An Efficacy and Safety of Guselkumab in Participants With Palmoplantar Pustulosis

January 31, 2025 updated by: Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K.

A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Guselkumab for the Treatment of Subjects With Palmoplantar Pustulosis

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of guselkumab for the treatment of participants with palmoplantar pustulosis.

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

This is a phase 3, randomized (study drug assigned by chance), double-blind (neither physician nor participant knows the name of the assigned drug), multicenter (when more than one hospital works on a medical research study) placebo-controlled (an inactive substance that is compared with a medication to test whether the medication has a real effect in a clinical study) study in participants with palmoplantar pustulosis. The study will consist of 3 phases: screening phase (up to 6 weeks), treatment period (week 0 - week 60) and observational period (up to week 84). Participants will be assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups (200 milligram [mg] guselkumab, 100 mg guselkumab or placebo group) using a stratified block randomization method in a 1:1:1 ratio at Week 0 and Group III (placebo) participants will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio to 1 of 2 treatment groups at Week 16. Participants will primarily be assessed for change from baseline in Palmo-Plantar Pustular Area and Severity Index (PPPASI) total score at Week 16. Safety will be monitored throughout the study.

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.
159

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

  • Japan
      • Asahikawa, Japan
      • Fukuoka, Japan
      • Fukushima, Japan
      • Hachioji, Japan
      • Hokkaido, Japan
      • Ichikawa, Japan
      • Ichinomiya, Japan
      • Kahoku-District, Japan
      • Kanazawa, Japan
      • Kobe, Japan
      • Kochi, Japan
      • Kofu, Japan
      • Kumamoto-City, Japan
      • Kyoto, Japan
      • Matsumoto, Japan
      • Morioka, Japan
      • Nagasaki-shi, Japan
      • Nagoya, Japan
      • Osaka, Japan
      • Osaka-Sayama, Japan
      • Sagamihara, Japan
      • Saku, Japan
      • Shimotsuke, Japan
      • Suita-shi, Japan
      • Takamatsu, Japan
      • Tokushima, Japan
      • Tokyo, Japan
      • Toon, Japan
      • Toyoake, Japan
      • Tsu, Japan
      • Tsukuba, Japan
      • Yokohama, Japan

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

20 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Has a diagnosis of palmoplantar pustulosis (with or without pustulotic arthro-osteitis, concurrent extra-palmoplantar lesions) for at least 24 weeks before screening
  • Has a >= 12 PPPASI total score at screening and at baseline
  • Has a moderate or more severe pustules/vesicle on the palms or soles (>= 2 PPPASI severity score) at screening and baseline
  • Has inadequate response to the treatment with topical steroid and/or topical vitamin D3 derivative preparations and/or the phototherapy and/or systemic etretinate prior to or at screening. Inadequate response is defined as a case judged by the investigator
  • Before the first administration of study drug, a woman must be either: Not of childbearing potential: premenarchal; postmenopausal or Of childbearing potential and practicing a highly effective method of birth control

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Has a diagnosis of plaque-type psoriasis
  • Has obvious improvement during screening (>= 5 PPPASI total score improvement during the screening)
  • Has a history or current signs or symptoms of severe, progressive, or uncontrolled renal, cardiac, vascular, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, endocrine, neurologic, hematologic, rheumatologic, psychiatric, or metabolic disturbances
  • Has unstable cardiovascular disease, defined as a recent clinical deterioration (eg, unstable angina, rapid atrial fibrillation) in the last 12 weeks or a cardiac hospitalization within the last 12 weeks before screening
  • Currently has a malignancy or has a history of malignancy within 5 years before screening (with the exception of a nonmelanoma skin cancer that has been adequately treated with no evidence of recurrence for at least 12 weeks before screening or cervical carcinoma in situ that has been treated with no evidence of recurrence for at least 12 weeks before screening)

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: Double

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: Group 1
Participants will receive guselkumab 200 milligram (mg) at Week 0, 4, 12 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60, and two syringes of placebo at Week 16 to maintain the blind.
Drug: Guselkumab
Participants will receive two or one syringe of guselkumab 100 mg subcutaneously at Week 0, 4, 12 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60 in group 1 or 2. Group 3a or 3b participants will receive two or one syringe of guselkumab 100 mg at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60.
Other Names:
  • CNTO 1959
Drug: Placebo
Participants in group 1 will receive placebo at Week 16. Participants in group 2 will receive placebo at Week 0, 4, 12, 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60. Participants in group 3 will receive placebo at Week 0, 4, 12, then at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60 for group 3b.
Experimental: Group 2
Participants will receive a syringe of guselkumab 100 mg and a syringe of placebo for guselkumab at Week 0, 4, 12 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60, two syringes of placebo at Week 16 to maintain the blind.
Drug: Guselkumab
Participants will receive two or one syringe of guselkumab 100 mg subcutaneously at Week 0, 4, 12 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60 in group 1 or 2. Group 3a or 3b participants will receive two or one syringe of guselkumab 100 mg at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60.
Other Names:
  • CNTO 1959
Drug: Placebo
Participants in group 1 will receive placebo at Week 16. Participants in group 2 will receive placebo at Week 0, 4, 12, 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60. Participants in group 3 will receive placebo at Week 0, 4, 12, then at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60 for group 3b.
Experimental: Group 3
Participants will receive two syringes of placebo at Week 0, 4 and 12. At Week 16, placebo participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to guselkumab mg arm (Group 3a) or 100 mg arm (Group 3b). Group 3a participants will receive guselkumab 200 mg at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60. Group 3b participants will receive guselkumab 100 mg and a syringe of placebo at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60.
Drug: Guselkumab
Participants will receive two or one syringe of guselkumab 100 mg subcutaneously at Week 0, 4, 12 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60 in group 1 or 2. Group 3a or 3b participants will receive two or one syringe of guselkumab 100 mg at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60.
Other Names:
  • CNTO 1959
Drug: Placebo
Participants in group 1 will receive placebo at Week 16. Participants in group 2 will receive placebo at Week 0, 4, 12, 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60. Participants in group 3 will receive placebo at Week 0, 4, 12, then at Week 16, 20 and every 8 weeks thereafter through Week 60 for group 3b.

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
Change From Baseline in Palmoplantar Pustulosis Area and Severity Index (PPPASI) Total Score at Week 16
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 16
PPPASI assesses severity of palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) lesions and response to therapy. In PPPASI, palms, soles are divided into 4 regions: right palm(RP), left palm(LP), right sole(RS), left sole(LS), that account for 20 percent (%), 20%,30%,30%, respectively, of total surface area(TSA) of palms, soles. Each area is assessed separately for erythema(E), pustules/vesicles (P), desquamation/scales (D), each rated on a scale (0-4). PPPASI produces score range of 0-72 using formula, PPPASI=(E+P+D)Area*0.2(RP)+(E+P+D)Area*0.2 (LP)+(E+P+D)Area*0.3(RS)+(E+P+D)Area*0.3(LS). Higher a score more the severe disease. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met treatment failure(TF) criterion(lack of efficacy/AE of worsening of PPP/who started a protocol-prohibited medication/therapy that could improve PPP), their baseline value carried forward to post baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline and Week 16

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 Palmoplantar Severity Index (PPSI) Total Score at Week 16
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 16
PPSI assesses the severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy with a score ranging from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more severe disease. In the PPSI system, the more severely affected location (palms or soles) were to be identified as the evaluation sites at screening that to be assessed at all subsequent visits. Evaluation sites were assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles and desquamation/scale, for most severe skin lesion rated on a scale of 0 to 4. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline and Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPPASI-50 Response at Week 16
Time Frame: Week 16
PPPASI assesses severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy. In PPPASI system, palms and soles are divided into 4 regions: right palm, left palm, right sole, and left sole, that account for 20%, 20%, 30%, and 30%, respectively, of TSA of palms and soles. Each of these areas is assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles, and desquamation/scales, each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. PPPASI produces a score range from 0 to 72. Higher score indicates more severe disease. PPPASI-50 response represents participants who achieved at least a 50% improvement from baseline in the PPPASI score. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 16
Change From Baseline in PPPASI Total Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPPASI assesses severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy. In PPPASI system, palms and soles are divided into 4 regions: right palm, left palm, right sole, and left sole, which account for 20%, 20%, 30%, and 30%, respectively, of TSA of palms and soles. Each of these areas is assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles, and desquamation/scales, each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. PPPASI produces a score range from 0 to 72. Higher score indicates more severe disease. PPPASI-50 response represents participants who achieved at least a 50% improvement from baseline in the PPPASI score. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at Week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Change From Baseline in PPSI Total Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPSI assesses the severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy with a score ranging from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more severe disease. In the PPSI system, the more severely affected location (palms or soles) were to be identified as the evaluation sites at screening that to be assessed at all subsequent visits. Evaluation sites were assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles and desquamation/scale, for most severe skin lesion rated on a scale of 0 to 4. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPPASI-50 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPPASI assesses severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy. In PPPASI system, palms and soles are divided into 4 regions: right palm, left palm, right sole, and left sole, that account for 20%, 20%, 30%, and 30%, respectively, of TSA of palms and soles. Each of these areas is assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles, and desquamation/scales, each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. PPPASI produces a score range from 0 to 72. Higher score indicates more severe disease. PPPASI-50 response represents participants who achieved at least a 50% improvement from baseline in the PPPASI score. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at Week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPPASI-75 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPPASI assesses severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy. In PPPASI system, palms and soles are divided into 4 regions: right palm, left palm, right sole, and left sole, that account for 20%, 20%, 30%, and 30%, respectively, of TSA of palms and soles. Each of these areas is assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles, and desquamation/scales, each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. PPPASI produces a score range from 0 to 72. Higher score indicates more severe disease. PPPASI-75 response represents participants who achieved at least a 75% improvement from baseline in the PPPASI score. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at Week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as nonresponders at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPPASI-90 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPPASI assesses severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy. In PPPASI system, palms and soles are divided into 4 regions: right palm, left palm, right sole, and left sole, that account for 20%, 20%, 30%, and 30%, respectively, of TSA of palms and soles. Each of these areas is assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles, and desquamation/scales, each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. PPPASI produces a score range from 0 to 72. Higher score indicates more severe disease. PPPASI-90 response represents participants who achieved at least a 90% improvement from baseline in the PPPASI score. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at Week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPPASI-100 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPPASI assesses severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy. In PPPASI system, palms and soles are divided into 4 regions: right palm, left palm, right sole, and left sole, that account for 20%, 20%, 30%, and 30%, respectively, of TSA of palms and soles. Each of these areas is assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles, and desquamation/scales, each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. PPPASI produces a score range from 0 to 72. Higher score indicates more severe disease. PPPASI-100 response represents participants who achieved at least a 100% improvement from baseline in the PPPASI score. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at Week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPSI-50 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPSI assesses the severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy with a score ranging from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more severe disease. In the PPSI system, the more severely affected location (palms or soles) were to be identified as the evaluation sites at screening that to be assessed at all subsequent visits. Evaluation sites were assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles and desquamation/scale, for most severe skin lesion rated on a scale of 0 to 4. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPSI-75 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPSI assesses the severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy with a score ranging from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more severe disease. In the PPSI system, the more severely affected location (palms or soles) were to be identified as the evaluation sites at screening that to be assessed at all subsequent visits. Evaluation sites were assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles and desquamation/scale, for most severe skin lesion rated on a scale of 0 to 4. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPSI-90 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
PPSI assesses the severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy with a score ranging from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more severe disease. In the PPSI system, the more severely affected location (palms or soles) were to be identified as the evaluation sites at screening that to be assessed at all subsequent visits. Evaluation sites were assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles and desquamation/scale, for most severe skin lesion rated on a scale of 0 to 4. PPSI 90 response represents participants who achieved at least a 90% improvement from baseline in the PPSI score. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at Week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PPSI-100 Response
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 72 and Week 84
PPSI assesses the severity of PPP lesions and their response to therapy with a score ranging from 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more severe disease. In the PPSI system, the more severely affected location (palms or soles) were to be identified as the evaluation sites at screening that to be assessed at all subsequent visits. Evaluation sites were assessed separately for erythema, pustules/vesicles and desquamation/scale, for most severe skin lesion rated on a scale of 0 to 4. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants in Each Categories of Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) Score
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
The PGA documents the Physician's Global Assessment of the PPP overall skin lesions status. The participant's PPP is assessed as clear (0), almost clear (1), mild (2), moderate (3), severe (4), or very severe (5). Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders at week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PGA Score of Cleared (0) or Almost Cleared (1)
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
The PGA documents the Physician's Global Assessment of the participant's palmoplantar overall skin lesions status. The participant's PPP is assessed as clear (0), almost clear (1), mild (2), moderate (3), severe (4), or very severe (5). Participants who achieved a PGA score of clear (0) or almost clear (1) were reported. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders through Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PGA Score of Cleared (0) or Almost Cleared (1) and Had at Least a 2-Grade Improvement
Time Frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
The PGA documents the Physician's Global Assessment of the participant's palmoplantar overall skin lesions status. The participant's PPP is assessed as clear (0), almost clear (1), mild (2), moderate (3), severe (4), or very severe (5). Participants who achieved a PGA score of clear (0) or almost clear (1) and had at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline were reported. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion were considered as non-responders through Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 60, 72 and Week 84
Change From Baseline in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84
The DLQI is a dermatology-specific quality of life (QOL) instrument designed to assess the impact of the disease on a participant's QOL. It is a 10-item participant-reported outcome questionnaire that, in addition to evaluating overall QOL, can be used to assess 6 different aspects that may affect QOL: symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure, work or school performance, personal relationships, and treatment. The DLQI produces a numeric score that can range from 0 to 30. Higher score indicates more severe disease. Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at Week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84
Change From Baseline in the 36-Item Short-Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84
SF-36 consists of 8 individual domains, which are weighted sums of questions in their section. 8 domains are: vitality(VT), physical functioning(PF), bodily pain(BP), general health(GH), Role-Physical(RP), Role-Emotional(RE), social functioning(SF) and mental health(MH). Each of these 8 scales (domains) is scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better health. Based on scale scores, summary PCS is derived. Scales contributing most to the scoring of the SF-36 PCS include PF,RP,BP and GH. Other domains not noted contribute to scoring but to a lesser degree. Scoring is derived based on an algorithm as presented in Japanese edition manual. Summary PCS score is also scaled from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better health. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to post-baseline attending visits before and at week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84
Change From Baseline in the 36-Item Short-Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84
SF-36 consists of 8 individual domains, which are weighted sums of questions in their section. 8 domains are: vitality(VT), physical functioning(PF), bodily pain(BP), general health(GH), Role-Physical(RP), Role-Emotional(RE), social functioning(SF) and mental health(MH). Each of these 8 scales (domains) is scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better health. Based on scale scores, summary PCS is derived. Scales contributing most to the scoring of the SF-36 PCS include PF,RP,BP and GH. Other domains not noted contribute to scoring but to a lesser degree. Scoring is derived based on an algorithm as presented in Japanese edition manual. Summary PCS score is also scaled from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better health. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion, their baseline value carried forward to post-baseline attending visits before and at week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84
Change From Baseline in the EuroQOL-5 Dimensions Questionnaire Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-5D VAS) Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84
EQ-5D is designed for self-completion by participants and consists of EQ-5D descriptive system and the EQ visual analog scale (EQ VAS). The EQ-5D descriptive system comprises of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and unable. The EQ VAS records the respondent's self-rated health on a vertical, VAS where the endpoints are labeled 'Best imaginable health state' (score of 100) and 'Worst imaginable health state' (score of 0). Participants were analyzed according to the treatment at week 0 or 16. Participants who discontinue study agent as they met a TF criterion their baseline value carried forward to the post-baseline attending visits before and at week 16 and after TF were applied, remaining missing data were handled with LOCF till Week 60.
Baseline, Week 16, 32, 52, 72 and Week 84

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.
Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K.

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.
  • Study Director: Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K. Clinical Trial, Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K.

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 (Actual)

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 15, 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.
March 28, 2017

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.
July 17, 2018

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).
December 14, 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.
December 23, 2015

First Posted (Estimated)

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.
December 29, 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.
March 25, 2025

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 31, 2025

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, 2025

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.
  • CR108046
  • CNTO1959PPP3001 (Other Identifier: Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K.)

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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