Disease Activity Monitoring in Patients With Giant Cell Arteritis Study (DiAcMo)

August 26, 2026 updated by: University of Aarhus

Disease Activity Monitoring in Patients With Giant Cell Arteritis

Giant Cell Arteritis (GCA) is a vasculitis of medium- and large-sized arteries in older adults that may lead to serious vascular complications, including permanent vision loss and aortic aneurysm formation. Glucocorticoids are effective, but relapse during tapering is common and poses a major clinical challenge, potentially contributing to prolonged glucocorticoid exposure. Symptoms are often nonspecific and conventional inflammatory markers lack sufficient reliability, particularly in patients treated with drugs targeting the interleukin-6 pathway. Thus, this project aims to evaluate different tools assisting disease activity monitoring and/or predict future relapses and higher treatment requirements. Up to 175 patients with GCA in remission will be enrolled to ensure that 144 participants complete 1 year of follow-up. Participants undergo vascular ultrasonography, including double-blinded assessment at suspected relapse, complete patient-reported outcome measures, and provide biobank blood samples.

Study Overview

Status

Status

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

Study Type

Study Type

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

Enrollment (Estimated)

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.
175

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.
  • Name: Morten Hansen, Medical Doctor
  • Phone Number: +45 20187463
  • Email: mothas@rm.dk

Study Locations

  • Denmark
      • Aalborg, Denmark, 9000
        • Not yet recruiting
        • Aalborg University Hospital, Department of Rheumatology
        • Contact:
          • Salome Kristensen, MD, PhD
          • Phone Number: +45 97664015
          • Email: sakr@rn.dk
      • Aarhus, Denmark, 8200
        • Recruiting
        • Aarhus University Hospital, Department of Rheumatology
        • Contact:
      • Glostrup Municipality, Denmark, 2600
        • Recruiting
        • Rigshospitalet Glostrup, Center for Rheumatology and Spine Diseases Rigshospitalet
        • Contact:
      • Horsens, Denmark, 8700
        • Recruiting
        • Regional Hospital Horsens, Department of Medicine
        • Contact:
      • Silkeborg, Denmark, 8600
        • Not yet recruiting
        • Hospitalsenhed Midt, Medicinsk Diagnostisk Center
        • Contact:
          • Søren Geill Kjær, MD
          • Phone Number: +45 6171 7078
          • Email: soekjaer@rm.dk
      • Svendborg, Denmark, 5700
        • Not yet recruiting
        • Svendborg Hospital, Department of Medicine
        • Contact:
      • Vejle, Denmark, 7100
        • Recruiting
        • Vejle Hospital, Department of Medicine
        • Contact:

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

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients with giant cell arteritis (ICD-10: M31.5, M31.6) in clinical remission but still undergoing glucocorticoid tapering or tapering of glucocorticoid-sparing treatment.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Clinical GCA diagnosis established/confirmed by a rheumatologist and positive GCA imaging or biopsy at diagnosis < 3 years.

  2. Clinical remission at the time of inclusion, defined as

    • Having adhered for ≥ 8 weeks prior to inclusion to either (a) the planned tapering of glucocorticoid therapy, or (b) the planned glucocorticoid-sparing DMARD treatment (with or without glucocorticoids).
    • Absence of, or no worsening of, symptoms attributed to GCA in ≥ 8 weeks.
    • Normal CRP level (< 10 mg/L) within 7 days before inclusion.
  3. Current prednisolone dosage of ≥ 5 mg if glucocorticoid monotherapy.
  4. A continuous tapering of monotherapy or combination therapy is planned.
  5. Age > 50 years.
  6. Study participants must be able to speak and understand spoken and written Danish.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Intra-articular, intravenous or intramuscular glucocorticoid ≤ 7 weeks prior to inclusion.
  2. Study participants who are unable to complete online questionnaires cannot participate in the GCA-PRO component of the study.
  3. Presence of cognitive impairment, including clinically significant dementia, that may interfere with the ability to provide informed consent or comply with study procedures.

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

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
Sensitivity and specificity of change in OGUS from inclusion to suspected relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
Sensitivity and specificity of change in OMERACT Ultrasonography GCA Score (OGUS) from inclusion to suspected relapse (Follow-up 1a) for relapse/non-relapse using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard.
Within 10 months

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
Proportion of correctly classified relapse/non-relapse by vascular ultrasonography among participants with clinically uncertain relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
Proportion of correctly classified relapse/non-relapse by vascular ultrasonography among participants with clinically uncertain relapse (Follow-up 1a) using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard. Key secondary.
Within 10 months
Predictive cut-off values of vascular ultrasonography scores at remission for relapse
Time Frame: 12 months
The predictive cut-off values of vascular ultrasonography scores (OGUS and halo count) at remission (inclusion) for relapse within 12 months of inclusion using Follow-up 2 as the reference standard. Key secondary.
12 months
Sensitivity and specificity of change in halo count from inclusion to suspected relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
The sensitivity and specificity of change in halo count from remission (inclusion) to Follow-up 1a for relapse/non-relapse using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard.
Within 10 months
Sensitivity and specificity of vascular ultrasonography scores at suspected relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
The sensitivity and specificity of US scores (OMERACT Ultrasonography GCA Score and halo count) at suspected relapse (Follow-up 1) for relapse/non-relapse using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard.
Within 10 months
Sensitivity and specificity of vascular ultrasonography scores for relapse/non-relapse in subgroups defined by OMERACT ultrasonography morphology
Time Frame: Within 10 months
The sensitivity and specificity of vascular ultrasonography scores for relapse/non-relapse in subgroups defined by OMERACT US morphology (normal, active vasculitis, chronic vasculitis, atherosclerotic) using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard.
Within 10 months
Change in probability of relapse and non-relapse before and after vascular ultrasonography
Time Frame: Within 10 months
Change in probability of relapse and non-relapse before and after vascular ultrasonography using clinician-rated pre-test probability and ultrasonography likelihood ratios.
Within 10 months
Time from suspected relapse to clinical conclusion in participants with clinically uncertain relapse that were correctly classified with vascular ultrasonography
Time Frame: 12 months
The time (potentially saved) from suspected relapse (Follow-up 1a) to clinical conclusion (relapse review) in participants with clinically uncertain relapse that were correctly classified with vascular ultrasonography compared to the reference standard (Follow-up 2).
12 months
Number of supplementary tests ordered at suspected relapse to clinical conclusion in participants with clinically uncertain relapses/non-relapse that were correctly classified by vascular ultrasonography
Time Frame: 12 months
The number of supplementary tests ordered at suspected relapse (Follow-up 1a) to clinical conclusion (relapse review) in participants with clinically uncertain relapses/non-relapse that were correctly classified by vascular ultrasonography using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard.
12 months
Time to relapse over 12 months in relation to vascular ultrasonography scores at inclusion
Time Frame: 12 months
Time to relapse over 12 months evaluated in relation to vascular ultrasonography scores at inclusion (remission).
12 months
Change in GCA-PRO scores from remission to relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
Change in Giant Cell Arteritis Patient Reported Outcome Measure (GCA-PRO) scores from remission (inclusion) to relapse (Follow-up 1a) using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as reference standard. The total score for the GCA-PRO ranges from 0 to 90, where 0 indicates no impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and 90 indicates high disease impact (poor HRQoL). Key secondary.
Within 10 months
Change in GCA-PRO scores at relapse and 10 days after treatment escalation.
Time Frame: Within 10 months
Change in GCA-PRO scores at relapse and 10 days after treatment escalation. The total score for the GCA-PRO ranges from 0 to 90, where 0 indicates no impact on HRQoL and 90 indicates high disease impact (poor HRQoL).
Within 10 months
Convergence of GCA-PRO scores with other surrogate markers of disease activity from remission to relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
Convergence of GCA-PRO scores with, respectively, c-reactive protein levels, patient and physician global activity numeric rating scale scores, and vascular ultrasonography scores (halo count and OGUS) from remission (inclusion) to relapse (Follow-up 1a). The total score for the GCA-PRO ranges from 0 to 90, where 0 indicates no impact on HRQoL and 90 indicates high disease impact (poor HRQoL).
Within 10 months
Sensitivity and specificity of change in GCA-PRO scores from inclusion to suspected relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
The sensitivity and specificity of change in GCA-PRO scores from inclusion to suspected relapse (Follow-up 1a) for relapse/non-relapse using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard. The total score for the GCA-PRO ranges from 0 to 90, where 0 indicates no impact on HRQoL and 90 indicates high disease impact (poor HRQoL).
Within 10 months
Sensitivity and specificity of GCA-PRO scores at suspected relapse
Time Frame: Within 10 months
The sensitivity and specificity of GCA-PRO scores at suspected relapse (Follow-up 1a) for relapse/non-relapse using the reassessment at Follow-up 2 as the reference standard. The total score for the GCA-PRO ranges from 0 to 90, where 0 indicates no impact on HRQoL and 90 indicates high disease impact (poor HRQoL).
Within 10 months
Relapse within 12 months evaluated in relation to GCA-PRO scores at inclusion.
Time Frame: 12 months
Relapse within 12 months evaluated in relation to GCA-PRO scores at inclusion. The total score for the GCA-PRO ranges from 0 to 90, where 0 indicates no impact on HRQoL and 90 indicates high disease impact (poor HRQoL).
12 months
Time to relapse over 12 months evaluated in relation to GCA-PRO scores at inclusion.
Time Frame: 12 months
Time to relapse over 12 months evaluated in relation to GCA-PRO scores at inclusion. The total score for the GCA-PRO ranges from 0 to 90, where 0 indicates no impact on HRQoL and 90 indicates high disease impact (poor HRQoL).
12 months

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.
University of Aarhus

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Aarhus University Hospital
Glostrup University Hospital, Copenhagen
Vejle Hospital
Aalborg University Hospital
Svendborg Hospital
Horsens Hospital
Regionshospitalet Silkeborg

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.
May 6, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

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 1, 2028

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.
February 1, 2029

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).
April 20, 2026

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.
April 20, 2026

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.
April 27, 2026

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.
August 31, 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.
August 26, 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.
May 1, 2026

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.
  • DiAcMo
  • 10.46540/5333-00156B (Other Grant/Funding Number: Independent Research Fund Denmark)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

All IPD that underlie results in the publications.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

After completion of the study.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

By reasonably request.

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL
  • SAP
  • ICF

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

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