Study Evaluating Efficacy / Safety of Etanercept + Methotrexate Compared to Usual Treatment in Moderate RA Subjects

An Open-Label, Randomized Study to Evaluate the Radiographic Efficacy and Safety of Enbrel™ (Etanercept) Added to Methotrexate in Comparison With Usual Treatment in Subjects With Moderate Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity

To assess comparative radiographic efficacy, clinical efficacy and safety of etanercept (ETN) + methotrexate (MTX) with usual disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment in subjects with moderate RA who were treated with MTX monotherapy, but continue to have moderate disease activity.

Study Overview

Status

Terminated

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

141

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Ostrava, Czech Republic, 722 00
      • Prague, Czech Republic, 128-50
      • Prague, Czech Republic, 140-59
      • Amiens, France, 80054
      • Amiens cedex 1, France, 80054
      • Echirolles, France, 38130
      • Metz, France, 57077
      • Montpellier, France, 34295
      • Paris, France, 75651
      • Paris, France, 75679
      • Paris cedex 13, France, 75651
      • Paris cedex 14, France, 75679
      • Rouen, France, 76031
      • Tours, France, 37044
      • Tours cedex 9, France, 37044
      • Berlin, Germany, 10117
      • Frankfurt, Germany, 60590
      • Hamburg-Eilbeck, Germany, 22081
      • Homburg, Germany, 66424
      • Koeln, Germany, 50924
      • Mainz, Germany, 55131
      • Budapest, Hungary, 1036
      • Budapest, Hungary, 1023
      • Miskolc, Hungary, 3529
      • Rijeka, Hungary, 51000
      • Split, Hungary, 21000
      • Zagreb, Hungary, 10000
      • Jesi (Ancona), Italy, 60035
      • Reggio Calabria, Italy, 89100
      • Bytom, Poland, 41-902
      • Krakow, Poland, 31-531
      • Ustron, Poland, 43-450
      • Warszawa, Poland, 02-637
      • Warszawa, Poland, 00-909
      • Wroclaw, Poland, 50-088
      • Barcelona, Spain, 08035
      • Madrid, Spain, 28006
      • Madrid, Spain, 28040
      • Madrid, Spain, 28046
      • Valencia, Spain, 46010
    • Cantabria
      • Santander, Cantabria, Spain, 39008
    • Madrid
      • Getafe, Madrid, Spain, 28902
    • Vizcaya
      • Bilbao, Vizcaya, Spain, 48013
      • Izmir, Turkey, 35340
      • Aintree, United Kingdom, L9 7AL
      • Newcastle, United Kingdom, NE7 7DN
      • Wirral, United Kingdom, CH49 5PE
    • Cambs
      • Cambridge, Cambs, United Kingdom, CB2 2QQ
    • West Midlands
      • Birmingham, West Midlands, United Kingdom, WS11 5XY

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

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Meet the 1987 ACR Revised Criteria for Rheumatoid Arthritis.
  • Documented evidence, confirmed by a blinded 3rd party assessor, of at least one erosion observed by X-ray at randomization based on X-ray taken at the screening visit.
  • Have received MTX as stable dose for 28 days prior to the screening visit.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous treatment with ETN, infliximab, adalimumab, other Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) -a inhibitors, anakinra or other biological agents.
  • Receipt of any DMARD, other than MTX, within 28 days 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
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Usual care
Utilized Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (DMARDs) from a list of the 6 most commonly prescribed in the participating countries (Methotrexate, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide, cyclosporine A and gold).
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: ETN + MTX
Etanercept (ETN) 50 milligrams (mg) sub-cutaneous (SC) injection once weekly (pre-filled syringe) plus continuation of current dose of Methotrexate (MTX) either oral (PO), SC, or intramuscular (IM).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change From Baseline in Modified Total Sharp Score (TSS) at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Modified TSS is a measure of change in joint health. TSS is defined as joint space narrowing score (range 0 [no narrowing] to 168 [high narrowing]) plus (+) erosion score (range is from 0 [no erosion] to 280 [high erosion]). The modified TSS range is from 0 (no damage) to 448 (bad joint status). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.
Baseline, Week 52

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change From Baseline in Erosions at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Erosion score (a component of the modified TSS) is a measure of change in joint health. Erosion score range is from 0 (no erosion) to 280 (high erosion). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.
Baseline, Week 52
Change From Baseline in Joint Space Narrowing at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52
Joint space narrowing score (a component of the modified TSS) is a measure of change in joint health. Joint space narrowing score range is 0 (no narrowing) to 168 (high narrowing). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.
Baseline, Week 52
Percentage of Participants Showing no Radiographic Progression (TSS Change <0.5) at Week 52
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 52, Last observation carried forward (LOCF)
Radiographic non-progression determined based on TSS change <0.5 using the dichotomous response Yes / No. The modified TSS range is from 0 (no damage) to 448 (bad joint status). Increase from baseline represents disease progression and / or joint worsening; no change represents halting of disease progression; a decrease represents improvement.
Baseline, Week 52, Last observation carried forward (LOCF)
Percentage of Participants Achieving >1.2 Improvement in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28-joint Count (DAS28)
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Disease activity score based on 28 painful joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) in millimeters per hour (mm/hr), and general health (GH) using Visual Analog Scale (VAS); range 0 (very well) to 100 (extremely bad). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56 square root (√) (28 painful joint count) + 0.28 √ (28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 (ln ESR mm/hr) + 0.014 GH; range 0 to 10. DAS28 score >5.1=higher disease activity; <3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=clinical remission. Achievement of >1.2 improvement defined as decrease in DAS28 >1.2 (change in DAS28 < -1.2).
Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28 <2.60)
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Disease activity score based on 28 painful joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) mm/hr, and general health (GH) using a visual analog scale (VAS); VAS range: 0 (very well) to 100 (extremely bad). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56 √ (28 painful joint count) + 0.28 √ (28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 (ln ESR mm/hr) + 0.014 GH; range 0 to 10. DAS28 score >5.10=higher disease activity; <3.20=low disease activity; <2.60=clinical remission.
Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Percentage of Participants Achieving Low Disease Activity (DAS28 ≤3.20)
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Disease activity score based on 28 painful joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) mm/hr, and general health (GH) using a visual analog scale (VAS); VAS range: 0 (very well) to 100 (extremely bad). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56 √ (28 painful joint count) + 0.28 √ (28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 (ln ESR mm/hr) + 0.014 GH; range 0 to 10. DAS28 score >5.10=higher disease activity; <3.20=low disease activity; <2.60=clinical remission.
Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Percentage of Participants Achieving a >0.6 Disease Activity Score (DAS)28 Response
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Disease activity score based on 28 painful joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) mm/hr, and participant's assessment of general health (GH) using a visual analog scale (VAS); VAS range: 0 (very well) to 100 (extremely bad). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56 √ (28 painful joint count) + 0.28 √ (28 swollen joint count) + 0.70 (ln ESR mm/hr) + 0.014 GH; range 0 to 10. DAS28 score >5.10=higher disease activity; <3.20=low disease activity; <2.60=clinical remission. DAS28 response of >0.6 defined as decrease in DAS28 >0.6 (change in DAS28 < -0.6).
Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Percentage of Participants Achieving Moderate or Good Response on European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response Criteria
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
Response to treatment assessed by EULAR response criteria. Participants were characterized as good, moderate, or non-responders based on both Disease Activity Score (DAS) level attained and change in DAS. Good response defined as >1.2 improvement in DAS from Baseline and DAS attained during follow-up of ≤2.4. Non-responders = participants with improvement of ≤0.6 or participants with improvement of >0.6 but ≤1.2 and DAS attained during follow-up of >5.1. Remaining participants were classified as moderate. Scores of good and moderate were considered to have therapeutic response.
Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response: responder = ≥ 20% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain; patient global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Subjects withdrawing early were non-responders.
Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response: responder = ≥ 50% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain; patient global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Subjects withdrawing early were non-responders.
Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response: responder = ≥ 70% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain; patient global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) . Subjects withdrawing early were non-responders.
Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 90% (ACR90) Response
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
American College of Rheumatology 90% (ACR 90) response: responder = ≥ 90% improvement in tender joint count; ≥ 90% improvement in swollen joint count; and ≥ 90% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain; patient global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]); and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Subjects withdrawing early were non-responders.
Week 12, Week 24, Week 52
Change From Baseline in Mean Daily Dose of Corticosteroids to Manage Flare-ups Across the 52-week Treatment Period
Time Frame: Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, Week 40, Week 52
Mean daily dose of corticosteroids to manage flare-ups (temporary increases in corticosteroid dose or use of intra-articular steroids) during treatment period. Daily dose of equivalent prednisone derived in mg/day: oral corticosteroids: 5 mg of prednisone = 5 mg of prednisolone = 25 mg of cortisone = 20 mg of hydrocortisone = 4 mg of methylprednisolone = 4 mg of triamcinolone = 2mg of paramethasone = 0.75 mg of betamethasone = 0.75 of dexamethasone = 0.3 of cortivazol.
Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, Week 40, Week 52
Percentage of Participants Achieving a Minimal Clinically Important Improvement (MCII)
Time Frame: Week 12, Week 52
Participants were asked how their pain had been during the last 48 hours compared to baseline. Participants that reported improvement assessed how important this improvement was to them; range: very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not at all important. Binary response options: 1=improved very important, or improved moderately important; 2=slightly important, not at all important, no change, or worse-more pain.
Week 12, Week 52
Percentage of Participants Achieving a Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS)
Time Frame: Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, Week 40, Week 52
Percentage of participants reporting acceptable symptom state: acceptance to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of pain they had during the last 48 hours; and unacceptable symptom state: not able to remain for the rest of their lives with the level of pain they had during the last 48 hours.
Week 4, Week 12, Week 24, Week 40, Week 52
Health Related Quality of Life: EuroQol-5D Health Index
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
EQ-5D is a self-administered questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in 5 domains (mobility, self care, usual activities, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression). Scores from the 5 domains are used to calculate the Health State Profile Score as a single index value; range: 0.0 (death) to 1.0 (perfect health); higher scores indicate a better health state.
Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
Health Related Quality of Life: EuroQol-5D Health State Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52
EQ-5D: subject rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 (worst imaginable health state) to 100 (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.
Baseline, Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

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.

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

September 1, 2008

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

December 1, 2009

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

May 1, 2010

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 25, 2008

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 27, 2008

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

June 30, 2008

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)

June 21, 2011

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 16, 2011

Last Verified

June 1, 2011

More Information

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 Rheumatoid Arthritis

Clinical Trials on methotrexate

3
Subscribe