A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of Subcutaneously Administered Guselkumab for the Treatment of Chronic Plaque Psoriasis in Pediatric Participants (PROTOSTAR)

June 4, 2026 updated by: Janssen Research & Development, LLC

A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Placebo- and Active Comparator-Controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of Subcutaneously Administered Guselkumab for the Treatment of Chronic Plaque Psoriasis in Pediatric Subjects (>=6 To <18 Years of Age)

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of guselkumab in pediatric participants aged greater than or equal to 6 through less than 18 years with chronic plaque psoriasis.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Active, not recruiting

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.
120

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 Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Locations

  • Australia
      • Box Hill, Australia, 3128
        • Eastern Health Research
      • St Leonards, Australia, 2065
        • Royal North Shore Hospital
      • Woolloongabba, Australia, 4102
        • Veracity Clinical Research
  • Belgium
      • Brussels, Belgium, 1200
        • Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc
      • Ghent, Belgium, 9000
        • Universitair Ziekenhuis Gent
      • Liège, Belgium, 4000
        • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liege Domaine Universitaire du Sart Tilman
  • Canada
    • Alberta
      • Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2G 1B1
        • Kirk Barber Reseach Inc.
      • Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2J 7E1
        • Dermatology Research Institute Inc
    • British Columbia
      • Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V5Z 4E8
        • Skin Care Centre
  • Germany
      • Bonn, Germany, 53127
        • Universitatsklinikum Bonn
      • Dresden, Germany, 01307
        • Universitatsklinikum Carl Gustav Carcus Dresden
      • Frankfurt, Germany, 60590
        • Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt
      • Kiel, Germany, 24105
        • Universitatsklinikum Schleswig Holstein Kiel
      • Langenau, Germany, 89129
        • Praxis Dr. med. Beate Schwarz - Germany
      • Selters, Germany, 56242
        • Company for Medical Study & Service Selters
      • Stuttgart, Germany, 70178
        • Hautarztpraxis Dr. Leitz & Kollegen
  • Hungary
      • Budapest, Hungary, 1036
        • Obudai Egeszsegugyi Centrum Kft
      • Debrecen, Hungary, 4032
        • Debreceni Egyetem
      • Miskolc, Hungary, 3526
        • Borsod Abauj Zemplen Varmegyei Kozponti Korhaz es Egyetemi Oktato Korhaz
      • Szeged, Hungary, 6720
        • Szegedi Tudomanyegyetem
  • Italy
      • Ancona, Italy, 60026
        • Ospedali Riuniti di Ancona
      • Bologna, Italy, 40138
        • Azienda Ospedaliera Policlinico S. Orsola-Malpighi
      • Cagliari, Italy, 09124
        • AOU di Cagliari
      • Padova, Italy, 35128
        • Azienda Ospedaliera Di Padova
      • Reggio Emilia, Italy, 42123
        • Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova - IRCCS
  • Netherlands
      • Nijmegen, Netherlands, 6525 GA
        • Radboud University Medical Center
  • Poland
      • Lodz, Poland, 90-265
        • Dermed Centrum Medyczne Sp z o o
      • Warsaw, Poland, 03-924
        • Szpital Dzieciecy im. prof. dr. med. Jana Bogdanowicza w Warszawie
      • Wroclaw, Poland, 50 556
        • Uniwersytecki Szpital Kliniczny Im Jana Mikulicza Radeckiego We Wroclawiu
  • United States
    • California
      • Palo Alto, California, United States, 94306
        • Stanford University
      • San Diego, California, United States, 92123
        • University of California, San Diego
    • Georgia
      • Macon, Georgia, United States, 31217
        • Dermatologic Surgery Specialists
    • Illinois
      • Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60611
        • Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Ann & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital
      • Rolling Meadows, Illinois, United States, 60008
        • Arlington Dermatology
    • New Jersey
      • East Windsor, New Jersey, United States, 08520-2505
        • Windsor Dermatology
    • New York
      • New York, New York, United States, 10003
        • Mt. Sinai School of Medicine
    • Ohio
      • Dayton, Ohio, United States, 45324
        • Wright State Physicians Health Center
    • Texas
      • Arlington, Texas, United States, 76011-3800
        • Arlington Center for Dermatology
      • Austin, Texas, United States, 78723
        • Dell Children's Medical Center of Central Texas

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

6 years to 17 years (Child)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Have a diagnosis of chronic plaque-type psoriasis for at least 6 months (with or without psoriatic arthritis [PsA]), prior to first administration of study intervention, defined as having at screening and baseline, Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) greater than or equal to (>=) 3, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) >=12, >=10% body surface area (BSA) involvement and at least one of the following: very thick lesions, clinically relevant facial, genital, or hand/ foot involvement, PASI>=20, >20% BSA involvement, or IGA=4
  • Be a candidate for phototherapy or systemic treatment of plaque psoriasis (either naive or history of previous treatment)
  • Have plaque psoriasis considered by the investigator as inadequately controlled with phototherapy and/or topical therapy after an adequate dose and duration of therapy
  • Be considered, in the opinion of the investigator, a suitable candidate for etanercept therapy, according to their country's approved Enbrel product labeling
  • Be otherwise healthy on the basis of physical examination, medical history, and vital signs performed at screening. Any abnormalities, must be consistent with the underlying illness in the study population and this determination must be recorded in the participant's source documents and initialed by the investigator
  • Must have acceptable evidence of immunity to varicella and measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), which includes any one of the following: documentation of age-appropriate vaccination that includes both doses of each vaccine (unless local guidelines specify otherwise) or documentation of past infection by a healthcare provider or in the absence of previous 2 criteria, participants must have positive protective antibody titers to these infection prior to the first administration of study intervention. For participants who have not completed the recommended vaccination schedule for varicella and MMR, and the subsequent vaccination falls within the next 4 years, an accelerated vaccination schedule must be completed prior to study enrollment if available and required or strongly recommended for the location. If varicella or MMR vaccines are utilized, it is necessary for 2 weeks to elapse between the vaccination and receipt of study intervention

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Currently has nonplaque forms of psoriasis (example, erythrodermic, guttate, or pustular)
  • Has current drug-induced psoriasis (example, a new onset of psoriasis or an exacerbation of psoriasis from beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, or lithium)
  • Has previously received guselkumab or etanercept
  • Has a history of chronic or recurrent infectious disease, including but not limited to chronic renal infection, chronic chest infection (example, bronchiectasis), recurrent urinary tract infection (recurrent pyelonephritis or chronic non-remitting cystitis), fungal infection (mucocutaneous candidiasis), or open, draining, or infected skin wounds or ulcers
  • Has a known history of lymphoproliferative disease, including lymphoma; a history of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS); or signs and symptoms suggestive of possible lymphoproliferative disease, such as lymphadenopathy or splenomegaly

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: Quadruple

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: Part 1 Group 1: Guselkumab
Participants in Part 1a (age greater than or equal to (>=) 12 - less than (<) 18 years) will receive a weight-based dose of guselkumab subcutaneously (SC) at Weeks 0, 4, and 12. Participants who are PASI 90 responders at Week 16 will not receive any additional doses of guselkumab until they lose >=50% of their Week 16 PASI response, then they receive 1 dose guselkumab, followed by a dose 4 weeks later, and every 8 weeks (q8w) thereafter through Week 52. Participants who are PASI 90 non-responders at Week 16 will receive a placebo injection at Week 16 and continue to receive guselkumab q8w from Week 20 through Week 52. Participants who are eligible and willing to continue guselkumab may enter the Long Term Extension (LTE) Phase of the study. Part 1b (age >= 6 - <12 years) will follow the same dosing and commence after Part 1a data review.
Drug: Guselkumab
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of guselkumab subcutaneously.
Other Names:
  • CNTO1959
Drug: Placebo for guselkumab
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of placebo for guselkumab subcutaneously.
Placebo Comparator: Part 1 Group 2: Placebo for Guselkumab
Participants in Part 1a (age >= 12 - <18 years) will receive placebo for guselkumab administered SC at Weeks 0, 4, and 12. Participants who are PASI 90 responders at Week 16 will not receive any additional doses of study intervention until they lose >=50% of their Week 16 PASI response, at which time they will receive a weight-based guselkumab SC dose, followed by a dose 4 weeks later, and q8w thereafter through Week 52. Participants who are PASI 90 non-responders at Week 16 will receive a weight-based guselkumab dose at Weeks 16 and 20, followed by q8w dosing thereafter through Week 52. Participants who are eligible and willing to continue guselkumab treatment, may enter the LTE phase of the study. Part 1b (age >= 6 - <12 years) will follow the same dosing and commence after Part 1a data review.
Drug: Guselkumab
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of guselkumab subcutaneously.
Other Names:
  • CNTO1959
Drug: Placebo for guselkumab
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of placebo for guselkumab subcutaneously.
Active Comparator: Part 1 Group 3: Etanercept
Participants in Part 1a (age >= 12 - <18 years) will receive weight-based etanercept dose up to 50 milligram SC weekly through Week 15. Participants who elect to continue in the study will receive a weight-based guselkumab dose at Weeks 20 and 24, followed by q8w dosing thereafter through Week 48. Participants who are eligible and willing to continue guselkumab treatment, may enter the LTE phase of the study. Part 1b (age >= 6 - <12 years) will follow the same dosing and commence after Part 1a data review.
Drug: Guselkumab
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of guselkumab subcutaneously.
Other Names:
  • CNTO1959
Drug: Etanercept
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of etanercept (up to 50 mg) subcutaneously.
Other Names:
  • Enbrel
Experimental: Part 2: Guselkumab
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of open-label guselkumab SC at Weeks 0, 4 and q8w thereafter through Week 52. Participants who are eligible and willing to continue guselkumab treatment, may enter the LTE of the study and continue to receive guselkumab at Week 52 and q8w thereafter.
Drug: Guselkumab
Participants will receive a weight-based dose of guselkumab subcutaneously.
Other Names:
  • CNTO1959

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
Part 1: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of Cleared (0) or Minimal (1) at Week 16
Time Frame: At Week 16
The IGA assesses participant's plaque psoriasis. Lesions were graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 point scale. Induration: 0 = no evidence of plaque elevation, 1 = minimal plaque elevation, = 0.25 mm; 2 = mild plaque elevation, = 0.5 mm; 3 = moderate plaque elevation, = 0.75 mm; 4 = severe plaque elevation, >1 mm; Erythema: 0 = no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation may be present, 1 = faint erythema, 2 = light red coloration, 3 = moderate red coloration, 4 = bright red coloration; Scaling: 0 = no evidence of scaling, 1 = minimal; occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion, 2 = mild; fine scale dominates, 3 = moderate; coarse scale predominates, 4 = severe; thick, scale predominates. Final IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores assessed on a 5 point scale: cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4). A higher score indicated more severe disease.
At Week 16
Part 1: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 Response at Week 16
Time Frame: At Week 16
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percent [%] to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe). The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no visible skin involvement) to 72 (maximal skin involvement of the whole body). A higher score indicated more severe disease. A PASI 75 response represented participants who achieved at least a 75 % improvement from baseline in the PASI score.
At 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
Part 1: Percentage of Participants Who Achieve PASI 90 Response at Week 16
Time Frame: At Week 16
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 % to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe). The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no visible skin involvement) to 72 (maximal skin involvement of the whole body). A higher score indicated more severe disease. A PASI 90 response represented participants who achieved at least a 90 % improvement from baseline in the PASI score.
At Week 16
Part 1: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an IGA Score of Cleared (0) at Week 16
Time Frame: At Week 16
The IGA assesses participant's plaque psoriasis. Lesions were graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 point scale. Induration: 0 = no evidence of plaque elevation, 1 = minimal plaque elevation, = 0.25 mm; 2 = mild plaque elevation, = 0.5 mm; 3 = moderate plaque elevation, = 0.75 mm; 4 = severe plaque elevation, >1 mm; Erythema: 0 = no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation may be present, 1 = faint erythema, 2 = light red coloration, 3 = moderate red coloration, 4 = bright red coloration; Scaling: 0 = no evidence of scaling, 1 = minimal; occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion, 2 = mild; fine scale dominates, 3 = moderate; coarse scale predominates, 4 = severe; thick, scale predominates. Final IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores assessed on a 5 point scale: cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4). A higher score indicated more severe disease.
At Week 16
Part 1: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI 100 Response at Week 16
Time Frame: At Week 16
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percent [%] to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which were each rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe). The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no visible skin involvement) to 72 (maximal skin involvement of the whole body). A higher score indicated more severe disease. A PASI 100 response represented participants who achieved a 100 % improvement from baseline in the PASI score.
At Week 16
Part 1: Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) Score at Week 16
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 16
CDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on children's quality of life. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. CDLQI total score was the sum of individual scores of questions 1-10 and ranged from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of children. Change from baseline is defined as post baseline score minus baseline score.
Baseline and Week 16
Part 1: Percentage of Retreated Participants Who Achieved a PASI 90 Response Over Time After Retreatment
Time Frame: At 4 and 8 weeks post retreatment (retreatment period ranged from Week 16 to Week 52)
PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In PASI system, body was divided into 4 regions: head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for percentage of area involved, which translates to score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 % to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe). PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no visible skin involvement) to 72 (maximal skin involvement of the whole body). A higher score indicated more severe disease. A PASI 90 response represented participants who achieved at least a 90 % improvement from baseline in PASI score.
At 4 and 8 weeks post retreatment (retreatment period ranged from Week 16 to Week 52)
Part 1: Percentage of Retreated Participants Who Achieved PASI Responses (PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100) Over Time After Retreatment
Time Frame: At 4 and 8 weeks post retreatment (retreatment period ranged from Week 16 to Week 52)
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90%-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A higher score indicated more severe disease. PASI 50, 75, 90 and 100 response represented at least 50, 75, 90 and 100% improvement from baseline respectively, in the PASI score.
At 4 and 8 weeks post retreatment (retreatment period ranged from Week 16 to Week 52)
Part 1: Percentage of Retreated Participants Who Achieved IGA Responses (IGA of Cleared [0], Minimal [1], or Mild [2], IGA of Cleared [0] or Minimal [1], and IGA of Cleared [0]) Over Time After Retreatment
Time Frame: At 4 and 8 weeks post retreatment (retreatment period ranged from Week 16 to Week 52)
The IGA assesses participant's plaque psoriasis. Lesions were graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 points scale. Induration: 0 = no evidence of plaque elevation, 1 = minimal plaque elevation, = 0.25 mm; 2 = mild plaque elevation, = 0.5 mm; 3 = moderate plaque elevation, = 0.75 mm; 4 = severe plaque elevation, >1 mm; Erythema: 0 = no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation may be present, 1 = faint erythema, 2 = light red coloration, 3 = moderate red coloration, 4 = bright red coloration; Scaling: 0 = no evidence of scaling, 1 = minimal; occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion, 2 = mild; fine scale dominates, 3 = moderate; coarse scale predominates, 4 = severe; thick, scale predominates. Final IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores assessed on a 5 points scale: cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4). A higher score indicated more severe disease.
At 4 and 8 weeks post retreatment (retreatment period ranged from Week 16 to Week 52)
Part 1: Cumulative Rate of Loss of at Least 50% of Week 16 PASI Improvement Through Week 52 Among Guselkumab PASI 90 Responders at Week 16
Time Frame: Weeks 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Cumulative rate of loss of at least 50% of PASI improvement was defined as percentage of participants with a loss of >=50% of Week 16 PASI improvement after treatment is withdrawn. The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In PASI system, body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 % to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe). The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no visible skin involvement) to 72 (maximal skin involvement of the whole body). A higher score indicated more severe disease.
Weeks 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Part 1: Cumulative Maintenance Rate of PASI 90 Response Through Week 52 Among Guselkumab PASI 90 Responders at Week 16
Time Frame: Week 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Cumulative maintenance rate was defined as percentage of participants who maintained their PASI 90 response through Week 52 among guselkumab PASI 90 responders at Week 16. The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In PASI system, body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe). The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no visible skin involvement) to 72 (maximal skin involvement of the whole body). A higher score indicated more severe disease. A PASI 90 response represented participants who achieved at least a 90% improvement from baseline in PASI score.
Week 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52
Part 1: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50 Response at Week 16
Time Frame: At Week 16
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In PASI system, body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 % to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 4 (severe). The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no visible skin involvement) to 72 (maximal skin involvement of the whole body). A higher score indicated more severe disease. A PASI 50 response represented at least a 50% improvement from baseline in the PASI score.
At Week 16
Part 1: Percent Improvement From Baseline in PASI Through Week 16
Time Frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16
The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A higher score indicated more severe disease.
Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16
Part 2: Percent Improvement From Baseline in PASI Through Week 52
Time Frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which were each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A higher score indicated more severe disease.
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
Part 1: Percentage of Participants With PASI Responses (PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100) Through Week 16
Time Frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which were each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A higher score indicated more severe disease. PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100 responses represented at least 50%, 75%, 90%, and 100% improvement from baseline respectively, in the PASI score.
Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16
Part 2: Percentage of Participants With PASI Responses (PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100) Through Week 52
Time Frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
The PASI was a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body was divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas was assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90% to 100% involvement), and for erythema, induration, and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produced a numeric score that can range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A higher score indicated more severe disease. PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100 responses represented at least 50%, 75%, 90%, and 100% improvement from baseline respectively, in the PASI score.
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
Part 1: Percentage of Participants With IGA of Cleared (0), Cleared (0) or Minimal (1), Mild or Better (<=2) Through Week 16
Time Frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16
The IGA assesses participant's plaque psoriasis. Lesions were graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 points scale. Induration: 0 = no evidence of plaque elevation, 1 = minimal plaque elevation, = 0.25 mm; 2 = mild plaque elevation, = 0.5 mm; 3 = moderate plaque elevation, = 0.75 mm; 4 = severe plaque elevation, >1 mm; Erythema: 0 = no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation may be present, 1 = faint erythema, 2 = light red coloration, 3 = moderate red coloration, 4 = bright red coloration; Scaling: 0 = no evidence of scaling, 1 = minimal; occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion, 2 = mild; fine scale dominates, 3 = moderate; coarse scale predominates, 4 = severe; thick, scale predominates. Final IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores assessed on a 5 points scale: cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4). A higher score indicated more severe disease.
Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16
Part 2: Percentage of Participants With IGA of Cleared (0), Cleared (0) or Minimal (1), Mild or Better (<=2) Through Week 52
Time Frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
The IGA assesses participant's plaque psoriasis. Lesions were graded for induration, erythema and scaling, each using a 5 points scale. Induration: 0 = no evidence of plaque elevation, 1 = minimal plaque elevation, = 0.25 mm; 2 = mild plaque elevation, = 0.5 mm; 3 = moderate plaque elevation, = 0.75 mm; 4 = severe plaque elevation, >1 mm; Erythema: 0 = no evidence of erythema, hyperpigmentation may be present, 1 = faint erythema, 2 = light red coloration, 3 = moderate red coloration, 4 = bright red coloration; Scaling: 0 = no evidence of scaling, 1 = minimal; occasional fine scale over less than 5% of the lesion, 2 = mild; fine scale dominates, 3 = moderate; coarse scale predominates, 4 = severe; thick, scale predominates. Final IGA score of psoriasis was based upon the average of induration, erythema and scaling scores assessed on a 5 points scale: cleared (0), minimal (1), mild (2), moderate (3), or severe (4). A higher score indicated more severe disease.
Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
Part 2: Change From Baseline in CDLQI Score Through Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
Change from baseline in CDLQI score through Week 52 were reported. CDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on children's quality of life. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. CDLQI total score was the sum of individual scores of questions 1-10 and ranged from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of children.
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
Part 1: Percentage of Participants With CDLQI Score Equal to 0 or 1 at Week 16 Among Participants With a Baseline CDLQI Score Greater Than (>) 1
Time Frame: At Week 16
CDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on children's quality of life. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. CDLQI total score was the sum of individual scores of question 1-10 and ranges from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of children.
At Week 16
Part 2: Percentage of Participants With CDLQI Score Equal to of 0 or 1 Through Week 52 Among Participants With a Baseline CDLQI Score > 1
Time Frame: Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
CDLQI is a 10-item questionnaire that measures the impact of skin disease on children's quality of life. Each question was evaluated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much); where higher scores indicate more impact on quality of life. CDLQI total score was the sum of individual scores of question 1-10 and ranges from 0 (not at all) to 30 (very much). Higher scores indicated more impact on quality of life of children.
Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
Part 1: Percentage of Participants With Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI) of 0 or 1 at Week 16 Among Participants With a Baseline FDLQI >1
Time Frame: At Week 16
The FDLQI was a 10-item questionnaire that examined the impact of participant's skin disease on different aspects of their QoL (example: emotional, physical well-being, relationships, social life, leisure activities, burden of care, job/study, housework and expenditure) over the last 1 month, as assessed by a family member/partner. Each item had a four-point response option, where Not at all/Not relevant = 0; A little = 1; Quite a lot = 2; and Very much = 3. The scores of individual items (0-3) were added to give a total scale score that ranged from 0 to 30; a higher score indicated greater impairment of QoL.
At Week 16
Part 2: Percentage of Participants With Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI) of 0 or 1 Through Week 52 Among Participants With a Baseline FDLQI >1
Time Frame: Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
The FDLQI was a 10-item questionnaire that examine the impact of participant's skin disease on different aspects of their QoL (example, emotional, physical well-being, relationships, social life, leisure activities, burden of care, job/study, housework and expenditure) over the last 1 month, as assessed by a family member/partner. Each item had a four-point response option, where Not at all/Not relevant = 0; A little = 1; Quite a lot = 2; and Very much = 3. The scores of individual items (0-3) were added to give a total scale score that ranged from 0 to 30; a higher score indicates greater impairment of QoL.
Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
Part 1: Change From Baseline in FDLQI Score at Week 16
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 16
The FDLQI was a 10-item questionnaire that examined the impact of participant's skin disease on different aspects of their QoL (example, emotional, physical well-being, relationships, social life, leisure activities, burden of care, job/study, housework and expenditure) over the last 1 month, as assessed by a family member/partner. Each item had a four-point response option, where Not at all/Not relevant = 0; A little = 1; Quite a lot = 2; and Very much = 3. The scores of individual items (0-3) are added to give a total scale score that ranged from 0 to 30; a higher score indicates greater impairment of QoL.
Baseline and Week 16
Part 2: Change From Baseline in FDLQI Score Through Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
The FDLQI was a 10-item questionnaire that examine the impact of participant's skin disease on different aspects of their QoL (example, emotional, physical well-being, relationships, social life, leisure activities, burden of care, job/study, housework and expenditure) over the last 1 month, as assessed by a family member/partner. Each item had a four-point response option, where Not at all/Not relevant = 0; A little = 1; Quite a lot = 2; and Very much = 3. The scores of individual items (0-3) are added to give a total scale score that ranged from 0 to 30; a higher score indicated greater impairment of QoL.
Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 28, 36, and 52
Part 1: Change From Baseline in Body Surface Area (BSA) With Psoriasis Skin Involvement at Week 16
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 16
Change from baseline in percent body surface area with psoriasis skin involvement was reported. BSA as physical measure to define disease severity is to determine how much of the BSA is affected by psoriasis. Involved BSA is calculated by using the palm of the participant's hand as equivalent to 1% of the BSA (rule of palm). Psoriasis affected BSA under 5% suggests mild psoriasis, a BSA of 5% to 10% is considered moderate, and an involved BSA of over 10% indicates severe psoriasis.
Baseline and Week 16
Parts 2: Change From Baseline in BSA With Psoriasis Skin Involvement Over Time Through Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
Change from baseline in percent body surface area with psoriasis skin involvement was reported. BSA as physical measure to define disease severity is to determine how much of the BSA is affected by psoriasis. Involved BSA is calculated by using the palm of the participant's hand as equivalent to 1% of the BSA (rule of palm). Psoriasis affected BSA under 5% suggests mild psoriasis, a BSA of 5% to 10% is considered moderate, and an involved BSA of over 10% indicates severe psoriasis.
Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 28, 36, 44, and 52
LTE Phase: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI Responses (PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100) Over Time
Time Frame: From Week 52 to End of the study (EOS) (December 2026)
From Week 52 to End of the study (EOS) (December 2026)
LTE Phase: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved IGA Score of (Cleared [0], Cleared [0] or Minimal [1], Mild or Better [<=2] Over Time
Time Frame: From Week 52 to EOS (December 2026)
From Week 52 to EOS (December 2026)
LTE Phase: Percent Improvement From Baseline in PASI Over Time
Time Frame: From Week 52 to EOS (December 2026)
From Week 52 to EOS (December 2026)
LTE Phase: Change From Baseline in BSA With Psoriasis Skin Involvement Over Time
Time Frame: From Week 52 to EOS (Dec 2026)
From Week 52 to EOS (Dec 2026)
LTE Phase: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved PASI Responses (PASI 50, 75, 90,and 100) at Weeks 60 and 84 After Retreatment Among Guselkumab Participants Who Were Withdrawn From Guselkumab at Week 16 and Retreated Upon Loss of Response or at Week 52
Time Frame: Week 60 and Week 84
Week 60 and Week 84
LTE Phase: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved IGA Score of (Cleared [0], Cleared [0] or Minimal [1], Mild or Better [<=2] at Weeks 60 and 84 After Retreatment
Time Frame: Week 60 and Week 84
Week 60 and Week 84
LTE Phase: Percent Improvement in PASI Responses (PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100) at Weeks 60 and 84 After Retreatment Among Guselkumab Subjects Who Were Withdrawn From Guselkumab at Week 16 and Subsequently Retreated Upon Loss of Response or at Week 52
Time Frame: Week 60 and Week 84
Week 60 and Week 84
LTE Phase: Change From Baseline in BSA at Weeks 60 and 84 After Retreatment Among Guselkumab Subjects Who Were Withdrawn From Guselkumab at Week 16 and Subsequently Retreated Upon Loss of Response or at Week 52
Time Frame: Week 60 and Week 84
Week 60 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 Research & Development, LLC

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 Research & Development, LLC Clinical Trial, Janssen Research & Development, LLC

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.
July 11, 2018

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.
July 19, 2023

Study Completion (Estimated)

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.
December 18, 2026

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 26, 2018

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, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

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 2, 2018

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.
June 8, 2026

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.
June 4, 2026

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.
June 1, 2026

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.
  • CR108452
  • CNTO1959PSO3011 (Other Identifier: Janssen Research & Development, LLC)
  • 2023-503378-19-00 (Registry Identifier: EUCT number)

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

Yes

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.

Clinical Trials on Psoriasis

Clinical Trials on Guselkumab

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

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