, Luna PC, Biswas P, DiBonaventura M, Farooqui SA, Rojo R, Cameron MC. Abrocitinib monotherapy in Investigator's Global Assessment nonresponders: improvement in signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis and quality of life. J Dermatolog Treat. 2022 Aug;33(5):2605-2613. doi: 10.1080/09546634.2022.2059053. Epub 2022 Jul 6. Stander S, Bhatia N, Gooderham MJ, Silverberg JI, Thyssen JP, Biswas P, DiBonaventura M, Romero W, Farooqui SA. High threshold efficacy responses in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis are associated with additional quality of life benefits: pooled analyses of abrocitinib monotherapy studies in adults and adolescents. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2022 Aug;36(8):1308-1317. doi: 10.1111/jdv.18170. Epub 2022 May 6. Wojciechowski J, Malhotra BK, Wang X, Fostvedt L, Valdez H, Nicholas T. Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of platelet time-courses following administration of abrocitinib. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2022 Aug;88(8):3856-3871. doi: 10.1111/bcp.15334. Epub 2022 Apr 11. Wojciechowski J, Malhotra BK, Wang X, Fostvedt L, Valdez H, Nicholas T. Population Pharmacokinetics of Abrocitinib in Healthy Individuals and Patients with Psoriasis or Atopic Dermatitis. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2022 May;61(5):709-723. doi: 10.1007/s40262-021-01104-z. Epub 2022 Jan 21. Erratum In: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2022 Apr;61(4):591. doi: 10.1007/s40262-022-01112-7. Cork MJ, McMichael A, Teng J, Valdez H, Rojo R, Chan G, Zhang F, Myers DE, DiBonaventura M. Impact of oral abrocitinib on signs, symptoms and quality of life among adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: an analysis of patient-reported outcomes. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2022 Mar;36(3):422-433. doi: 10.1111/jdv.17792. Epub 2021 Dec 4. Simpson EL, Silverberg JI, Nosbaum A, Winthrop KL, Guttman-Yassky E, Hoffmeister KM, Egeberg A, Valdez H, Zhang M, Farooqui SA, Romero W, Thorpe AJ, Rojo R, Johnson S. Integrated Safety Analysis of Abrocitinib for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis From the Phase II and Phase III Clinical Trial Program. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2021 Sep;22(5):693-707. doi: 10.1007/s40257-021-00618-3. Epub 2021 Aug 18. Erratum In: Am J Clin Dermatol. 2021 Nov;22(6):905. doi: 10.1007/s40257-021-00638-z. Silverberg JI, Thyssen JP, Simpson EL, Yosipovitch G, Stander S, Valdez H, Rojo R, Biswas P, Myers DE, Feeney C, DiBonaventura M. Impact of Oral Abrocitinib Monotherapy on Patient-Reported Symptoms and Quality of Life in Adolescents and Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Pooled Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2021 Jul;22(4):541-554. doi: 10.1007/s40257-021-00604-9. Epub 2021 May 5. Erratum In: Am J Clin Dermatol. 2021 Sep;22(5):739. doi: 10.1007/s40257-021-00634-3. Simpson EL, Sinclair R, Forman S, Wollenberg A, Aschoff R, Cork M, Bieber T, Thyssen JP, Yosipovitch G, Flohr C, Magnolo N, Maari C, Feeney C, Biswas P, Tatulych S, Valdez H, Rojo R. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (JADE MONO-1): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020 Jul 25;396(10246):255-266. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30732-7.
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
0
0
Pfizer CT.gov Call Center
Query!
Address
0
0
Pfizer
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
0
0
Query!
Address
0
0
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Data sharing statement
Will individual participant data (IPD) for this trial be available (including data dictionaries)?
Yes
Query!
What data in particular will be shared?
Pfizer will provide access to individual de-identified participant data and related study documents (e.g. protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), Clinical Study Report (CSR)) upon request from qualified researchers, and subject to certain criteria, conditions, and exceptions. Further details on Pfizer's data sharing criteria and process for requesting access can be found at: https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical_trials/trial_data_and_results/data_requests.
Query!
When will data be available (start and end dates)?
Query!
Available to whom?
Query!
Available for what types of analyses?
Query!
How or where can data be obtained?
IPD available at link: https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical_trials/trial_data_and_results/data_requests
Query!
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Type
Other Details
Attachment
Statistical analysis plan
https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/60/NCT03349060/SAP_000.pdf
Study protocol
https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/60/NCT03349060/Prot_001.pdf
Results publications and other study-related documents
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Results not provided in
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03349060