Fracture (FX) Improvement With Teriparatide: FiX-IT Study (FiX-IT)

November 6, 2017 updated by: Susan L. Greenspan
This open label comparison study examines the hypothesis that teriparatide given immediately following repair of an atypical subtrochanteric or diaphyseal femoral shaft fracture will enhance healing and improve bone mineral density compared to delayed treatment (after six months) with teriparatide or no treatment with teriparatide (patients who refuse therapy or for whom teriparatide is contraindicated). Patients with up-front teriparatide in addition will have greater quality of life measures and less pain compared to those with delayed or no therapy.

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

Up to 24 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who have been on bisphosphonate therapy for one year or more at any point prior to fracture and have sustained an atypical subtrochanteric or diaphyseal fracture will be enrolled. Subjects randomized to the two intervention arms will self-administer a daily SQ injection of the study medication for 12 months. The primary objective is to demonstrate greater radiologic evidence of healing at 10 weeks in patients on immediate teriparatide compared to those on delayed teriparatide who receive therapy six months after fracture. Secondary end points include (1) radiologic healing at 2, 6, 24, and 46 weeks; (2) increased bone density at 6 and 12 months as assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at the spine, contralateral hip, and femoral neck; (3) quality of life improvements at 10 weeks and 6 months as assessed by quality of life questionnaire and pain score; and (4) differences in biochemical markers of bone turnover in patient with upfront therapy compared to patients with delayed therapy and patients who refuse therapy or for whom teriparatide is contraindicated.

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.
Interventional

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.
13

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 4

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

  • United States
    • Pennsylvania
      • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, 15213
        • University of Pittsburgh, Osteoporosis Prevention & Treatment Center

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

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • postmenopausal women
  • with osteoporosis who have been on bisphosphonate therapy for one year or more (all bisphosphonates will be included such as alendronate, risdedronate, ibandronate, or zoledronic acid).
  • Patients will also be included if they are on glucocorticoids or other medications known to affect bone mineral metabolism as these are often found in patients with these types of fractures.
  • sustain an atypical subtrochanteric or diaphyseal femoral shaft fracture as defined by the the 2010 ASBMR task force. An atypical fracture must include all of the following: (1) a location in the femur distal to lesser trochanter; (2) no trauma or minimal trauma as a fall; (3) transverse or short oblique configuration; (4) noncomminuted; and (5) complete fracture extends through both cortices and may be associated with a medial spike; incomplete fractures involve only the lateral cortex. Patients who have an incomplete fracture can be included if they fall into the 2010 ASBMR task force definition.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • men
  • children
  • those who have had radiation therapy
  • Paget's disease
  • treatment with teriparatide for two year in the past
  • metastatic bone disease
  • active cancer
  • hypercalcemia
  • hyperparathyroidism
  • metabolic disease other than osteoporosis

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

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
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.
Experimental: Immediate teriparatide
Open label teriparatide given immediately following surgical repair of fracture
Drug: teriparatide
20 microgram once-daily subcutaneous injection
Other Names:
  • Forteo
Experimental: Delayed teriparatide
Open label teriparatide given six months following surgical repair of fracture
Drug: teriparatide
20 microgram once-daily subcutaneous injection
Other Names:
  • Forteo

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
Radiologic Evidence of Bone Healing
Time Frame: 6, 12 months of treatment
The radiologic indices of fracture healing included (1) cortical continuity on two of four cortices, (2) persistence of alignment, (3) decreased conspicuity of fracture line, and (4) increased callus formation. For each of these indices, healing was graded on a scale of 1 to 4 with 1 = no change (less than 25%), 2 = minimum healing (25-50%), 3 = moderate healing (50-75%), and 4 = complete healing (greater than 75%). A composite score was calculated by summing the subscale scores for the 4 indices. Composite score scale ranged from 4 to 16 with higher scores indicating more complete healing. The primary grading was performed by a radiologist with expertise in musculoskeletal radiology, then independently repeated by a second radiologist, both of whom were blinded to the study allocation.
6, 12 months of treatment
Radiologic Evidence of Healing
Time Frame: at 10 weeks for immediate teriparatide group
Number of participants with persistence of alignment as determined by a radiologist.
at 10 weeks for immediate teriparatide group

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
Radiologic Healing
Time Frame: at 2, 6, 24, and 48 weeks
at 2, 6, 24, and 48 weeks
Increased Bone Density
Time Frame: at 6 and 12 months
Percent change in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) as assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at the spine, contralateral hip, distal 1/3 radius, and femoral neck
at 6 and 12 months
Quality of Life Improvements
Time Frame: at 12 months
Assessed by quality of life questionnaire (SF-36). There are 8 subscales each ranging from 0-100 with higher scores indicating better quality of life.
at 12 months
Difference in Biochemical Markers of Bone Turnover
Time Frame: intervals over 12-18 months depending on treatment group
upfront therapy group compared to delayed therapy group and no therapy group
intervals over 12-18 months depending on treatment group

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.
Susan L. Greenspan

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Eli Lilly and Company
University of Pittsburgh

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Susan L. Greenspan, MD, University of Pittsburgh

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.
December 1, 2012

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.
September 1, 2016

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.
September 1, 2016

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).
October 9, 2012

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.
October 11, 2012

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.
October 12, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

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.
December 12, 2017

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.
November 6, 2017

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.
November 1, 2017

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.
  • PRO12040560 (FiX-IT)

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