Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Etanercept in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis Treated by Rheumatologists

January 10, 2014 updated by: Pfizer

Prospective Post Marketing Surveillance to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Etanercept Under Usual Care Settings in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Treated by Rheumatologists

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of etanercept under usual care settings in patients with PsA treated by rheumatologists.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Non-interventional study: subjects to be selected according to the usual clinical practice of their physician

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
1308

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Germany
      • Toerwang-Samerberg, Germany, 83122
        • Pfizer Investigational Site

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Only patients for whom the decision has already been made to initiate treatment with Enbrel® can be enrolled in this observational trial. These patients must have a proven diagnosis of Psoriatic Arthritis

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Clinical diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Sepsis or risk for sepsis,
  • Acute infection,
  • Hypersensitivity against Etanercept

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis
Drug: Etanercept
The patients will be treated in accordance with the requirements of the labelling of Enbrel® in Germany. The dosage and duration of therapy is to be determined by the physician to meet the patients' individual needs for treatment.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Percentage of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
Time Frame: Baseline up to Week 52
An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and Week 52 (end of the observation period) that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included SAEs as well as non-serious AEs which occurred during the trial.
Baseline up to Week 52

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Psoriasis at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Baseline, Week 52
Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on 28 Joints Count (DAS 28) at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
DAS28 calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joints count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and patient's global assessment (PGA) of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment with transformed scores ranging 0 to 100 mm; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 total score range: 0-10, where DAS28 less than or equal to (=<) 3.2 = low disease activity, DAS28 >3.2 to 5.1 = moderate disease activity and >5.1 = high disease activity.
Baseline, Week 52
Change From Baseline in Ritchie Index at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Ritchie index: the numerical measurement of joint tenderness (28 joints) in participants with arthritis. The number of quantitative evaluations of the pain experienced by the participants when the joints were subjected to firm pressure when exerted over the articular margin or in some instances by passive movement of the joint. Participant's reaction to pressure exerted by the physician were documented on 4-point scale, 0=not tender, 1=tender, 2=tender and caused wince, 3=reflexive effort to withdraw. Ritchie index was calculated as the total of the individual grades for all joints; ranged from 0 to 84, where higher score indicated higher tenderness.
Baseline, Week 52
Change From Baseline in Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Physician global assessment of disease activity was measured on a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) visual analog scale (VAS), with 0 mm = no disease activity to 100 mm = most possible disease activity.
Baseline, Week 52
Number of Participants With Nail Involvement
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 12, 52
Number of participants with psoriatic arthritis affecting the nails are reported.
Baseline, Week 12, 52
Change From Baseline in C-reactive Protein (CRP) at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.
Baseline, Week 52
Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Itching at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Participants rated the severity of their psoriasis itching on a 0 (none) to 100 (most possible) scale.
Baseline, Week 52
Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Pain at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Participants rated the severity of their psoriatic arthritis-related pain on a 0 (none) to 100 (most possible) scale.
Baseline, Week 52
Change From Baseline in 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
SF-12 questionnaire was used to determine participants' quality of life (QoL). It comprised 12 items which covered 8 concepts: physical functionality, role impairment due to physical problems, physical pain, perception of general health, vitality, social functionality, role impairment due to emotional problems, and psychological wellbeing. Results were presented in the form of 2 meta-scores, the physical component and the mental component, each ranged from 0 to 100. Higher scores=better QoL, positive changes from baseline=improvement in QoL.
Baseline, Week 52

Other Outcome Measures

Other Outcome Measures

For clinical trials, a planned measurement described in the protocol that is used to determine the effect of an intervention/treatment on participants. For observational studies, a measurement or observation that is used to describe patterns of diseases or traits, or associations with exposures, risk factors, or treatment. Types of outcome measures include primary outcome measure and secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Measured using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0 mm = very good to 100 mm = very bad.
Baseline, Week 52

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Pfizer

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Helpful Links

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
January 1, 2006

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
February 1, 2013

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
February 1, 2013

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 15, 2006

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 15, 2006

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
February 17, 2006

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
February 26, 2014

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 10, 2014

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
January 1, 2014

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 0881A6-102064
  • B1801127

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings