Study to Assess the Immunogenicity, Safety, and Efficacy of High Capacity Process Etanercept in Rheumatoid Arthritis Subjects

May 10, 2017 updated by: Pfizer

A Single-arm, Open-label Study To Assess The Immunogenicity, Safety, And Efficacy Of Etanercept Manufactured Using The High Capacity Process Administered To Subjects With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Open-label immunogenicity, safety and efficacy study of etanercept manufactured using the high capacity process. Descriptive results will be provided however a formal hypothesis will not be tested in this trial.

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.

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.
188

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 3

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

  • Bulgaria
      • Plovdiv, Bulgaria, 4000
        • MHAT Plovdiv
      • Sofia, Bulgaria, 1431
        • DCC "Aleksandrovska" EOOD
      • Sofia, Bulgaria, 1612
        • UMHAT "Sv. Ivan Rilski" EAD, Sofia
      • Stara Zagora, Bulgaria, 6000
        • Medical Center - "New rehabilitation center" EOOD
  • Croatia
      • Rijeka, Croatia, 51000
        • CHC Rijeka
      • Zagreb, Croatia, 10000
        • Medicinski Centar Kuna Peric
  • Germany
      • Berlin, Germany, 14059
        • Schlosspark-Klinik, Innere Medizin II, Rheumatologie
      • Hannover, Germany, 30625
        • Medizinische Hochschule Hannover
      • Vogelsang-Gommern, Germany, 39245
        • Immunologisches Zentrum Vogelsang-Gommern GmbH
    • Hessen
      • Frankfurt/Main, Hessen, Germany, 60528
        • Centrum für innovative Diagnostik und Therapie
    • Nordrhein-westfalen
      • Ratingen, Nordrhein-westfalen, Germany, 40882
        • Rheumaforschung - Studienambulanz Dr. Wassenberg
  • Greece
      • Thessaloniki, Greece, 56429
        • Rheumatology Unit
    • Achaia
      • Rion Patras, Achaia, Greece, 26500
        • Rheumatology department
    • Crete
      • Heraklion, Crete, Greece, 71110
        • University Hospital of Heraklion
  • Hungary
      • Budapest, Hungary, 1036
        • Qualiclinic Kft.
      • Kistarcsa, Hungary, 2143
        • Pest Megyei Flor Ferenc Korhaz
      • Nyiregyhaza, Hungary, 4400
        • Szabolcs-Szatmar-Bereg megyei
  • Poland
      • Krakow, Poland, 31-501
        • Krakowskie Centrum Medyczne sp. Z.O.O
      • Nadarzyn, Poland, 05-830
        • NZOZ Lecznica MAK-MED s.c.
      • Poznan, Poland, 61-397
        • Prywatna Praktyka Lekarska Prof. UM dr hab.med. Pawel Hrycaj
      • Warszawa, Poland, 02-691
        • Reumatika-Centrum Reumatologii
  • Serbia
    • Beograd
      • Belgrade, Beograd, Serbia, 11000
        • Institute of Rheumatology
  • Slovakia
      • Bratislava, Slovakia, 841 04
        • Reumatologicka ambulancia
      • Dunajska Streda, Slovakia, 929 01
        • AAGS, s.r.o.
      • Poprad, Slovakia, 058 01
        • Reumatologicka ambulancia, MUDr. Zuzana Cizmarikova, s.r.o.
      • Rimavska Sobota, Slovakia, 979 01
        • Reumex S.R.O.
      • Trnava, Slovakia, 917 01
        • REUMA-GLOBAL s.r.o.
      • Zilina, Slovakia, 010 01
        • Reumatologicka ambulancia
  • South Africa
    • Cape Town
      • Panorama, Cape Town, South Africa, 7500
        • Panorama Medical Centre
    • Johannesburg
      • Parktown, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2193
        • Wits Clinical Research CMJAH Clinical Trial Site
    • Kwazulu-natal
      • Durban/Berea, Kwazulu-natal, South Africa, 4001
        • St. Augustines Hospital

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

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Moderate to severe active disease with presence of at least 4 tender joints and 4 swollen joints.
  • Either the patient or a designee must be capable of administering the subcutaneous injection of study drug.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Prior treatment with etanercept.
  • Presence of active infection or active or untreated tuberculosis.

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: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group 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: ETN 50mg QW
Biological: etanercept
50mg subcutaneous, once weekly, 24 weeks

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 Positive Etanercept Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Status at Week 12
Time Frame: Week 12
Participants who developed anti-drug antibodies after treatment with Etanercept were evaluated. Percentage of participants with positive Etanercept anti-drug antibodies were summarized.
Week 12
Percentage of Participants With Positive Etanercept Anti-Drug Antibody Status at Week 24
Time Frame: Week 24
Participants who developed anti-drug antibodies after treatment with Etanercept were evaluated. Percentage of participants with positive Etanercept anti-drug antibodies were summarized.
Week 24
Percentage of Participants With Positive Etanercept Anti-Drug Antibody Status: Throughout Study Treatment
Time Frame: Baseline up to Week 24
Participants who developed anti-drug antibodies after treatment with Etanercept were evaluated. Percentage of participants with positive Etanercept anti-drug antibodies were summarized.
Baseline up to Week 24

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
Percentage of Participants With Positive Etanercept Neutralizing Anti-Drug Antibody Status: Throughout Study Treatment
Time Frame: Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 24
Percentage of participants with positive Etanercept neutralizing anti-drug antibodies were summarized.
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 24
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
Time Frame: Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. 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 were events between first dose of study drug and up to 28 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse events.
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
Number of Participants With Investigator-Identified Serious Infections
Time Frame: Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
Infection was considered as serious by investigator for any of the following outcomes: death; life-threatening; required initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity or congenital anomaly/birth defect.
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
Number of Participants With Injection Site Reactions
Time Frame: Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
Injection site reactions included injection site erythema, swelling, pain and warmth.
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
Number of Participants With Grade 3 and 4 Clinical Laboratory Abnormalities
Time Frame: Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
Laboratory abnormalities(national cancer institute toxicity criteria version 4.0),Grade 3:neutrophil (greater than or equal to[>=]0.5,less than[<]1.0 10^9/L),lymphocyte (<0.5 10^9/L),hemoglobin (Hb) (<80,>=65 gram per liter [g/L]),platelet(<50.0,>=25.0 10^9/L),white blood count(WBC) (<2.0, >=1.0 10^9/L);alkaline phosphatase (AP),aspartate aminotransferase(AST),alanine aminotransferase(ALT) (greater than[>]5.0*upper range [UR], <=20.0*UR unit per liter[U/L]);bilirubin(>1.5*UR, less than or equal to[<=]3.0*UR micromole per liter[mcmol/L]);creatinine(>3.0*UR, <=6.0*UR mcmol/L);albumin (<20.0 g/L),urea(>3.0*UR, <=4.0*UR g/L);potassium (K)-high,low (>6.0,<=7.0or<3.0,>=2.5 mcmol/L); sodium(Na)-high,low(>155, <=160 or <130, >=120 mcmol/L)and Grade 4: neutrophil(<0.5 10^9/L),Hb (<65 g/L);platelet (<25.0 10^9/L); WBC(<1.0 10^9/L);AP,AST,ALT(>20.0*UR U/L);bilirubin(>3.0*UR mcmol/L);creatinine (>6.0*UR mcmol/L);urea (>4.0*UR g/L);K-high,low (>7.0or<2.5 mcmol/L);Na-high, low (>160or<120 mcmol/L).
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 28 (Follow-up)
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response
Time Frame: Week 4, 12, 24
ACR20 responder: participants with 20 percent (%) improvement in tender and swollen 28-joint counts and 20% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 measures: participant global assessment of arthritis (PtGA), physician global assessment of arthritis (PGA), participant pain visual analogue scale (Pain-VAS), health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) and C-reactive protein. PtGA: participant assessed overall disease activity, score: 0 (no arthritis) to 10 (extreme arthritis), higher score=more arthritis. PGA: physician judged participant's overall disease activity, score: 0 (no arthritis) to 10 (extreme arthritis), higher score=more arthritis. Pain-VAS: participant assessed arthritis pain by 100 millimeter (mm) VAS, score: 0 mm (no pain) to 100 mm (extreme pain), higher score=more pain. HAQ-DI: functional disability evaluation, score: 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (extreme difficulty), higher score=more disability. Percentage of participants with ACR20 response were reported.
Week 4, 12, 24
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response
Time Frame: Week 4, 12, 24
ACR50 responder: participants with 50% improvement in tender and swollen 28-joint counts and 50% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 measures: participant global assessment of arthritis (PtGA), physician global assessment of arthritis (PGA), participant pain visual analogue scale (Pain-VAS), health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) and C-reactive protein. PtGA: participant assessed overall disease activity, score: 0 (no arthritis) to 10 (extreme arthritis), higher score=more arthritis. PGA: physician judged participant's overall disease activity, score: 0 (no arthritis) to 10 (extreme arthritis), higher score=more arthritis. Pain-VAS: participant assessed arthritis pain by 100 millimeter (mm) VAS, score: 0 mm (no pain) to 100 mm (extreme pain), higher score=more pain. HAQ-DI: functional disability evaluation, score: 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (extreme difficulty), higher score=more disability. Percentage of participants with ACR50 response were reported.
Week 4, 12, 24
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response
Time Frame: Week 4, 12, 24
ACR70 responder: participants with 70% improvement in tender and swollen 28-joint counts and 70% improvement in at least 3 of the 5 measures: participant global assessment of arthritis (PtGA), physician global assessment of arthritis (PGA), participant pain visual analogue scale (Pain-VAS), health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) and C-reactive protein. PtGA: participant assessed overall disease activity, score: 0 (no arthritis) to 10 (extreme arthritis), higher score=more arthritis. PGA: physician judged participant's overall disease activity, score: 0 (no arthritis) to 10 (extreme arthritis), higher score=more arthritis. Pain-VAS: participant assessed arthritis pain by 100 millimeter (mm) VAS, score: 0 mm (no pain) to 100 mm (extreme pain), higher score=more pain. HAQ-DI: functional disability evaluation, score: 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (extreme difficulty), higher score=more disability. Percentage of participants with ACR70 response were reported.
Week 4, 12, 24
Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Scale Based on 28 Joint Count Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [ESR]) at Week 4, 12 and 24
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24
DAS28: measure of disease activity in participants with rheumatoid arthritis. DAS28-4 (ESR) was calculated from number of swollen joints (SJC) and tender joints (TJC ) using the 28 joints count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (millimeter per hour [mm/hour]) and participant's general health visual analog scale assessment (scores: 0 mm [very well] to 100 mm [extremely bad], higher scores indicate worse health condition). Total DAS28-4 (ESR) score: 0 (none) to 10 (extreme disease activity), higher scores indicate more disease activity. DAS28-4 (ESR) less than (<) 2.6= remission, <3.2= low disease activity, greater than or equal to (>=) 3.2 to 5.1= moderate disease activity and >5.1= high disease activity.
Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24
Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Scale Based on 28 Joint Count C-Reactive Protein (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [CRP]) at Week 4, 12 and 24
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24
DAS28 is a measure of disease activity in participants with rheumatoid arthritis. DAS28-4 (CRP) was calculated from the number of swollen joints and tender joints using the 28 joints count, C-Reactive protein (milligram per liter [mg/L]) and participant's general health visual analog scale assessment (scores ranging 0 mm [very well] to 100 mm [extremely bad], higher scores indicate worse health condition). Total DAS28-4 (CRP) score range: 0 (none) to 10 (extreme disease activity), higher scores indicate more disease activity. DAS28-4 (CRP) less than (<) 2.6= remission, <3.2= low disease activity, greater than or equal to (>=) 3.2 to 5.1= moderate disease activity and >5.1= high disease activity.
Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24
Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at Week 4, 12 and 24
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24
HAQ-DI assesses the degree of difficulty a participant has experienced during the past week in 8 domains of daily living activities: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other activities. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0= no difficulty; 1= some difficulty; 2= much difficulty; 3= unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0 (least difficulty) and 3 (extreme difficulty), where higher scores indicate more difficulty while performing daily living activities.
Baseline, Week 4, 12, 24

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

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.
April 1, 2015

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.
May 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.
June 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).
February 13, 2015

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 26, 2015

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.
March 4, 2015

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.
May 15, 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.
May 10, 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.
March 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

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.
  • B1801359
  • 2013-004569-16 (EudraCT Number)

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